http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5423
July 31, 2008
Foreign Policy in Focus
Afghanistan: Not a Good War
by Conn Hallinan
<snip>
The Taliban appears to be evolving from a creation of the
U.S., Saudi Arabian, and Pakistani intelligence agencies during
Afghanistan's war with the Soviet Union, to a polyglot collection of
dedicated Islamists to nationalists. Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad
Omar told the Agence France Presse early this year, "We're fighting
to free our country. We are not a threat to the world."
Those are words that should give Obama, The New York Times, and NATO
pause.
The initial invasion in 2001 was easy because the Taliban had
alienated itself from the vast majority of Afghans. But the weight
of occupation, and the rising number of civilian deaths, is shifting
the resistance toward a war of national liberation.
No foreign power has ever won that battle in Afghanistan.
War Gone Bad
There is no mystery as to why things have gone increasingly badly
for the United States and its allies.
As the United States steps up its air war, civilian casualties have
climbed steadily over the past two years. Nearly 700 were killed in
the first three months of 2008, a major increase over last year. In
a recent incident, 47 members of a wedding party were killed in
Helmand Province. In a society where clan, tribe, and blood feuds
are a part of daily life, that single act sowed a generation of
enmity.
Anatol Lieven, a professor of war at King's College London, says
that a major impetus behind the growing resistance is anger over the
death of family members and neighbors.
Lieven says it is as if Afghanistan is "becoming a sort of surreal
hunting estate, in which the U.S. and NATO breed the very terrorists
they then track down."
Once a population turns against an occupation (or just decides to
stay neutral), there are few places in the world where an occupier
can win. Afghanistan, with its enormous size and daunting geography,
is certainly not one of them.
<snip>
The UN considers one third of the country "inaccessible," and almost
half, "high risk." The number of roadside bombs has increased
fivefold over 2004, and the number of armed attacks has jumped by a
factor of 10. In the first three months of 2008, attacks around
Kabul have surged by 70%. The current national government has little
presence outside its capital. President Karzai is routinely referred
to as "the mayor of Kabul."
According to Der Spiegel, the Taliban are moving north toward
Kunduz, just as they did in 1994 when they broke out of their base
in Kandahar and started their drive to take over the country. The
Asia Times says the insurgents' strategy is to cut NATO's supply
lines from Pakistan and establish a "strategic corridor" from the
border to Kabul.
The United States and NATO currently have about 60,000 troops in
Afghanistan. But many NATO troops are primarily concerned with
rebuilding and development - the story that was sold to the European
public to get them to support the war - and only secondarily with
war fighting.
The Afghan army adds about 70,000 to that number, but only two
brigades and one headquarters unit are considered capable of
operating on their own.
According to U.S. counter insurgency doctrine, however, Afghanistan
would require at least 400,000 troops to even have a chance of
"winning" the war. Adding another 10,000 U.S. troops will have
virtually no effect.
Afghanistan and the Elections
As the situation continues to deteriorate, some voices, including
those of the Karzai government and both U.S. presidential
candidates, advocate expanding the war into Pakistan in a repeat of
the invasions of Laos and Cambodia, when the Vietnam War began
spinning out of control. Both those invasions were not only a
disaster for the invaders. They also led directly to the genocide in
Cambodia.
By any measure, a military "victory" in Afghanistan is simply not
possible. The only viable alternative is to begin direct
negotiations with the Taliban, and to draw in regional powers with a
stake in the outcome: Iran, Pakistan, Russia, Turkmenistan,
Tajikistan, China, and India.
But to do so will require abandoning our "story" about the Afghan
conflict as a "good war." In this new millennium, there are no good
wars.
Conn Hallinan is a Foreign Policy In Focus columnist.
Copyright © 2008, Institute for Policy Studies