The generally sane and realistic military analyst Tony Cordesman published a 28-page paper (PDF) yesterday on the US war in Afghanistan, which to me merely underlined how deeply un-winnable this US war has become.
Here’s his lead sentence:
- There are no certainties in war, and the tasks that NATO/ISAF and the US must perform in Afghanistan go far beyond the normal limits of counterinsurgency. They are the equivalent of armed nation building at a time when Afghanistan faces major challenges from both its own insurgents and international movements like Al Qa’ida, and must restructure its government and economy after 30 years of nearly continuous conflict.
Armed nation building?
Pack up your guns and come home, guys. Do whatever deals you need to do, to get out of there fast. Leave Afghanistan to the Afghans.
I’m not even sure where this notion of “nation building” came from, within US/western strategic and policy discourse. The current Wikipedia entry on it is suggestive and helpful. For starters, it denotes a clear distinction between the process of nation-building and that of state-building– most notably, by sending you to a different page for the latter.
To me, nation-building implies a process that can only be effectively and sustainably undertaken by the constituent members of the nation itself. It certainly can’t be carried out in any meaningful way by a horde of very heavily armed robo-troops parachuted in from a distant land. It just might be that a group of armed men from outside could do something to help with the process of state-building. (Not that that would make the resulting state recognizably a democratic one, however.) But nation-building, in the sense of building up the ties among a group of people so they feel they all belong to one “nation” and are bound by the obligations of that commitment?
Nah, I’m still not seeing it as a possibility.
I don’t think NATO can succeed at state-building in Afghanistan, either.
… This evening I was on a Press TV show with Larry Korb and Gareth Porter, about Afghanistan and Iraq, both. Larry, who’s a sensible, realist person, seemed fairly supportive of Obama’s decision to increase the numbers of US troops in southern Afghanistan. At one point I asked him what the best outcome was that he could reasonably foresee in Afghanistan. He said something like,
- Well, that in 18 months we would have stabilized things enough there that the process of nation building could be taking root. But if that hasn’t happened by then, we’d have to look at other options.
This is not exactly a gung-ho outlook. But I think that even this outlook is very short-sighted and irresponsible.
Why wait another 18 months, when it is almost certain that the kind of “stability” Larry was looking for won’t be there then… and along the way, how many more Afghan citizens and how many more Americans will have died?
Pres. Obama should start acting now– to reach out to the whole of the rest of the world community, but especially Afghanistan’s neighbors, to ask their help in formulating a plan for a speedy withdrawal of the western troops from the country. Pakistan and Afghanistan both need a lot of help in re-establishing effective governance at all levels. But military troops who are western are just about the worst imaginable tools to help bring this about.
And guess what. There are plenty of other ways for these two countries’ peoples to get what they need.
Sure, many Americans still have a lot of concern about future Al-Qaeda attacks, or about Afghanistan once again turning into the kind of place where Al-Qaeda can find a safe haven for organizing its heinous plots. But once again, the insertion, use, and maintenance of a large western military force in the Afghan-Pakistani border region seems like just about the worst, and most counter-productive way to respond to these concerns.
Why wait another 18 months?
The critical factor in these equations is the US electoral timetable: 18 months take us to the defining time of the primary campaigns. A perfect time to exercise Afghan options.
As to the Afghans, they are the anvil on which political careers are hammered out in NATO countries.
There are hundreds of millions of war criminals in the world today and most of them are decent people averting their eyes.
Nation building indeed!
. . .the insertion, use, and maintenance of a large western military force in the Afghan-Pakistani border region seems like just about the worst, and most counter-productive way to respond to these concerns.
Hurrah. We’re all Quakers now.
Democracy is the main thing. That is why we in South Africa talk about National Democratic Revolution (NDR). Nation-building cannot be separated from the national democracy.
I do not share your residual respect for Mr Cordesman, Helena. Armed nation-building is not merely a gross contradiction in terms. Cordesman is also writing in the Honduras conjuncture, the Iran conjuncture, the Zimbabwe and Kenya conjuncture, all cases where democracy has been compromised and weakened under the pressure of the USA.
US policy is all about nation-destruction. To say otherwise is to say the thing that is not.
