The Afghanistan situation
A dramatic change in the approach to Afghan conflict is coming to the fore. From primarily a military method, matters evolved to a strategy that involved fighting and talking at the same time. Now, NATO and US have thanked Pakistan for freeing of some high profile imprisoned Taliban, and for facilitating the Afghan-led peace process. Previously, Pakistan was blamed for not doing enough to crack down on Afghan Taliban residing in FATA.
The change in NATO strategy does not mean it is without options. While Pakistan has remained the focus of attention, recent events have pointed to the suspicious regional role Karzai government is increasingly playing, especially in FATA and Balochistan. However, while speaking at the Centre for a New American Security, Leon Panetta reiterated the US position on November 20, “Look, in many ways, the success in Afghanistan is dependent on having a Pakistan that is willing to confront terrorism on its side of the border and prevent (militant) safe havens.”
Ever since Pakistan declared its acquiesce towards a terrorist label for Haqqani network, the harsher criticism from the American side has somewhat diminished. There is another noteworthy change in the region that came about in the aftermath of Malala incident. The US acknowledged that the perpetrator of the attack, Moulana Fazlullah, was indeed hiding in the North East Afghanistan as alleged by Pakistan. Reportedly, an unnamed US official told The Washington Post “Finding Fazlullah is not a priority because he is not affiliated with Al-Qaeda or with insurgents targeting US and Afghan interests.”
Ironically, it’s the same argument used by Pakistan; it does not act against the Haqqanis because they do not target it. Although, there is one subtle difference, Haqqanis are tied to Al-Qaeda but Fazlullah is not.
Earlier, in August, Pakistan’s Interior Minister Rehman Malik had commented that elements within the Afghan government were likely supporting Fazlullah. He told Reuters “I think some of the elements (of the Afghan government) there are supporters. Maybe state actors, maybe non-state actors.” The emphasis in the accusation was the same as that levelled against Pakistan for its role in Afghanistan.
Nonetheless, it is clear from the above statements that Pakistan is being destabilised from Afghanistan with the active support of Karzai government while NATO forces have intentionally looked the other way. This obviously does not bode well for the Pak-Afghan relations and the envisioned economic integration of the region.
The Afghan role in the deteriorating situation of Balochistan has also come under focus. In March, Pakistan’s interior minister claimed that President Karzai had admitted some inference in Balochistan was taking place from Afghanistan. “President Karzai has promised to stop infiltration of militants from Afghanistan into Pakistan,” Rehman Malik told reporters.
Speaking to Pakistan’s Senate in August, Malik presented the recruitment and training process for those conducting terror related activities in Balochistan. He elaborated that after receiving basic training in about 45 training camps, brainwashed youngsters are sent to Afghanistan to obtain advance training. For proof, he showed official letters written by Afghan government to fund and support the activities of Brahmdagh Bugti and his followers.
Another aspect of Pakistan’s concern with Afghanistan has to do with the nature of its ties with India. President Karzai visited India for five days in mid-November. The two countries previously signed a strategic agreement in 2011 and India has already committed two billion dollars in assistance for Afghanistan. During the visit, Karzai was not just seeking more investments, but also testing Indian limits in enhancing the capacity of Afghan security forces. As far as Pakistan is concerned, training of Afghan military forces by India is another sensitive matter.
It is not clear what the US intentions are in regards to India’s military role in Afghanistan. Although India itself is wary of its military involvement, the US has encouraged it to take on a more active role once NATO begins to limit its military presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014. There is obviously a risk that in addition to the proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan may also become a theatre for tussles between India and Pakistan. In the wider politics of Middle East, the NATO and US tilt has thus far been in favour of Sunni groups. This stance is unlikely to change as long as Iran remains a bone of contention.
Although India has abided with western sanctions on Iran and in restricting economic affairs with the country, Afghanistan and Pakistan have continued to deal with it. The insistence of Afghanistan and Pakistan on diversifying economic and energy relations with Iran are some of the other complicating factors when it comes to US-Pakistan relations and the future of Afghanistan. While talking to a private TV channel at the D8 Summit in Islamabad, Ahmedinejad emphasised how Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan can solve many of the regional problems themselves, and foreign presence was the reason for the perpetuating conflict. While Afghanistan has signed an agreement with the US allowing its military to remain there beyond 2014, Iran has alleged that US bases are being used to destabilise Iran and Pakistan.
