Collapsing Afghanistan & Pakistan Refuse to Cooperate with Obama Photo Op

Posted on 05/02/2012 by Juan Cole

President Barack Obama sneaked in and out of Afghanistan by the cover
of night, his advance security team clearly too worried about the
situation in Kabul to allow him to appear in public by day. And they
would have been right, since shortly after Obama departed, Taliban hit
a foreign workers’ guest house (which was very secure) and killed 6
people (some reports say 17), announcing that Obama is not welcome in
Afghanistan.

The ostensible purpose of the trip was to sign a [pdf] Strategic
Partnership Agreement with Afghanistan president Hamid Karzai. The SPA
is essentially an executive order, not a treaty, since Obama did not
take it to Congress. On the Afghan side, I think it is also an
executive order and was not approved by the Afghanistan parliament.
Although the White House assures us that it has the force of law, it
clearly falls short of being a binding treaty.

The agreement designates “The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan” as a
major non-NATO ally of the United States, the same status as is
enjoyed by Egypt, Kuwait, Pakistan and a handful of other countries.

The document speaks of commitment to democracy, but Karzai stole the
last presidential election, and there were serious allegations of
irregularities in the most recent parliamentary elections, as well.

The document pledges that the US will have no permanent bases in
Afghanistan, but the issue won’t even come up again for discussion
until a decade or a decade and a half. There are roughly 88,000 US
troops in Afghanistan, but that will come down to some 69,000 by
September, and then most of those will leave by the end of 2013.

In the meantime, the US will have access to Afghanistan bases and will
provide special forces for the continued fight against “Taliban” (most
of the ones we call that aren’t), as well as continuing to train the
Afghan army.

And more importantly to pay for it (roughly $4 billion a year).
Afghanistan cannot afford the enormous army being created for it, so
it will go on being supported by ‘strategic rent’ from outside powers
or it will collapse.

Obama’s four-fold strategy for Afghanistan is sickly if not dead. It
consisted of:

1. Finding a way to replace the eratic and undependable Hamid Karzai
with someone else (perhaps Abdullah Abdullah, former foreign minister
of the Northern Alliance).

But Karzai stole the last presidential election and is still there,
and Obama had to grin and bear it.

2. Conduct a massive counter-insurgency strategy, rooting out the
Taliban and winning the hearts and minds of the Afghans for a new
political order.

I don’t think there is any reason to believe that ‘counter-insurgency’
succeeded. The hearts and minds were un-won by night raids (sometimes
with a mistaken target), peeing on corpses of dead Taliban, burning
Qur’ans at Bagram base, etc., etc.

3. Train up a capable new Afghanistan National Army.

The army, now 187,000 strong, suffers from being 86% illiterate, and
from being disproportionately Tajik (Dari Persian-speaking Sunnis not
respected by the majority Pashtuns), and from having almost no buy-in
from Qandahar and Helmand provinces (Taliban strongholds). It loses
the equivalent of counties in the east to the Taliban and can’t seem
to fight independently of US troops. Only one ANA military unit is
assessed as able to fight independently, out of nearly 100). It is
bloated, over-equipped, but under-trained and lacking in initiative
and apparently esprit de corps. That this army can defeat the Taliban
or even just keep Karzai from being hanged when the US and NATO depart
is not at all a sure thing.

4. Use drone strikes to hit al-Qaeda and Taliban leaders in the tribal
belt of Pakistan, while pressuring Pakistan finally to step up and
help defeat the Taliban.

Actually the drone strikes have created a strong backlash in the
Pakistani public, jealous of their national sovereignty. When the US
air force inadvertently hit 24 Pakistani troops in December, the
Pakistani parliament stopped NATO supply trucks from using the
Pakistan route from Karachi to the Khyber pass, marooning thousands of
tons of military equipment intended for the Afghanistan National Army.
Parliament is recommending against letting the US ship military goods
through Pakistan, and against allowing further drone strikes.

Ordinarily foreign policy is an executive prerogative, but the
executive in Pakistan is paralyzed by a constitutional crisis, with
the Supreme Court holding the Prime Minister, Yusuf Raza Gilani, in
contempt because he hasn’t moved against President Asaf Ali Zardari
for corruption.

Obama just disregarded the parliamentary report and used drones again
in Pakistan, to public dismay.

Pakistan is not going well, and neither, really, is Afghanistan.

So, Mitt Romney, who is jumping up and down like a little boy in the
background, shouting ‘Me, too!’, ‘Me, too!’, seems unaware that he is
me-tooing a policy that is in deep trouble with the exception of the
killing of Bin Laden last year.

Obama told the US troops there that everyone over here knows of their
sacrifices and deeply appreciates them. Alas, I fear few Americans are
paying attention to Afghanistan. The war is unpopular now with the
part of the public that does know about it, including even Republicans
(so Mitt has little chance of picking up leverage here). I seldom see
it reported on on television, and even a lot of newspapers are
basically ignoring it. You wouldn’t know we had nearly 90,000 troops
fighting and dying abroad.

So although Afghanistan and Pakistan have not gone well for Obama,
there is likely no US political gain to be had on either side from the
misery of those two countries.

-- 
Jim Devine / "An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of
support." -- John Buchan
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to