Today I find myself agreeing with all posters on Afghanistan, specially with Bevin. It may be because I do not know much about the topic. In my ignorance I suspect that both the war and the nation building are hopeless. In a place where the national sport uses a headless goat instead of a ball, anything is hopeless.
The ultimate irony is that most soccer ball that kids play here in the US are made in Pakistan, and they own backyard they’d rather use headless goats…
And so missing the Taleban. Women and their daughters most of all, of course, but the boys too. No more amputations and stonings at the soccer grounHow ds. Soccer and fvf games are no substitute. How they must must all look with envious eyes on what their neighbours in northern Pakistan are enjoying.
Rather than Wikipedia, why not look at “Killing Hope” by William Blum?
As for Titus, really you go beyond racism to a point where you become ridiculous. What were your ancestors? Were they like mine, feudal aristocrats? Barbarians, in fact? And what have you learnt from that? Who is the barbarian now? It is you, but you have no excuse. You are supposed to know better by now.
The Soviet Union supported a National Democratic Revolution in Afghanistan, and the USA ridiculously called that NDR “communism”, in a country without factories! The US supported the sheep-head-kicking feudals, whom you now affect to despise.
You are a monster, Titus.
Some Photos and Captions by Michael Yon
The term “nation building” as it is used today seems to take on a specialized meaning in the aftermath of the Cold War (when the US became “the sole superpower”). Ambassador James Dobbins, the doyen of modern nation builders has been involved with this activity in Somalia, Haiti, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, and Afghanistan and sees US involvement in Japan and Germany as early examples of American nation building. Several of his treatises on the subject are available in pdf at the RAND Corporation website.
In his The Beginner’s Guide to Nation-Building he provides a basic definition:
Nation-building, as it is commonly referred to in the United States, involves the use of armed force as part of a broader effort to promote political and economic reforms with the objective of transforming a society emerging from conflict into one at peace with itself and its neighbors.
I’m afraid such a view of nation building is becoming the norm among US policy makers. Another grave concern is that the perceived regional character of this activity is pushing Pakistan to the point when it too will be a candidate for nation building.
Here’s a link to Paul Robinson’s comparison of present day nation building in Afghanistan to the art as practised previously by the Soviets:
http://amconmag.com/article/2009/aug/01/00030//
I’m not even sure where this notion of “nation building” came from, within US/western strategic policy discourse.
That must be a typo, right? You meant :
I’m not even sure where this notion of “nation building” came from, within US/western strategic and policy disease.
It’s like a case of the clap, originally spread by Woodrow Wilson among like-minded enthusiasts enjoying a repeat viewing of Birth of a Nation.
Now, of course, it’s out of control. The Europeans’ revenge upon the Americas for syphilis.
Poll: Majority in US Oppose Both Wars
A new AP-GfK poll released today shows a majority of Americans opposed to the wars in both Afghanistan and Iraq. The numbers also reveal growing concern that the president will be able to meet his goals, particularly in Iraq.
The Iraq War was opposed 63-34, while the slightly more popular Afghan War was opposed 53-44. Both numbers split strongly along party lines, with roughly two thirds of Republican supporting each war. Only 10 percent of Democrats support the Iraq War while only 26 support the Afghan War, which has been the foreign policy centerpiece for the Obama Administration.
That’d be the “progressives” among the demoblicans who support everything Obama does on the grounds that they “can believe in” it.
Other polls have showed growing opposition among allies for their own nations’ contribution to the Afghan War, and it seems that as the war has become a more prominent part of American foreign policy with the Obama Administration’s escalations that opposition is rubbing off on Americans as well.
Germany’s Defense Ministry has sought to stem anti-war sentiment by arguing that its not a war at all.
Ah ha! It’s a German phrase then, perhaps? “Armed nation building!” Yeah that has a Third Reichean Ring to it! Or perhaps it’s Das Ring der Götterdämmerung.
So, what’s the eventual goal?
