We have gotten used to the invasion of Iraq being called “The Wrong War” and the intervention in Afghanistan being called “The Right War,” but there is an emerging consensus that we went about “the right war” in the wrong way. I attended a panel discussion on the lessons to be learned from America’s seven years in Afghanistan and wanted to share some of the insights that emerged.
Ted Galen Carpenter, Vice President for Defense and Foreign Policy Studies, Cato Institute recalled that 22 years have passed since his first paper for Cato about Afghanistan. He noted that Afghanistan is no longer America’s forgotten war. American casualties now exceed those in Iraq. He feels that we forfeited whatever chance we had for decisive success in 2002. Then, American officials focused more on Iraq and diverted resources especially special forces units to Iraq.
Akbar Ahmed, Professor of Islamic Studies at American University noted that the events in Mumbai have complicated matters. There is an expression in that part of the world: “I took revenge after a hundred years and I took it too soon.” Afghanistan has been the graveyard of the greatest empires of their day from Alexander the Great to the Mughals to the Soviets. Prof. Ahmed opined that a combination of arrogance and ignorance will not win. He quoted Benjamin Franklin that “What begins in anger often ends in shame.” In the tribal society of Afghanistan, the Americans became yet another tribe allied with the enemies of the Pashtun. After 9/11, the objectives were to capture Bin Ladin and Mullah Omar, establish a durable democracy and remove the sources of anti-Americanism. None of these have been achieved. Now the Taliban are in the tribal areas of Pakistan.
Prof. Ahmed noted that there were three centers of leadership in the border areas: tribal leaders, central government, and religious leaders. He argued that the first two have now been marginalized; for the first time in history the religious clerics have unchecked leadership, and control has fallen to the Taliban, closing girls schools and arresting men without beards in settled regions. He emphasized that Afghanistan must be understood in the context of Pakistan, Kashmir, and India. He sees signs of a most dangerous time in history.
Caroline Wadhams, Senior Policy Analyst at the Center for American Progress, said the trend lines are negative in a variety of areas including security and the drug trade, not just the situation on the ground but in the perceptions of international community and American people, Afghans, the press in NATO countries. Even the U.S. press, shows increasing skepticism. She asked do we really want to nation build or just get rid of terrorists? She argued that getting it right would require a long term expensive commitment with international cooperation and civilian tools. Failure is marked by the growing insurgency in Afghanistan, targeting of aid workers and foreigners, the threat to Kabul, and successful targeting of supply lines.
The government is weak increasingly corrupt and criminalized. The pace of reconstruction is slow. Afghanistan produces 89% of the world’s opium. Most of the debate has focused on troop levels — even with the Obama team. She thinks that a dramatic strategic rethink is required, that state building needs to occur, but it needs to be rethought, to take a regional approach. She said that our policies since 9/11 have been neither coordinated nor consistent. We need a major focus of governance issues of legitimacy, corruption, rule of law, reconstruction, and development. Political reconciliation must be Afghan led, but we must know what our red lines are like women’s rights and violence.
Said T. Jawad, Ambassador of Afghanistan to the United States, argued that the tribal structure is gone and that a real tribal structure needs to be re-empowered in order to restore a balance to the civil society. He noted that for the cost of one American soldier you could have 80 Afghani soldiers. Prof. Ahmed added that he would like the emphasis to shift to civil administration. Afghanistan had a centuries-old sophisticated and functional civil service structure, but in the last decade this has fallen under a militarized environment. He argued that without stabilizing governance, military successes are meaningless. He emphasized that when you kill from 30000 feet up you create outrage. Ms. Wahams concluded that the governance model we have pushed has not been very successful; top down government and development have both failed and we should look to interesting local development models.
Regarding the drug problem, Mr. Jawad feels there has been too much emphasis on eradication. To prevent opium cultivation we should create alternative markets for traditional crops. You cannot change the system by changing the president. Mr. Carpenter noted that crop substitution had been tried many times and failed for economic reasons.
Prof. Ahmed concluded that America is seen as a fair-weather friend. If nation-building is not your job, he said, you shouldn’t have gone in the first place. He warned that if tensions rise between India and Pakistan, the Pakistanis will move their troops out of the tribal areas.
Imad-ad-Dean Ahmad
Minaret of Freedom Institute
www.minaret.org
Leave a Reply