Opinion

Facebook DIGG

Fallout Will Hit Obama's Afghan Plan

by: Maleeha Lodhi  |  Visit article original @ The Independent UK

photo
(Photo: Uriel Sinai / Getty Images)

The US should cease attacks in Pakistan, which have inflamed public opinion.

    The terrorist attacks in Mumbai have dramatised how the urgent will often take precedence over the important for the incoming Obama administration.

    The attacks have plunged relations between Pakistan and India into unpredictable territory just when a series of policy reviews in Washington are focussed on overhauling strategy in Afghanistan.

    With Afghanistan in a "downward spiral" Washington is groping for a new strategy. It would do well to recall Lewis Carroll's famous line in Alice in Wonderland: "When you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there."

    The Obama Administration will need to define both where it needs to go and the way out of the quagmire in Afghanistan.

    Washington recognises that no country is more pivotal than Pakistan to its goals of defeating terrorism and stabilising Afghanistan. But this relationship is today held together only at the leadership level with the wider establishments and publics in both nations viewing the other with suspicion, even hostility. The trust deficit must be addressed as this will determine the quality of cooperation that Washington and Islamabad can mobilise to avert the chaos that now threatens to engulf the region.

    President-elect Obama should break from the Bush legacy of treating Pakistan as hired help rather than valued ally. Pakistan has paid a heavy price for being America's frontline ally. Thousands of people, including 2,000 military personnel, have been killed in terrorist attacks since 2001. Economic losses are estimated at $34bn.

    Three decades of strife in Afghanistan have taken a heavy toll on Pakistan. Bush's flawed Afghan strategy compounded by the fatal distraction of Iraq, widened the conflagration and pushed the war into Pakistan.

    Obama has pledged a troop surge in Afghanistan. But without a fundamental change in strategy, this may increase the sense of occupation and mire the United States in a war without end. Moscow deployed more than 150,000 troops at the height of its occupation of Afghanistan and failed to avoid defeat.

    A more realistic approach must start with redefining US goals, and distinguish between what is vital and attainable (disruption of terrorist networks) and what is desirable but best left for Afghans to undertake (transforming society).

    So far Washington has lacked clarity about objectives and sought to eliminate terrorists, defeat the Taliban, transform society, and promote democracy.

    This has fused Pashtun nationalism with Muslim radicalism, and fuelled the growing insurgency.

    Over reliance on military force led to high civilian casualties and become a potent factor behind support for the Taliban.

    A new strategy must seek to de-couple al-Qa'ida and the Taliban, engage the Taliban in a reconciliation process and hold out the offer for an eventual withdrawal of foreign forces in return for a cessation of attacks and support for the creation of a viable Afghan army. Bombing campaigns should be replaced by political accommodation and economic development.

    A new Afghan grand assembly or Loya Jirga should be called to endorse this process. Washington should also help orchestrate a regional consensus to back this plan which should include Iran and Russia.

    Washington should cease unilateral missile strikes into Pakistan's territory. These attacks have inflamed public opinion, undercut Pakistan's own counter-insurgency efforts and risk shattering ties with Islamabad. Instead the US should strengthen Pakistan's own capacity to fight militancy.

    A new US approach should also recognise that Pakistan's stability depends not just on containing militancy but on strengthening the economy and on addressing its long adversarial relationship with India.

    Economic help to Pakistan should be construed more in trade than in aid terms. The Obama administration should make a preferential trade deal for Pakistani textiles - the lifeblood of its economy - the centrepiece of economic assistance. Trade creates jobs and durable income which are more effective anti-terrorism tools than bombs and bullets.

    Obama has already acknowledged the need to resolve the long-running Kashmir dispute to enable Pakistan to switch focus from India to counter-insurgency. Washington should launch a diplomatic initiative aimed at reaching an accommodation between Pakistan and India.

    This may seem a daunting menu, but continuing with present policy promises to sink the region in a whirlpool of chaos.

    --------

    The writer is a Fellow at Harvard's Kennedy School and a former Pakistan ambassador to the UK and United States.

»


IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. TRUTHOUT HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS TRUTHOUT ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON TO MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

Unfortunately, the Bush

Unfortunately, the Bush administration is just too arrogant and too ideologically blinded to to anything like this. Here in Canada, likewise, Stephen Harper seems to be deluded to admit that the current approach is losing horribly right now. The people of Afghanistan do not wish to be Westernized. We should not try to assimilate them - that in itself would be an undemocratic action. The only reason why the US is there is supposedly to take out Al Queda and also likely for the natural gas from the Caspian Sea. Bringing democracy or any improvement of life was just propaganda spewed out by the Bush administration. One of the things that must be done if the US ever really wants to win the popular opinion of Afghanistan is to truly make an effort to improve life there. Furthermore, relations with Pakistan are as the author notes, critical, and only a multilateral approach will ever work towards diffusing tensions there.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.