I’m not sure that I can understand what The President’s aims might be. If Zbigniew Brzezinski still has influence in the Obama Administration, then, he says in his book, THE CHOICE, “For at least a generation, the major task facing the United States in the effort to promote global security will be the pacification and then the cooperative organization of a region that contains the world’s greatest concentration of political injustice, social deprivation, demographic congestion and potential for high intensity violence. But the region also contains most of the world’s oil and natural gas. ( p.60 )
He is talking about Central Asia and the countries that border Afghanistan.
So, does Obama think that the Army can fulfill that kind of mission? Actually, the entire U.S. policy making establishment and their disciples in the think tanks that they finance never get much beyond the military’s stream of thought. They relentlessly promote and attempt to impose western style “institutionalization” and the “rule of law”. Despite all of those efforts, the rule of law specialist at the USIP, Alex Their, repeatedly says that traditional Afghan methods have a good rate of success at resolving conflicts while the new government institutions either do nothing or fail.
No doubt, his observations reflect reality in many different ways in Afghanistan.
In reality, we need to stop thinking of Afghans as poor, ignorant, war stricken, and helpless. With all of their centuries of experiences, they possess a tremendous amount of ability. We may be the ones that need to start learning if Obama is ever going to even try to attain the aims that Brzezinski outlines.
Bob Spencer
“Pack-up your guns and come home guys” sounds so rational and disarming.. Its more fitting given the present xenophobic US public for this version, “pack-up your guns cause were moving on to Iran, then Somalia, and for sure Darfur”. and then unto Nrth Korea, and China/Russia?
Cause look how far we have come since we liberated our ALLY THE SHEIK OF Kuwait.
First Gulf War – 1991
A multi-national force of 34 countries, led by the United States, invades Iraq over Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait.
Though widely viewed as a just war, this was another war by the United States against a former ally that the US propped up and supported, including overlooking Saddam Hussein’s ordering of the gassing of his own people. The Persian Gulf War was a case of the US defending one dictatorship over another. While the war’s stated goals were just, US history vis-a-vis Iraq raises questions about her culpability.
Operation Restore Hope, 1992 -1993
The US led a UN sanctioned effort to relieve the humanitarian crisis in Somalia. Somalia had collapsed into anarchy with local warlords splintering the country into warring factions. Operation Restore Hope was an attempt to open supply lines to bring humanitarian aid to starving Somalis.
Iraqi “No Fly” Zones, 1992-2003
US, along with the UK and France, establish “no fly” zones in northern and southern Iraq. UN Security Council Resolution 688 is cited as legal justification for these zones, but there is authorization…
UN Protection Force, 1993
President Clinton sent 350 US troops to support stability in Macedonia, formerly part of Yugoslavia.
Bosnia, 1993-2004
US participation in Operation Joint Endeavour was part of a NATO sponsored peacekeeping force in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This military intervention is widely regarded as both just and successful.
Though the war ended in 1995, NATO did not officially end its stabilization force until 2004 (pdf). US participation began under President Bill Clinton and continued under President George W. Bush.
Entry in Haiti, 1994-1997
n 1994, a planned US invasion of Haiti became a peaceful entry after former President Carter convinced dictator Raoul Cédras to step down peacefully. Despite US presence in Haiti for several years, widespread corruption remained.
Airstrikes in Afghanistan and Sudan, 1998
.
In a move widely supported by both Republicans and Democrats, President Clinton orders air strikes against Aghanistan and Sudan in an attempt to destroy facilities allegedly owned by Osama bin Laden. This was in response to the bombing of two US embassies, by terrorists believed to be affiliated with bin Laden.
Air Strikes against Iraq, 1998
President Clinton orders air strikes against Iraq after Saddam Hussein refuses to cooperate with weapons inspectors.
NATO Bombing of Yugoslavia, 1999
The US participated in Operation Allied Force, a campaign to halt war in the the now nonexistent Federal Rebublic of Yugoslavia. Though military targets were primarily selected, civilian targets were also chosen.
Largely designed to protect Albanians from Serbs, many Albanians found themselves homeless refugees, driven out of their villages by Serbs in the ensuing chaos.
Afghanistan War, 2001 to Present
In response to the 9/11 attack on US soil, the US and UK invaded Afghanistan to capture Osama bin Laden, remove the Taliban government which supported him, and uproot al-Qaeda.
