The border is relatively meaningless. Historically, the Pushtuns consider themselves to be ” the Afghans” and Pakistan’s NW territory was part of historical Afghanistan until the British empire was forced to patrol it regularly to prevent raids into India. Talibs and al Qaida terrorists are as much ” at home” in Waziristan as in Paktia. To occupy Afghanistan en masse, as the critics argue but stop at the Khyber Pass is to accept the same strategic situation that prevails today in Afghanistan except with vastly higher costs and more troops. This assumes that the presence of so many foreigners would not provoke an insurgency of course. We have gotten by without one mainly because most Afghans do not see too many Americans on any given day.
What exactly is the strategic gain these critics are looking for ?
Page 2 of 2 | Previous page
Dave Schuler:
January 7th, 2005 at 10:26 pm
As far as the Afghan-Pakistan border goes this might be a good time to point out that Paki-stan is an acronym:
Punjabi
Afghani
Kashmiri
Iranian
P-A-K-I. Tells you all you need to know, doesn’t it? Including about the waggish British map-drawers.
I think Eric Martin of TIA described pretty well the objectives that would be sought from a more decisive victory in Afghanistan: remove the Taliban, capture bin Laden, establish a liberal democracy in Afghanistan, create a functioning, thriving economy there (essentially ex nihilo) and gain the admiration of the whole world.
In comments left at my site Eric Martin has suggested that he didn’t mean we should put a massive force into Afghanistan but that we should accomplish more with a sub-Desert Storm sized force. I think that’s fanciful. We’ve accomplished what could reasonably be expected (maybe more) with a force whose size and presence in the region wouldn’t destabilize the region.
Other than believing that these objectives are at least impractical if not impossible without destabilizing the entire region and the price of destabilizing Pakistan is loss of control of their nuclear arsenal my main problem with this plan is that, unfortunately for the Afghans, nobody cares about them. Afghanistan per se is of no strategic significance. Nobody would be impressed by such an outcome. Possibly not even the Afghans.
If you’re looking for an exemplar it must be an Arab nation. Nothing else will suffice. The ethnic politics of the Arab world demands it. So from that standpoint Iraq was a great candidate. But, as I’ve said before here, Mark, I remain skeptical of a favorable outcome there.
mark:
January 8th, 2005 at 8:37 pm
Hi Dave,
Well said Dave.
In Afghanistan, we have very, very long supplies lines from our ” homeland” which made it economical to maximize the amount of military force we could bring to bear per unit of American personnel. The traditional, large support base American armies normally field would be a disadvantage in terms of expense, strain on our logistical capability and vulnerability. Unlike in Iraq, there is hardly anything to reconstruct and no reason to occupy, say, Hazara-Ismaili mountain villages as they hated the Taliban anyway.
The thesis of Kabul as a shining city on a hill that must be created before the next phase of the GWOT is an attempt to set an impossible bar to delay military operations elsewhere. If the Karzai government can simply maintain a trucial state/cooperative relationship with the warlords that allows commerce and agriculture to reemerge in Afghanistan and keep Kabul open to the outside world then the Afghans are better off than at any time before the fall of Daoud.
As for Iraq, I originally assumed a timeline of around five years to see real progress to market democracy. The Bush administration squandered so many opporunities during the CPA regime that the ” modest success and stability” phase is a good decade to fifteen years away, if it happens at all now.
Dr. Demarche:
January 9th, 2005 at 12:22 am
Greetings! Not sure if the “from Peter Rice a.k.a. -Dr. Demarche ” is supposed to mean that I (Dr. Demarche) am Peter Rice, but it aint so. Sorry! My identity remains a secret to all but Smiley and Mrs. Dr. Demarche…
Good blog anyway, though!
mark:
January 9th, 2005 at 7:14 am
Ha ! I am sorry, my apologies Doctor. You have a fine blog as well.
tpraja:
March 8th, 2007 at 8:23 am
Have you seen the new India search engine
http://www.ByIndia.com they added all the cool features of popular productslike MySpace,YouTube, Ebay,craigslist,etc.all for free to use and specifically for India.Anyone else try this yet? ByIndia.com First to Blend Search,Social Network,Video Sharing and Auctions Into One Seamless Product for Indian Internet Users.