ANALYSIS : Emergence of Afghanistan? — Azizullah Khan

[Toramana]

The strategic agreements Afghanistan has signed with different states, especially with the U S and India, not only provide strategic and political safeguards for its emergence but also facilitate the process

The US designation of Afghanistan as its major non-Nato ally not only reinforces the essence of the US-Afghan Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA), signed early May, but also shows its commitment to the stability, or in other words, emergence of Afghanistan. The US is keen to make it amply clear to the neighbours of Afghanistan that it (Afghanistan) is not to be abandoned this time around, so they better give up hope to manoeuvre to their advantage its internal affairs at the cost of its stability and prosperity.

The designation followed by donors’ pledges of $ 16 billion should be added to several other facts, which point to the most probable emergence of Afghanistan. First is the sustainable structure and, thus far, effective working of the National Directorate of Security (NDS), the intelligence agency of Afghanistan. So far, its output is that its existence has begun to be felt in the region and no cracks or internal rifts in its structure are reported. In the modern complex and globalised world, an intelligence agency has a very significant role to play in the stability and security of any state. In matters of security, it is reckoned as the real powerhouse and brain of a state.

The NDS has been successfully repulsing some of the brutal/bloody attacks on government installations. It has captured and unmasked several key Taliban commanders who are now in its custody. More spectacular was the role it seemingly played in co-opting and re-socialising them and having their desertion ceremonies widely covered by media. The fleeing Taliban would talk to media about the way they, as per their claim, were misguided and exploited and their sheer patriotic sentiment impelled them to surrender before the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). They would spew poison against the ISI and Pakistan and would attribute all dirt to them. It is quite easy to discern from the videos, which are available on the internet, that the proverbial brain is behind the whole project. The idea behind the project is to enjoin upon fellow countrymen to hate the Taliban as proxies of neighbours, and for stability and prosperity look towards President Karzai and co.

Besides that, it claimed after the May 2, 2011 operation to have been the first to trace Osama bin Laden and tip off crucial information to the US, which led to his killing. No state dared to disprove the claim. Afghanistan’s realistic response to critical issues like cross-border terrorism and regional strategic game-play seems to be based on concrete policy input from this emerging institution. The NDS owes this brilliance to the fact that it has been working with the CIA for 10 long years in a state (Afghanistan) that has been the focal point of regional intelligence agencies for more than three decades. It will gain more strength as it has to work with the agency for the next ten years.

Moreover, the ANSF is all set to take operational control from foreign forces by 2014. It is fighting against the Taliban determinedly, and its credibility with the average Afghan is building rapidly. Those who are waiting for the ANSF to fall apart are always quick to warn that it will not be able to exert control over peripheral areas from where the insurgents could stage a forceful comeback and ignite a bloody civil war, which will only be a matter of time. After all, Pakistan, Turkey and even China among other developed states, have failed to control the peripheral areas. For Afghanistan having started from scratch, this should not be projected as a singularly huge issue.

By the end of 2014, Afghanistan will have a 350,000 strong security force, which will not be though in line with the standard counterinsurgency models but also not much less satisfactory. Afghan security forces are leading 40 percent of operations nationwide. These soldiers are “better than we thought”, says General John Allen, commander of the US forces in Afghanistan. The forces are also greatly helped by the growing unpopularity of the Taliban who want to backdate Afghanistan to 2000. For a 30 million population, a force consisting of 350,000 personnel is enough.

Third, the strategic agreements Afghanistan has signed with different states, especially with the US and India, not only provide strategic and political safeguards for its emergence but also facilitate the process. The major threat to the stability and prosperity of Afghanistan is not incompetence or inactiveness of Afghans but the destructive interference of the regional states. The emergence of Afghanistan is guaranteed if regional states are stopped from interfering in its internal affairs. Squarely this is the objective Afghanistan’s strategic agreements with the US and India are targeted at.

It is easy to discern from the tone and tenor of the Afghan-US SPA that its prime objective is to pass a strong message to Afghanistan’s neighbours that ‘if you mess with Afghanistan you will be messing with the US’. The designation of Afghanistan as a non-NATO ally reinforced this message. The Indo-Afghan strategic agreement has more to do with building the ANA and general development than withmessages to the regional states. These three states — Afghanistan, the US and India — are getting closer every day and their strategic flirting is all about the stabilisation of Afghanistan. Afghanistan has signed similar agreements with Germany, France, Italy, Britain and Australia.