Due in large part to the horror of the 9/11 attack, this war was widely supported, even amongst countries who traditionally opposed the US. Though initially successful, this was has dragged on longer than expected. It is widely believed this is due to the US invasion of Iraq having spread its military resources too thin and alienating many erstwhile supporters.
Some believe that the US directly supported the Taliban during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, but though some Mujahideen eventually joined the Taliban, they were distinct. Many Mujahideen died fighting the Taliban, who were largely trained and funded by Pakistan.
Iraq War, 2003 – Present
In 2003, the US led a multi-national invasion of Iraq. There is much dispute as to the reasons for the invasion, but the original justifications for the war — weapons of mass destruction, cooperation with al-Qaeda and a link to 9/11 — have long been disproved.
Check out Chuck Spinney’s recent piece at Counterpunch about the flawed strategic thinking behind the USA’s and NATO’s adventure there. Here are the money paragraphs:
,flawed strategic ,
flawed: or criminal?
Alexander Cockburn mentions the same book (Killing Hope by William Blum) that I mentioned above at http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn07242009.html in an article about CIA and other US military assassination and torture activities for the last 64 years or so.
“the use of armed force as part of a broader effort to promote political and economic reforms with the objective of transforming a society emerging from conflict into one at peace with itself and its neighbors.”
I would say that as practiced by the United States, particularly in Iraq and Afghanistan it involves first initiating an armed conflict where none exists. Neither Iraq nor Afghanistan was “emerging from conflict” when the United States attacked, invaded, and occupied them. Iraq is now trying to emerge from the conflict inflicted on it by the United States, and in Afghanistan Obama is, it appears, trying to ramp down the conflict by escalating it.
Nation building a very nice, very humanly term used by warmongers and occupiers of other nations and land.
Whatever what name or title given their goals on far land to justifying what they doing, it is far from real goals and strategies goals they came from start to that land.
In Iraq and in boarder term in ME specially the Israeli neighbouring Arab states nation building used to twice and changes the realities on the ground, which in boarder term is the refusal of mainstream Arab and Muslim people for Israeli state in ME.
It is a dream 2000 years old that the west came with this planted stat in ME seeking forgiveness what the done to Jews in their lands. the project of nation building starts when Israeli planted as small baby however for 60 years this project have massive and board problem be accepted by mainstream Arabs. Although the massive change and corrupted regimes installed to change the well of their people which obviously failed to miserably.
US found herself in position that time now to come by here power and here massive feast to do the changes on the ground.
Do they succeed?
Time will tell.
Read this article by Patrick Cockburn: Iraq is a country no more. Like much else, that was not the plan
Nation Building?
**
قال لي صباح وهو محلل سياسي من الدرجة الاولى في محطة فضائية من اكبر المحطات العربية ..بعد ان تحدثنا عن تصريحات رئيس وزراء وطننا ..
“تدرين عنده حق .. لو ان الامريكان خرجوا من العراق ..سيتحول العراق الى مهرجان تسوق .. فالضابط الوحيد من خلف الستار .. ووتد خيمة العراق اليوم هم الاميركان”
اردت ان اطلق نكتة ، الا انه استرسل قائلا .. لقد قام الامريكان بترتيب البيت العراقي بطريقة تناسبهم تماما .. وكل كتلة ومجموعة في فلك امريكا تدور .. حتى البعثيين خارج العراق مرتبطين بالاميركان ..”
تذكرت احد الاميركان على اثر كلام ابو نور .. عندما قال : العراق يسير في نفق مظلم .. وكان ذلك عام 2006 فقلت له .. اما ان نصبح الولاية الامريكية 51 او ان تصبح بلادكم المحافظة 19
**
Mayada Al-Askari
Salah, I notice you have posted several items from Mayada Al Askari. She is a friend of mine, and a very lovely person.
I respect here views although I am not agree with some of here.
When she write she reflects the feelings of the majority of Iraqis .
I respect Mayada a great deal as well, and I also disagree with some of her views. We have discussed these things, but mostly we discuss more personal things that do not involve politics. She represents an authentic Iraqi point of view in many ways.