Bring Home the Troops From Afghanistan

Sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan is not a good strategy. Some argue that we need to "clean up Bush's mess." I won't even mention how paternalistic that is (See what I did there? That's a trick I picked up from Fox News). It assumes that adding more troops will somehow stabilize Afghanistan. It assumes that Bush brought war to that war-ravaged nation. It fails to put this latest phase of the war in Afghanistan into context.

Afghanistan has never been a "country" in the way the United States is one, with a government providing for every corner of the nation-state. Don't give me that bullshit about King Zahir Shah. He couldn't control the disparate population of Afghanistan if you gave him another 40 years as the nominal head of state!

Let's forget the fact that Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and every other historical power you can name couldn't control Afghanistan; Afghanis (with actual legitimacy) haven't even stood a chance! Even when the Taliban captured 90% of the country before the American invasion, they held very little de facto control. Sure, they enforced some outrageous laws in some high-profile places, but let's give the Afghan population some credit. The Taliban did not and will never truly rule over the majority of Afghanistan. They have some pull in the south of the country and the U.S. occupation has done nothing to diminish the Taliban's popularity in the Pashtun heartland. But most people in Herat and Kabul will always resent their presence. In Hazarajat and in the north, the Taliban will always be mortal enemies. There shouldn't be much concern that the Taliban will sweep through the country if and when the U.S. leaves.

Afghanis have been fighting since the late 1970s, and no one has been able to set up anything resembling a functioning government. Perhaps, least of all, Hamid "The Election Stealer" Karzai and his band of corrupt cohorts. They are the U.S. allies right now. If, by some miracle, the U.S. is able to create a stable and secure Afghanistan, it is these frauds that will run Afghanistan's future. Seems pretty futile, doesn't it?

There is a big concern that, if Afghanistan crumbles (it hasn't already? Then what do you call the last 30 years?), Pakistan (a nuclear state, we are constantly reminded) will follow. The problem is that virtually everyone in Pakistan hates the U.S. and every action it takes. As a result, the population tends to support the force opposing the U.S. regardless of its ideology. If the U.S. were to leave, it's clear Pakistanis would disavow the various Talibans, neo-Talibans, and post-modern Talibans. If you haven't noticed, Pakistanis aren't big fans of foreigners operating militarily within their sovereignty. And what are al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban? Foreigners. They're just "less" foreign than the U.S. And if the Pakistan Taliban did attempt another foray towards grabbing power in Islamabad, they should just remember that it didn't work out too well for them the first time.


To sum up: Let the Afghanis control their own destiny, especially since the U.S. can't be anything more than a band-aid on the swine flu. If the U.S. withdraws, it would likely increase the Pakistanis resolve to fight certain radical groups, because those groups would no longer serve their purpose as anti-U.S. (and, really, anti-Karzai - because the Pakistani military has always viewed Karzai as nothing more than an Indian proxy) forces. (more at International Affairs Edition)