Afghanistan: Some dots to connect

The Afghanistan Conflict Monitor does a great job of pulling together reports on breaking developments in that war-wracked country.
Here are three consecutive posts from today’s front page:

You can find many more details about the tragedy Afghanistan is living through, more than seven years into the country’s occupation by the US-led coalition, here.
Seven years into the US-led occupations of Japan and Germany, the situation in each of those countries was exponentially better than the situation in Afghanistan today.
The present model of overwhelmingly military, overwhelmingly western responsibility for Afghanistan’s in/security environment is clearly not working for the Afghan people. They– and the world– need a different model.

10 thoughts on “Afghanistan: Some dots to connect”

  1. The Taliban and all others who use children in warfare must cease doing so. The rights of children in Afghanistan must be fully protected.
    Using children to kill adults is bad, but using adults (and teen-agers) to kill children is apparently acceptable according to the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General for Afghanistan, Kai Eide. That is how the rights of children will be fully protected, according to this genius.
    Where do they find these lackies to jump through hoops for the US, in the style of Eide and his boss Ban ki-Moon? These are people who can so casually concoct their own rules for acceptable warfare which not only are at variance with international legal standards but are totally accepting of aggressive war itself which is a violation of the UN Charter. They are scum and the UN is a stinking, dead fish.
    I hope I haven’t been too easy on them.

  2. Yes! Do we ever need a different model!?
    Lately, I have been doing quite a bit of reading and studying about rural Afghanistan. Despite 30 years of war, they have many traditions within their culture and their complex social structures that can provide the model for stability, peace and development.
    We can help those traditions come to life. We need to accept their value, and importantly, understand their dynamics.
    We certainly have a long ways to go before we can competently support community sources of growth and conflict resolution, but those seeds exist.
    Bob Spencer

  3. Bob,
    Have you been able to identify any viable groups, bloggers or other entities (“seeds”) in A. with whom we might engage? And if you’re willing, let’s hear about any other ideas you have, here on JWN. Or email me and I’ll use my new-found HC-granted powers to do an article.
    The situation there is going from bad to terrible under the current thought-regime. As you say, we need a different model. WAR IS NOT THE ANSWER!

  4. from David Ignatius, WaPo:
    What will destroy that country’s experiment in democracy isn’t the Taliban or other insurgent groups, but the lawlessness and corruption that have been allowed to fester under the government of President Hamid Karzai.
    The core issue is bad governance. The biggest threat . . . right now isn’t insurgent attacks from Taliban fighters. It’s kidnappings by the criminal gangs that are destroying normal life in Kabul. “The resurgence of the Taliban is a result of the public’s hunger for law and order.”

  6. Frank,
    Thanks — fascinating stuff. Some main points I take from it:
    * Russia/Iran ties, particularly in air defense
    * the US’s “Great Central Asia Strategy” with its “GWOT” cover (and I thought it was just the pipeline)
    * the possible Black Sea — Caucuses — Stans supply line
    * keeping India at bay with Kashmir
    * new air capabilities for Pakistan
    * the ongoing US promotion of instability
    I would just add:
    * US air superiority in the south Caucuses requires a continuing US presence in Iraq
    * there are unknowns, like: China or Russia, or anyone, providing Stinger-type MANPAD missiles to Afghan partisans, keeping in mind that warfare isn’t what it used to be
    * Don’t count Russia and China out — they have vital geopolitical interests in this area
    * The Pakistani generals may have a problem protecting the NATO supply line
    Oh, let’s not forget that the US is doing all this to “get the guy in the cave.” Ha ha. A little Irish humor there.

  7. Don
    They are desperate to get that Pipeline in place before the Russians consolidate.
    The logic in the following seems to still hold true particularly if you look at the goings on in Baku.
    http://www.takeoverworld.info/Grand_Chessboard.pdf
    While the restoration of the maximum feasible degree of Russian political and economic influence in the region is the overall
    goal and the reinforcement of the CIS is the principal mechanism for achieving it, Moscow’s primary geopolitical targets for political
    subordination appear to be Azerbaijan and Kazakstan. For a Russian political counteroffensive to be successful, Moscow must not
    only cork access to the region but must also penetrate its geographic shield.
    For Russia, Azerbaijan has to be a priority target. Its subordination would help to seal off Central Asia from the West, especially from Turkey, thereby further increasing Russia’s leverage vis-a-vis the recalcitrant Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan. To that end, tactical
    cooperation with Iran regarding such ontroversial issues as how to divide the drilling concessions to the Caspian seabed serves the important objective of compelling Baku to accommodate itself to Moscow’s wishes. A subservient Azerbaijan would also facilitate the consolidation of a dominant Russian position in both Georgia and Armenia. Kazakstan offers an especially tempting primary target as well,
    because its ethnic vulnerability makes it impossible for the Kazak government to prevail in an open confrontation with Moscow. Moscow can also exploit the Kazak fear of China’s growing dynamism, as well as the likelihood of growing Kazak resentment over the Sinification of the adjoining Xinjiang Province in China. Kazakstan’s gradual subordination would have the geopolitical effect of almost automatically drawing Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan into Moscow’s sphere of control, while exposing both Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan to more direct Russian pressure.

  9. Frank,
    I should have been more clear — I thought the main rationale for OEF was the TAPI pipeline. Indian participation in that project has now been at least partially upset by Mumbai, but Pakistan just announced that will require $1 billion to build underground storage for gas to be imported from Iran and Turkmenistan. (Pakistan had already threatened India that the IPI pipeline would become the IPC pipeline (Iran-Pakistan-China.)
    But yes, the focus of attention now seems to be on Azerbaijan, the Caspian, the Stans and Georgia. And as McCain warned, don’t forget Ukraine, the largest country (entirely) in Europe, with it’s de facto control(?) of the Black Sea (Turkey has legal control).
    I’ll do an article on MANPADS sometime.

  10. Thanks Don
    As I remember it Brzezinski summarises his thoughts as ” Kazakhstan is the prize and Ukraine is the key”
    I suspect Kazakhstan is a lost cause, and we wait to see just how cold the Ukranians get before the elections

Comments are closed.