On Sun, 13 Oct 2002, Ulhas Joglekar wrote:
> If the US occupies Iraq, Iran would be encircled. The US would have
> occupied Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan. With the US navy in the Persian
> Gulf, Iran would be vulnerable. What the US would do next, Michael?
What is this, a trick question? :o)
But seriously, I only do context. Predicting the results of war is harder than predicting the course of markets. And predicting the course of the war after next is way beyond me. I only know what I read in the papers.
I will certainly agree that a US occupation of Iraq will put Iran in grave danger. But I don't think anybody would argue with that.
But I'm not quite sure I agree that our presence in Afghanistan or Pakistan adds very much to that threat. I mean, it's a lot harder to get to Afghanistan than it is to get to Iran, so I don't see what it adds to an attack. It's already accessible coastlines are vast, and Qatar, our new local headquarters, is only a short hop away.
In addition, our presence in both countries is far from consolidated and their governments are far from settled. A year or from now, they could conceivably be our problems and Iran's assets.
Lastly, I think the concept of "surrounded" is a little too firm for the fluid reality of Afghanistan, as well perhaps also for the borderlands of Pakistan. Before we invaded Afghanistan, Iran was bordered on that side by an enemy who hated it more implacably than we do and who killed its diplomats and co-religionists in cold blood. Nowadays that border is open, trade is flourishing, and Iran has more influence than it's had in years. Here's an interesting article on the modern version of the Greco-Bactrian confusion. Herat's not just a city, it's a major province.
Financial Times; Oct 08, 2002
BACK PAGE - FIRST SECTION: US fears Afghan city could be handed to Iran on a plate
By Charles Clover
Twelve months after the US bombing campaign began in Afghanistan on October 7 last year, power has been usurped by regional strongmen such as Ismail Khan, the governor of Herat, with ties not just to Kabul but to Afghanistan's neighbouring governments.
For centuries, Herat has been a hub of commerce for southern Eurasia. Today little has changed.
The city is famous for cutting deals with new conquerors rather than fighting them. Ghulam Qader Akbar, the head of the Herat chamber of commerce, grins and winks. "You should have seen me during the time of the Taliban - you wouldn't have recognised me. I had the biggest beard, the tallest turban, and the longest set of prayer beads of anyone here. Whatever they said, we would say, 'You are right.'"
Now, 10 months after the Taliban was thrown out of Herat, Mr Akbar's beard is neatly trimmed. He wears a flashy designer suit and no turban. "Like we say in Afghanistan: business is like water, you can cut it in a thousand places and it will always flow back together," he says.
The truth of his words can be seen at Herat's customs house which is mobbed with traders seeking to cash in on the first stability and calm Afghanistan has enjoyed in decades.
But Herat's commercial revival has drawn scepticism from Kabul, which sees the emergence of a potential rival power-centre, and from Washington, which worries about the city's increasingly close ties to its western neighbour, Iran, one of the countries President George W. Bush named as part of the "axis of evil".
Such matters seem of little concern to Sufi Qudoos, Herat's leading merchant. Sipping tea in his modest office, he says: "We bring the goods in, mainly from Dubai, through Iran, and sell them here. What the buyers do with them is their business." His company, Safi Brothers, has been working since 1972 through five regime changes. "I never got too close to any governments here. They all took their taxes - they were happy, I was happy."
Herat's governor has used the city's sizeable customs revenues to start an ambitious building programme, including refurbishing several ancient mosques, and building a $250,000 drainage system, public parks and a ring road.
Eckart Schweik, a United Nations official in Herat, says: "If you see these kinds of projects anywhere else in Afghanistan, they are being funded by international organisations. Herat is the only city I've seen that is funding this sort of construction using its own budget."
The city's prosperity has made Ismail Khan probably the most independent of Afghanistan's local governors, and complicated his relationship with the central government in Kabul. He has extended his control into four or five neighbouring provinces, where his authority is stronger than that of other local governors. He disputes he is a "warlord", the title western policy-makers use for prominent former Mujahideen commanders such as himself.
But he clearly sees himself less as a regional governor, and more in the mould of the 19th century satraps and khans of central Asia, who sold their loyalty to the highest bidder. He has even taken the title of "emir", usually reserved for heads of state.
While Ismail Khan builds his power base, the lucrative trading business that fuels Herat's economy has become inseparable from the complicated geo politics of central Asia. He has also developed close ties with Iran, which is the conduit for nearly all of Herat's trade, much to the concern of the US.
Donald Rumsfeld, the US defence secretary, travelled to Herat in the spring and Lieutenant-General Dan McNeill, commander of coalition forces in Afghanistan, met Ismail Khan in August. This month, the US has also sent a permanent diplomat in residence to Herat, the first for any Afghan city. One western diplomat, referring to the 19th century competition between Great Britain and Russia for mastery of central Asia, says: "Ismail Khan is playing the Great Game. He likes to have the feeling that other countries are competing for his loyalty."
For Ismail Khan, Herat's future lies more in the hands of Tehran than the US-backed government in Kabul. While Kabul badgers Herat for a share of its estimated $3m-a- month customs revenues, Tehran is a source of patronage and investment. Iran is funding a road from Herat to the Iranian border at Islam Qalaa, and is connecting Herat to the Iranian electric grid.
A United Nations official in Herat says: "Ismail Khan is dependent on Iran. Herat's entire economy and all of Ismail Khan's tax revenues depend on having an open border with Iran."
Ismail Khan says of Iran's relationship with Afghanistan and with Herat: "A big country like the United States should have no worries about this."
Turning to relations with the Afghan government, he said: "We are in complete agreement with Kabul on every issue."
Privately, US officials indicate concern at Herat's increasingly close ties with Iran, and the weakness of Kabul to enforce its authority in Herat and elsewhere in Afghanistan's provinces.
The US and Iran have been at loggerheads over charges by Mr Rumsfeld that Iran may be harbouring al-Qaeda fugitives. According to Herat airport officials, after the fall of the Taliban, a number of Iranian aircraft did land at Herat airport empty, took passengers and flew back to Iran. Mirwais Sadeq, Afghanistan's civil aviation minister and Ismail Khan's son, dismisses the charge as "rubbish".
Ismail Khan says: "I don't think there should be any disagreement over Herat from our friends abroad. Both the US and Iran want the same thing in Herat that we want - stability, prosperity and peace."