Nato must rectify the errors it has made in Afghanistan

[Admin Khan]

Monday's great Afghanistan jamboree in Bonn has been overshadowed by the latest row between Washington and Pakistan. After the killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers by Nato air strikes, the government in Islamabad refused to let its foreign minister attend. The real problem, however, is the conference's agenda: it will not discuss how to end foreign occupation and prevent the revival of a disastrous ethnically based civil war among Afghans.

The meeting is being held on the 10th anniversary of the UN-led conference in Bonn that installed Hamid Karzai as Afghan leader after the fall of the Taliban. In 2001, expectations for a new start in a country that had known a decade and a half of war were high. And in some areas, progress has been made. A UN report last week shows improvements in health, with a rise in life expectancy and a sharp fall in infant mortality. There have been large increases in the number of children attending school.

But security remains the top priority for Afghans, and the gap between the reality of 2011 and the expectations of 2001 is huge. Much of the blame goes back to the original Bonn conference. Tajik and Uzbek warlords assumed the major role in the Afghan government and the largest ethnic community, the Pashtuns, felt marginalised. Karzai being a Pashtun made little difference, since many saw him as at best a prisoner of the warlords and at worst a US puppet.

The widespread sense of exclusion among Pashtuns was a key factor in the resurgence of the Taliban. The corruption of the government and the appointment of equally corrupt local and provincial officials after the Taliban's defeat added to popular unrest. When the US added tens of thousands of troops in response to incipient resistance, the shift only provoked more Pashtuns to oppose foreign occupation.

The focus should be on correcting those mistakes. Nato policy, which the conference is almost certain to endorse, is to continue the war by other means and with other troops. US and British troops will gradually hand their garrisons over to Afghans, the aim being that they should take the lead in fighting the Taliban after 2014. Meanwhile, the US and Karzai are negotiating a separate deal to keep tens of thousands of US troops in the country as trainers and advisers after 2014, while relying for fighting increasingly on air power and drone strikes rather than infantry assaults.

This is misguided. The only strategy that has a chance of ending the war is to engage in talks with the insurgency and reverse the marginalisation of the Pashtun. Guido Westerwelle, Germany's foreign minister who is hosting the gathering in Bonn, came out strongly last week for such talks. "Reconciliation does not happen among friends but rather between erstwhile opponents. That is what we need to work on," he said.

Ideally, the conference will take it further. It should refrain from backing the indefinite extension of a US troop presence, since this will only maintain the Taliban's armed resistance. It should also clarify the aim of negotiations. "Talking to the Taliban" is often used as a way of splitting them into moderates and "irreconcilables" and bribing the former into surrender. It is merely war-fighting under a different name.

Genuine peace talks have to steer towards the creation of a government of national unity in which the insurgents have a place alongside other political forces. There will also have to be a new constitution that devolves most power to the provinces. This would calm the Tajiks and Uzbeks, but also reduce the significance of Kabul, and make it less of a prize to be fought over. If Bonn II can rectify the failings of Bonn I, it will be worth it. But hopes cannot be high.

Nato must rectify the errors it has made in Afghanistan | Jonathan Steele | Comment is free | The Guardian

[khushal]

Its too late, once trust is lost, it is almost impossible to gain it back. Nationalism in Afghanistan is an oxy-moron. You have a nation called Afghanistan with 50% (give ot take depending which source you trust) of the people as non ethnic Afghan and you have tribes that never had a nationalistic mind set. A centalized governmnet structure set up is also unfeasable to work in such a society.

Reconcilation in the current atmosphere can not work since one party is demanding the full withdrawal of foreign troops for how can they feel safe and how could it be an afghan led peace plan when foreign guns are pointing at one of the party and defending the other. The man with the gun who fights his own battles makes the demands not the one that is being defended by a foreign man with a gun.

[Admin Khan]

Its too late, once trust is lost, it is almost impossible to gain it back. Nationalism in Afghanistan is an oxy-moron. You have a nation called Afghanistan with 50% (give ot take depending which source you trust) of the people as non ethnic Afghan and you have tribes that never had a nationalistic mind set. A centalized governmnet structure set up is also unfeasable to work in such a society.

Reconcilation in the current atmosphere can not work since one party is demanding the full withdrawal of foreign troops for how can they feel safe and how could it be an afghan led peace plan when foreign guns are pointing at one of the party and defending the other. The man with the gun who fights his own battles makes the demands not the one that is being defended by a foreign man with a gun.

Khushal, even though the people might not be ethnically Afghan, wouldn't you agree that they consider themselves Afghan? I mean, can you imagine walking up to someone in Badakshan and telling him he isn't Afghan? In my opinion, nearly every inhabitant in Afghanistan views himself as an Afghan -- and they have every right to do so.

[Manzareh]

This is a responce from a user called exCaptain

"It's already too late for all that.

Was just reading general Bucknall's call to the West not to betray its 'investment in blood,' and his claim that the NATO forces have the Taliban on the run.