There are certain other facts that support the notion of emergence of Afghanistan. Over the past 10 years, 4,000 schools have been built and 1,000,000 new teachers recruited. Today, girls make up 37 percent of the seven million students in primary and secondary schools. The co-educational American University is also working unhindered. Every year 52 Afghan students go to the US for higher study as Fulbright Scholars.

Afghanistan’s GDP has more than tripled in the last decade, averaging “around nine percent a year, with notable gains in infrastructure, telecommunications, and financial and business services”. There is every probability that Afghanistan is going to emerge as a normal and stable state. Will it be allowed to emerge is to be seen. With the US and the international community sincere in draining the swamp in the region, the onus is on the regional states to welcome the emergence of Afghanistan as a win-win situation for both the region and individual states. Instability in Afghanistan will feed terrorism, which is eating into the stability and prosperity of the region.

The writer is a freelance columnist. He can be reached at khetranazk@gmail.com

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012%5C07%5C24%5Cstory_24-7-2012_pg3_6#.UA3eMShVMF4.facebook

[randolph85]

a rosy picture of afghanistan whereby working with the west, afghanistan is somehow strong and has leverage. there is nothing further from the truth, as the country has become a welfare state and the much touted strategic pact with the US has not materialized into reality as the mute response to rocket attacks on kunar have proved. the gdp has been artificially inflated by foreign aid, this is a country that over 10 years after the occupation and international recognition has only about 300 million dollars in exports.

afghanistan is in a humiliating situation right now, its people are being killed by its allies(nato) and also by its enemy(pakistan) while the government is powerless to speak out against either of these entities. all the while, the karzai government sucks up to both of them.

as for the successes in afghanistan, it is all 100% dependent on money and security. whether you gave the money to the commie government, mujahadin government, talibs or karzazi government, there would of been the same amount of progress on paper depending on the security situation.

[Toramana]

a rosy picture of afghanistan whereby working with the west, afghanistan is somehow strong and has leverage. there is nothing further from the truth, as the country has become a welfare state and the much touted strategic pact with the US has not materialized into reality as the mute response to rocket attacks on kunar have proved. the gdp has been artificially inflated by foreign aid, this is a country that over 10 years after the occupation and international recognition has only about 300 million dollars in exports.

afghanistan is in a humiliating situation right now, its people are being killed by its allies(nato) and also by its enemy(pakistan) while the government is powerless to speak out against either of these entities. all the while, the karzai government sucks up to both of them.

as for the successes in afghanistan, it is all 100% dependent on money and security. whether you gave the money to the commie government, mujahadin government, talibs or karzazi government, there would of been the same amount of progress on paper depending on the security situation.

I think it is in better shape than it was during Taleban regime some problems notwithstanding due to the difficult situation Afghanistan is in. It is today better armed to defend its sovereignty against threats from the neighbours esp the Muslim neighbours. Although, one can argue and admit that some hard/unpleasant strategic decisions had to be made to achieve all this but if somebody is out to usurp your freedom you are left with no option but to look around for alliances whoever the allies are.

[randolph85]

I think it is in better shape than it was during Taleban regime some problems notwithstanding due to the difficult situation Afghanistan is in. It is today better armed to defend its sovereignty against threats from the neighbours esp the Muslim neighbours. Although, one can argue and admit that some hard/unpleasant strategic decisions had to be made to achieve all this but if somebody is out to usurp your freedom you are left with no option but to look around for alliances whoever the allies are.

but afghanistan has no sovereignty to speak of right now. instead of being influenced by one state during the talib times, it is now controlled by dozens today. i have never heard of a free nation that is occupied and directly controlled by outsiders.

[Toramana]

but afghanistan has no sovereignty to speak of right now. instead of being influenced by one state during the talib times, it is now controlled by dozens today. i have never heard of a free nation that is occupied and directly controlled by outsiders.

