Obama’s New Afghanistan Strategy, Threat or Opportunity?
Interview with Pir Mohammad Mollazehi, Afghanistan affairs analyst
What do you think of Obama’s recently announced Afghanistan strategies, sending 30,000 fresh soldiers to this country and talking of withdrawal?
There are some key points to mention about this new strategy. First of all, Americans have accepted to train the Afghan security forces, army and police and equip them with modern weapons. It is significant, since US troops’ withdrawal from Afghanistan in 18 months depends of the level of security achieved. But still there is the question that do Americans and NATO really want to train and equip Afghan forces to a level that they can provide security for their citizens? Or are NATO and US planning a long-term presence in this country?
Second point relates to the thirty-thousand soldiers that Obama has decided to dispatch to Afghanistan. NATO will also send five-thousand fresh forces to this country. It seems that the US and NATO have decided to exert a heavy military pressure on Taliban and al-Qaeda in order to convince them join the national unity talks and enter a deal with Hamed Karzai. An extensive military operation will be launched most likely in the next summer, in hope to pressurize Taliban and force them to join the new political procedure. Of course, not everyone is optimistic about this plan. Taliban has recently announced that it will not do any negotiations until American and NATO troops have left Afghanistan.
Thirdly, it seems that the plan also assigns a role to Pakistan. Obama expects the Pakistani army to show an iron fist in tribal areas and control the borders more strictly to prevent Taliban from free commute between the Pakistani and Afghan territory.
But with all that I said, there is a fundamental paradox between adding to the number of soldiers in Afghanistan and talking of a withdrawal timetable.
Will the new US strategy have regional ramifications?
There will definitely be a grueling war in the future and we should expect that. A tougher war means further vulnerability. However, it seems that if US and NATO wage a successful war against Taliban and even force them to flee Afghanistan, Pakistan will become the next victim. I think Pakistan is concerned with expansion of the United States’ military operation, particularly when it comes to Helmand, where the main body of fresh troops is going to be deployed. If the pressure on Taliban forces them to retreat to tribal areas, Baluchistan or Sarhad province of Pakistan, the already failed state will face hellish days. Afghanistan’s other neighbors such as Iran or Central Asian countries may be less affected.
After Obama announced his new strategy, Taliban has warned him with harder days. Could the threat have an impact on Obama’s decision?
Well the belligerent gesture was quite predictable. The more US troops sent to Afghanistan, the higher are the chances of battle between Taliban and American forces. However, the primary victims of this war will be Afghan civilians. The so-called ‘collateral damage’ will just aggravate the disappointment among Afghan citizens with the presence of foreign troops and Taliban will be the party who benefits the discontent.
I believe that the new strategy could be a blessing for the Taliban, since they can extend the war to civilian areas. As the number of civil victims arises, more Afghans will support Taliban. Pashtun tribes will be a fertile ground for them. So I think Obama’s strategy will not undermine Taliban.
There are some key points to mention about this new strategy. First of all, Americans have accepted to train the Afghan security forces, army and police and equip them with modern weapons. It is significant, since US troops’ withdrawal from Afghanistan in 18 months depends of the level of security achieved. But still there is the question that do Americans and NATO really want to train and equip Afghan forces to a level that they can provide security for their citizens? Or are NATO and US planning a long-term presence in this country?
Second point relates to the thirty-thousand soldiers that Obama has decided to dispatch to Afghanistan. NATO will also send five-thousand fresh forces to this country. It seems that the US and NATO have decided to exert a heavy military pressure on Taliban and al-Qaeda in order to convince them join the national unity talks and enter a deal with Hamed Karzai. An extensive military operation will be launched most likely in the next summer, in hope to pressurize Taliban and force them to join the new political procedure. Of course, not everyone is optimistic about this plan. Taliban has recently announced that it will not do any negotiations until American and NATO troops have left Afghanistan.
Thirdly, it seems that the plan also assigns a role to Pakistan. Obama expects the Pakistani army to show an iron fist in tribal areas and control the borders more strictly to prevent Taliban from free commute between the Pakistani and Afghan territory.
But with all that I said, there is a fundamental paradox between adding to the number of soldiers in Afghanistan and talking of a withdrawal timetable.
Will the new US strategy have regional ramifications?
There will definitely be a grueling war in the future and we should expect that. A tougher war means further vulnerability. However, it seems that if US and NATO wage a successful war against Taliban and even force them to flee Afghanistan, Pakistan will become the next victim. I think Pakistan is concerned with expansion of the United States’ military operation, particularly when it comes to Helmand, where the main body of fresh troops is going to be deployed. If the pressure on Taliban forces them to retreat to tribal areas, Baluchistan or Sarhad province of Pakistan, the already failed state will face hellish days. Afghanistan’s other neighbors such as Iran or Central Asian countries may be less affected.
After Obama announced his new strategy, Taliban has warned him with harder days. Could the threat have an impact on Obama’s decision?
Well the belligerent gesture was quite predictable. The more US troops sent to Afghanistan, the higher are the chances of battle between Taliban and American forces. However, the primary victims of this war will be Afghan civilians. The so-called ‘collateral damage’ will just aggravate the disappointment among Afghan citizens with the presence of foreign troops and Taliban will be the party who benefits the discontent.
I believe that the new strategy could be a blessing for the Taliban, since they can extend the war to civilian areas. As the number of civil victims arises, more Afghans will support Taliban. Pashtun tribes will be a fertile ground for them. So I think Obama’s strategy will not undermine Taliban.