It's deja vu all over again. US generals used the exact same arguments late in the Vietnam war, but they turned out to be total rubish.

Just like the VC, the Taliban now percieve themselves as winning. They know full well the bloated government army will crumble just as readily after 2014 as the South Vietnamese did after the Americans left.

To make things worse, the US-led focus on killing mid-level Taliban leaders has removed the moderates and promoted irreconcilables into command positions, just as the Phoenix program did in South Vietnam. People you could talk to and persuade to join in a coalition government have been replaced by hardliners determined to end the war with a battlefield victory.

I suggest Bucknall be pulled back a couple of ranks and made take a course in Guerrila Warfare 101."


do you agree?

[khushal]

Khushal, even though the people might not be ethnically Afghan, wouldn't you agree that they consider themselves Afghan? I mean, can you imagine walking up to someone in Badakshan and telling him he isn't Afghan? In my opinion, nearly every inhabitant in Afghanistan views himself as an Afghan -- and they have every right to do so.

The more I read and interact with people, the more I am convinced that the idea of Afghanistan as a nation is a failed entity. There are even elements in the Taliban that are convinced of letting go the name Afghanistan if they are to succeed in winning the other ethnic populations.

Afghanistan is ruled by Tajiks and Hazaras today, ask yourself how can they successfully rule a nation called "Afghan"-istan. The ethnic Afghans would reject such rulers wheather they are secular minded or theocracy minded.
On the flip side, the Tajiks and Hazaras have been politically awakened and they will not go back to sleep.
The only way to rule such a society is to have a governmnet under a federal structure much like how Pakistan is administered. The regional ethnicities would rule themselves but would have loyalty to the federal governmnet in exchange for beneifits.

[randolph85]

afghanistan can't be ruled by tajiks and hazaras, even if they controlled the kabul government, which they dont. because afghanistan is not under centralized rule, only under a law which people don't follow among other laws. its the same propoganda spouted against pashtuns about karzai ruling the government with his hezb i islami friends. none of this matters anyways since no one really controls afghanistan. kabul can't unseat a guy like atta muhammad in balkh if they wanted to, and the only way they got sherzai out of kandahar and to nangarhar was with millions of dollars. the only thing non pashtuns control these days is the military, but again, that means nothing when the institution is weak as hell and can collapse at any moment the second there is no western funding for it.

it doesn't matter what name u give the political entity, afghanistan will only work if afghans work for it. it won't be any better in current conditions as aryana, khorasan or any other name. its like idiots in pakistan thinking changing the name of nwfp would do it any good while ignoring the real issues for 60 years.

[khushal]

afghanistan can't be ruled by tajiks and hazaras, even if they controlled the kabul government, which they dont. because afghanistan is not under centralized rule, only under a law which people don't follow among other laws. its the same propoganda spouted against pashtuns about karzai ruling the government with his hezb i islami friends. none of this matters anyways since no one really controls afghanistan. kabul can't unseat a guy like atta muhammad in balkh if they wanted to, and the only way they got sherzai out of kandahar and to nangarhar was with millions of dollars. the only thing non pashtuns control these days is the military, but again, that means nothing when the institution is weak as hell and can collapse at any moment the second there is no western funding for it.

it doesn't matter what name u give the political entity, afghanistan will only work if afghans work for it. it won't be any better in current conditions as aryana, khorasan or any other name. its like idiots in pakistan thinking changing the name of nwfp would do it any good while ignoring the real issues for 60 years.

Much like the Soviet The US has created a centralized governmnet structure, the reason that Kabul is not ruling Afghanistan is because a centralized structure has never worked in Afghanistan. If you want the Afghans to work for the national political entity, you must create a system for it. The Federal system much like the country you currently reside in is more feasable for Afghanistan's society. The answer lies in the history of Afghanistan. Historically it has experienced peace under federal structure.

Changing the name of NWFP was done by locals in KP. It was not doen by Panjabis in Lahore or Sindhis in Karachi. Pakistan was stable until the US pressured Pakistan to invade FATA. I dont exactly know what you mean the real issues of the past 60 years.

[randolph85]

Much like the Soviet The US has created a centralized governmnet structure, the reason that Kabul is not ruling Afghanistan is because a centralized structure has never worked in Afghanistan. If you want the Afghans to work for the national political entity, you must create a system for it. The Federal system much like the country you currently reside in is more feasable for Afghanistan's society. The answer lies in the history of Afghanistan. Historically it has experienced peace under federal structure.

Changing the name of NWFP was done by locals in KP. It was not doen by Panjabis in Lahore or Sindhis in Karachi. Pakistan was stable until the US pressured Pakistan to invade FATA. I dont exactly know what you mean the real issues of the past 60 years.

afghanistan in its modern era has always been a loosely centralized state. its been a ridiculous system of tribal favorism and weak governance. centralism was never the problem though, its been tribal kickbacks and playing one tribe against the other. this worked fine in the zahir shah era when the country was allowed to govern itself because outsiders saw no interest in the country. federalism these days would just mean dividing up an already weak entity.

real issues in kp are education, real political representation, the army-madrassa connection. not the name of a province. see a bunch of red shirts dance around because of a name change is ridiculous, especially when the underlying problems of the province make it more likely that they will be shot or bombed on their way home.