Afghanistan also continues to play with Pakistan’s sensitivities when it comes to the Durand Line. The country went in to an uproar when Mark Grossman presented the US position on the issue. In an interview on Afghan TV on October 21, he stated: “Our policy is that that border is the international border.” Other commentary that surrounded the debate pointed to the fact that Pakistan’s alarm about Afghan intentions is not that out of place. In all three countries – Pakistan, Afghanistan and India – there are those who want to undo history.
While Pakistan is blamed for the cross-border attacks emanating from FATA, what has emerged is that the Afghans and NATO forces are equally at fault for the out of control provinces of Kunar and Nuristan. The security forces of Pakistan have repeatedly suffered deadly strikes in Bajaur, Swat and Dir, from militants linked to Fazlullah. There are fears Taliban resurgence may once again be occurring in the area.
The writer is the chief analyst for PoliTact (www.PoliTact.com and http:twitter.com/politact) and can be reached at [email protected]
I don't understand that why only Pakistan-Afghanistan border is an affected area? Why is there no violence on Afghanistan-Iran, Afghanistan-Turkmenistan, Afghanistan-Uzbekistan & Afghanistan-Tajikistan border areas? How are these other neighboring countries of Afghanistan remain unaffected….
As usual a well written, thought provoking article. Let us just move away from the blame game to to the great game. I admire the afghani people-may be that has some relation to a part of DNA i carry or perhaps my visits there!
Afgahanis er proud, stubborn ,independent, xenopobic and brave warriors who through centuries have fought off invaders single handedily. They have not relied on outside help but have not refused when offered. They play a waiting game which can be a long time. Nothing unites other than then an attack on their country. The british, the Russians and the USA can attest to it.
In the not distant past the afghanis had their own tribal codes mainly the pushton code
where religion was incorporated in it but still the the tribal code took precedence. The islam practiced was of the mild type. I wonder if the writer of the above article visited Kabul in the sixties—he would have been surprised by the hippies in the centre of Kabul using all types of drugs available to the amusement of the local population. They were never molested!
Talking of Kabul and centralised Govt.now. Kabul has been the seat of the Govt always but has been the centre of a weak govt with a limited portfolio i.e foreign affairs and limited defence affairs. The writ of the Govt.has been limited.
Now came the avalanche of the Americans. After ? defeating the Talibans instead of Al Qaeeda they decided to introduce a concept of strong centralised Govt. The idea was conceived in Washington, deilivered in Bonn and Mr. Karzai was declared the President in Bonn and installed in Kabul surrounded by american security upto now. In came the afghani expatriates from all over the world esp.from USA. They had never participated in any fighting but had in fact fled in times of various wars. Now they were back with a bang. They had unique advantage. They could speak English, wore expensive suits and had gold rolex watches on their wrists. Almost every one wanted to be a minister or a advisor. President dressed in his fancy attire in cohot with the western powers obliged and also went to bed with the most hated warlords to stay in Power. In came Field Marshal Fahim, Gen Dostum etc.
This Govt had nothing in common with the men sitting in front of them. They were dirty looking with unkempt beards, wearing baggy shalwars and carrying a multipurpose carpet and eating out of a common bowl and licking their fingers afterwards. The westerns could not do business with them but they conveniently forgot that these were the very warriors who had driven the Russians out and were about to turn on them!
These scruffy people felt genuinely neglected, sett aside and forced to deal people who did not understand them and were not on the same wavelength. Pashtun Karzai did not understand his own people.What cerdentials had he? The fighting of the dispossed started again. The experiment of centralised Govt. lies in tatters. The Americans have understood and are going home–period. Karzai has to remember again that his country is a country of 40000 villages where the old traditions live on and raw justice pervails. It is no use blaming others for his ills. There is no light in the end of tunnel for you –only the traditional helicopter –remember the usa embassy in Saigon. The afghanis have lot of patience.
A third-grade piece written for third-grade audience (count me in too because I read), I think sometimes you need to think like a fool to respond to a fool who thinks that it is fair to play the blame game. The hard part is that you need to be a fool to think like fool.
I admire you. You are no fool but has made me look like –excuse me made me a fool without giving me the benefit of doubt. I congratulate you on your spot diagnosis. i am off to take a I.Q test to confirm it. My dear wife was not surprised at all—she after all is a MAC widow.
Comments are closed.