Zwana, the first thing is, it doesn't matter whether you are influenced by one country or more. What matters is, how much are you influenced i.e., the degree of influence. In the case of Taleban, this influence or rather more appropriately control (by Pakistan's military establishment) was "total, thorough" and "unshakable" whereas in the case of the present political dispensation, it is not so substantial if not marginal. An evidence of that is, unlike the present govt, Taleban weren't sovereign to establish diplomatic relations with India (due to Pakistani control over them) or even Iran (due to Saudi influence on them). Afghanistan today has strategic pacts, bilateral trade/trade agreements, and mining/mineral exploration treaties with myriad of countries including China which is the rival of US (whose total control over Afg you are trying to suggest here). That indicates how sovereign the present govt in foreign policy is relative to Taleban. Even Afghanistan's strategic pact with US was endorsed by Afg govt after thorough deliberation, hard negotiations, and parliamentary approval. On the contrary, Taleban took most of their orders form GHQ in Rawalpindi, Pakistan which told them whom to establish relations with and whom not.

No nation on earth including the superpowers have absolute/unlimited freedom. Every nation has to limit its freedom a bit to strengthen its sovereignty relative to its real/perceived foes. Afghanistan by establishing alliances with different poles has strengthened its sovereignty and its short/long-term interest many times more than when there were Talebs. There is a lot of more development and more hope today compared to Taleban era.

[randolph85]

none of what you say holds up considering the fact that the taliban actively lobbied for recognition by the UN/US and had several unofficial relationships with western countries. the taliban didn't exactly have the luxery of being recognized by countries which wanted nothing to do with them.

a foreign policy depends on actually being recognized by foreigners. acting like karzai's foreign installed government having relations with the western world that installed it, which in turn holds sway over pakistan and sa, is some kind of achievement is a joke.

[khushal]

how can a government be independent when it needs a foreign military with foreign soldiers to defend it.

[Toramana]

none of what you say holds up considering the fact that the taliban actively lobbied for recognition by the UN/US and had several unofficial relationships with western countries. the taliban didn't exactly have the luxery of being recognized by countries which wanted nothing to do with them.

a foreign policy depends on actually being recognized by foreigners. acting like karzai's foreign installed government having relations with the western world that installed it, which in turn holds sway over pakistan and sa, is some kind of achievement is a joke.

Taleban didn't have any legitimacy neither internal nor external and had come to power primarily through force. They were neither acceptable to ethnic and religious minorities inside Afghanistan nor to many (if not most) of the majority community. Their policies conflicted with the rest of the world except Pakistan and Saudi Arabia who originally had installed them.

They were an utter failure in terms of security to the Afghans and development.They couldn't manage Afghanistan's foreign policy well and converted Afghanistan into a pariah state that no one wanted to have any dealing with. This reason alone is sufficient enough to nullify their right to rule. Now you can argue the same about the present set-up but at least it has some degree of national and international legitimacy as it has demonstrated through democracy and elections no matter how much of questionable validity and successful diplomatic relations with and recognition by the rest of the world.

This is a great achievement. And the future of Afghans today is more secure than it was before. The trust of the Afghans in the present set-up can be gauged from the fact that except for Taleban who are fringe elements of the society the rest of Afghans including all ethnic and religious groups trust the present govt and participate in the political process and governance.

[randolph85]

Taleban didn't have any legitimacy neither internal nor external and had come to power primarily through force. They were neither acceptable to ethnic and religious minorities inside Afghanistan nor to many (if not most) of the majority community. Their policies conflicted with the rest of the world except Pakistan and Saudi Arabia who originally had installed them.

every afghan government in history has come to power through force so lets not pretend thats what determines legitimacy. the rest of the world didn't care what was happening inside afghanistan, as shown by the recognition of the rabbani government, the only government in the world where the president and prime minister were actively at war with each other.

They were an utter failure in terms of security to the Afghans and development.They couldn't manage Afghanistan's foreign policy well and rather converted Afghanistan into a pariah state that no one wanted to have any dealing with. This reason alone is sufficient enough to nullify their right to rule. Now you can argue the same about the present set-up but at least it has some degree of national and international legitimacy as it has demonstrated through elections no matter how much of questionable validity and diplomatic relations and recognition with/by the rest of the world.

well security was about the only thing they got right. their right to rule is not determined by the whims of foreign nations, its determined by the consolidation of power in the country without the need for 150,000 foreign soldiers. as for development, like i said before, there would be the same amount of development in the country today had there of been 60 billion dollars in aid like the karzai government has received. if anything, the money probably would of went to better use instead of karzai and northern alliance cronies buying villas in dubai.