[khushal]

afghanistan in its modern era has always been a loosely centralized state. its been a ridiculous system of tribal favorism and weak governance. centralism was never the problem though, its been tribal kickbacks and playing one tribe against the other. this worked fine in the zahir shah era when the country was allowed to govern itself because outsiders saw no interest in the country. federalism these days would just mean dividing up an already weak entity.

real issues in kp are education, real political representation, the army-madrassa connection. not the name of a province. see a bunch of red shirts dance around because of a name change is ridiculous, especially when the underlying problems of the province make it more likely that they will be shot or bombed on their way home.

Outsiders saw no interest? or was it becasue outsiders were kept at bay. Ousiders came in when they could when they saw a weak and divided Afghanistan.

federalism does not mean divsion, it means the people residing would and should have an incentive to stay in the union. Why should the hazaras stay in a union with pashtuns and tajiks if there is no incentive and vice versa. This can only work if everyone is forced by incentives not by the barrel of a gun to live and work together.

[Ghundal]

Randolph,

Madrasahs the Arabic word for school. Many of the most well known madrassahs not only teach the Quran, but also maths, science, history, etc

There is a lot of misinformation that appears to be accepted as truth just because it is repeated over and over

[randolph85]

we both know the kind of madrassas i am talking about. the kind ran by isi favorites like sami ul haq who churn out poor kids to fight battles for punjabi elites.

[Ghundal]

we both know the kind of madrassas i am talking about. the kind ran by isi favorites like sami ul haq who churn out poor kids to fight battles for punjabi elites.

Prove it

That is all Western recycled propaganda

Can you fetch that Madrassahs curriculum for me?
Pakistans interference and meddling in Afghanistan is due to its support for the US war

So it's pro- Pakistanis who are in Afghanistan?

All the facts state otherwise, especially with Dr. Pape's(university of Chicago) research that disproves this retarded donkey crap over and over again

[randolph85]

Prove it

That is all Western recycled propaganda

Can you fetch that Madrassahs curriculum for me?
Pakistans interference and meddling in Afghanistan is due to its support for the US war

So it's pro- Pakistanis who are in Afghanistan?

All the facts state otherwise, especially with Dr. Pape's(university of Chicago) research that disproves this retarded donkey crap over and over again

what do i need a cirriculum for when i can see what the students have accomplished? they have been cannon fodder for punjabis in islamabad for their proxy wars in afghanistan and kashmir. i don't know the cirriculum of ghetto schools in los angeles, but based on what the alumni have accomplished, i am guessing its crap. do u really think the students of these madrassas that have been sent to afg since the mid 90s know what they are fighting for? know the history of the conflict they are participating in? there is no pro or anti pakistan with these people, its just marching orders.

so are u denying that students from schools like haqs were sent to fight in afg with the paki establishments support?

a journalist can't even write exposes of the isi-militant connection in pakistan without being brutally murdered by the isi but these schools that send thousands of students to participate in an afghan civil war can operate without isi consent? lol

[Ghundal]

what do i need a cirriculum for when i can see what the students have accomplished? they have been cannon fodder for punjabis in islamabad for their proxy wars in afghanistan and kashmir. i don't know the cirriculum of ghetto schools in los angeles, but based on what the alumni have accomplished, i am guessing its crap. do u really think the students of these madrassas that have been sent to afg since the mid 90s know what they are fighting for? know the history of the conflict they are participating in? there is no pro or anti pakistan with these people, its just marching orders.

so are u denying that students from schools like haqs were sent to fight in afg with the paki establishments support?

a journalist can't even write exposes of the isi-militant connection in pakistan without being brutally murdered by the isi but these schools that send thousands of students to participate in an afghan civil war can operate without isi consent? lol

In a discussion such ad this, the onus is on you to furnish evidence for the claims you are making.

Show me the curriculum of these specific madrassahs you speak of

Also, show me that Pakistani citizens are present in Afghanistan

Show me that it is Pakistani nationals who are there

[ComradePashtun]

lol there are no accessible curriculums for the ISI run madrassahs. In fact there are non to exist, you d_ick.

What captures the imagination of this god for saken idiot Ghundal to claim that history, science (wohooooo hahah lol), arts etc. are taught in the zombie terrorists churning cannon-fodder for Pujabi elites' goals' madrassahs? When we say that they are the cannon fodders of Panjabi elites, this idiotic literalist is seeking documented evidence of whether if dark-aas Panjabis are running around in Kabul? Your intellectual impishmess of the Paki-Afghan politics shows that you are mag.