|
Afghanistan:
A war won and lost
This week is the sixth anniversary of the start of US air strikes
against al-Qaeda and its Taliban hosts in Afghanistan. It was a
very clever politico-military operation, and by December of 2001
all of Afghanistan was under the control of the United States and
its local allies for a total cost of twelve American dead. Then,
for no good reason, it fell apart, and now the war is lost.
In the days just after 9/11 George Tenet, the Central Intelligence
Agency's chief, came up with a bold proposal. Why invade Afghanistan
with a large American army, deploying massive firepower that kills
large numbers of locals and alienates the population? Why give Osama
bin Laden the long anti-American guerilla war that he was undoubtedly
counting on?
Instead, Tenet proposed sending teams of CIA agents and
special forces into the country to win the support of the various
militias, loosely linked as the Northern Alliance, that still dominated
the northern regions of the country. Although the Taliban had controlled
most of the country since 1996, they had never decisively won the
civil war. So why not intervene in that war, shower their opponents
with money and weapons, and tip the balance against the Taliban?
It worked like a charm. Pakistan, whose intelligence
services had originally created the Taliban, withdrew its support,
the regime fled Kabul, and most of the Taliban troops melted back
into their villages. The government of a country of 27 million people
was taken down for a death toll that probably did not exceed 4,000
on all sides.
By mid-December 2001 the United States effectively controlled
Afghanistan through its local allies, all drawn from the northern
minority groups: Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazara. There had not been the
mass killing of innocent bystanders that would inevitably have accompanied
a conventional US invasion, so there was no guerilla war. The traditional
ruling group and biggest minority, the Pashtun, who had put their
money on the Taliban and lost, would have to be brought back into
the game somehow, but the usual Afghan deal-making would suffice.
Washington had the wit to make Mahmoud Karzai, a Pashtun
from a clan that never had much to do with the Taliban, its puppet
president in Kabut, but it didn't carry through. It froze out all
the prominent Pashtun political and religious leaders who had had
dealings with the Taliban -- which was, of course, almost all of
them.
The Taliban had been the government of Afghanistan for
almost five years, and were at the time the political vehicle of
the Pashtun ascendancy in the country. If you were a traditional
Pashtun leader, how could you not have had dealings with them? An
amnesty that turned a blind eye to the past, plus pressure by the
United States on its recent allies to grant the Pashtuns a fair
share of the national pie, would have created a regime in Kabul
to which Pashtuns could give their loyalty, even if they were less
dominant at the centre than usual. But that never happened.
The United States had so closely identified the Taliban with
al-Qaeda (although bin Laden probably never told the Taliban leadership
what he was planning) that it would not talk to Pashtun leaders
who had been linked to the Taliban. Six years after the invasion
that wasn't, the Pashtuns are still largely frozen out. That is
why the Taliban are coming back.
Afghanistan has usually been run by regional and tribal
warlords with little central control: nothing new there. But now
it is also a country where the biggest minority has been largely
excluded from power by foreign invaders who sided with the smaller
minorities, and then blocked the process of accommodation by which
the various Afghan ethnic groups normally make power-sharing deals.
The Taliban are still the main political vehicle of
the Pashtuns, because there has been no time to build another. It
doesn't mean that all Pashtuns are fanatics or terrorists. Indeed,
not all the Taliban are fanatics (though many of them are), and
hardly any of them nurse the desire to carry out terrorist acts
in other countries. That was the specialty of their (rather ungrateful)
Arab guests, who fled across the border into the tribal areas of
Pakistan almost six years ago.
The current fighting in the south, the Pashtun heartland,
which is causing a steady dribble of American, British and Canadian
casualties, will continue until the Western countries pull out.
(Most other NATO members sent their troops to various parts of northern
Afghanistan, where non-Pashtun warlords rule non-Pashtun populations
and nobody dares attack the foreigners.) Then, after the foreigners
are gone, the Afghans will make the traditional inter-ethnic deals
and something like peace will return.
Will Karzai still be the president after that? Yes, if
he can convince the Pashtuns that he is open to such a deal once
the foreigners leave.
Will the Taliban come back to power? No, only to a share
of power, and only to the extent that they can still command the
loyalty of the Pashtuns once it is no longer a question of resistance
to foreigners.
Will Osama bin Laden return and recreate a "nest of terrorists"
in Afghanistan. Very unlikely. The Afghans paid too high a price
for their hospitality the first time round.*
back to top
|