This is a great achievement. And the future of Afghans today is more secure. The trust of the Afghans in the present set-up can be gauged from the fact that except for Taleban who are fringe elements of the society the rest of Afghans including all ethnic and religious minorities trust the present govt.

thats not an achievement at all and are you really serious? people in the government don't even trust the government lol

[Toramana]

every afghan government in history has come to power through force so lets not pretend thats what determines legitimacy. the rest of the world didn't care what was happening inside afghanistan, as shown by the recognition of the rabbani government, the only government in the world where the president and prime minister were actively at war with each other.

Well Zwana, that was a political norm if you go far back in history. But today's context and norms are different in that you not only have to have requisite power to keep your country united but also show a reasonably good level of political acumen and governing skill to rule your country. Furthermore, we are no longer living in isolation like the societies of the bygone ages where we could go on doing what we wanted to without the outside world not knowing about it or reacting to it (out of self-interest or genuine humanistic consideration).

Taleban failed on both counts neither demonstrating sufficient degree of power nor political acumen to unite and rule a divided/fragmented society. Rather, their policies plunged the country into a perpetual civil war and resulted into invasion of the country by a foreign power. Their governing skills were rudimentary at best.

It would not be an exaggeration to claim that all govts preceding and following Taleban were better and more efficient.

well security was about the only thing they got right. their right to rule is not determined by the whims of foreign nations, its determined by the consolidation of power in the country without the need for 150,000 foreign soldiers. as for development, like i said before, there would be the same amount of development in the country today had there of been 60 billion dollars in aid like the karzai government has received. if anything, the money probably would of went to better use instead of karzai and northern alliance cronies buying villas in dubai.

I think one thing that you are avoiding to mention is Taleban total dependence of Pakistan's military and intelligence agencies. There is sufficient evidence to indicate that they were a project of Pakistan's ISI and received constant support from the military and intelligence establishment of that country. So don't portray Taleban to be something homegrown. As for the 60 billion dollars, that is the skill (that I want to underline) Taleban lacked and the present govt has. Afghanistan is not an isolated country today and Afghans are venturing into every thing and can opt to go to any part of the world due to the security provided by the present set up and its international legitimacy. That has provided Afghans with immense opportunity to enhance their capacities.

Well, there is foreign military but I am sorry to say, that is not the total story. Compared to the rag-tag Taleban militia, Afg today has a regular army and police force trained on modern lines and more properly equipped. No regional hegemon can threaten Afghanistan's sovereignty due to its international legitimacy and relations with other countries (relations that are broad-ranged and far reaching).

As for Dubai, there definitely may be some corruption but not to the degree the opponents of the present set up are talking about.

[Tjanaparh]

I do not know what concerns security, but what concerns production and economy, Afghanistan seems to be much further than my country. At least Afghanistan does export and even makes mobile phones.

[Toramana]

I do not know what concerns security, but what concerns production and economy, Afghanistan seems to be much further than my country. At least Afghanistan does export and even makes mobile phones.

Arevapasht, I thought Armenia is a very developed state.

[khushal]

I do not know what concerns security, but what concerns production and economy, Afghanistan seems to be much further than my country. At least Afghanistan does export and even makes mobile phones.

you need security in order to have a robust economy

[Khostai]

I do not know what concerns security, but what concerns production and economy, Afghanistan seems to be much further than my country. At least Afghanistan does export and even makes mobile phones.

I think you are too negative about your country. Afghanistan is far behind, in everything actualy, Armenia has also problems but not like Afghanistan, you don't have armed groups who thinks that women working outside is the same as a *****. Armenia need just a good goverment and everything will be fine in just a coupel of years. But Afghanistan need 100 years or even more to just become normal country and to clean the mess that we have.

[Khostai]

and Toramana, you portray Afghanistan as if its going it the right direction, what is not, the current goverment is full of criminals and corrupt peopel. The Army and the police is incompetent. If they don't change soon the situation will become worse.
And yes I know much have been done and things are better now than under taliban, but the difrence for common peopel is not that big.....