AFGHANISTAN: UNITED STATES MILITARY EMBEDMENT IS A STRATEGIC IMPERATIVE

AFGHANISTAN: UNITED STATES MILITARY EMBEDMENT IS A STRATEGIC IMPERATIVE

By Dr. Subhash Kapila

Introductory Observations

The United States is currently engaged in a high-level strategic review of American options in Afghanistan. In the wake of this process there are prominent discordant voices in Washington arguing for a speedy US exit from Afghanistan. These discordant notes are motivated more by political expediency adopting a line that the situation in Afghanistan is irretrievable for the United States and NATO Forces.

Constantly being reiterated in this Author’s writings is the strategic reality that with the resources allocated to them, US & NATO Forces in Afghanistan have succeeded in stabilizing Afghanistan with the exception of Afghan areas in geographical contiguity with Pakistan. The military deduction for the United States should be obvious.

The United States Af-Pak Strategy has been in operation for about six months now. Strikingly obvious in a review of these six months are the following conclusions:

US & NATO Forces were able to provide a relatively stable security environment for conduct of recent Afghan presidential elections
US drone operations in Pakistan’s border areas (where Pakistan Army hesitated to undertake military ground operations) against Al Qaeda and Taliban strong holds have brought successful results
The Pakistan Army in which the United States has invested so heavily strategically and militarily has not contributed in any significant manner to the successful implementation of US Af-Pak Strategy.
The Pakistan Army, whatever little it did in Swat region was only under the US threat of direct military intervention there.

The United States needs to note that there are three countries which are opposed to United States stabilization of Afghanistan and the success of the US democratic experiment in Afghanistan. These three countries are Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and China.

The United States policy establishment and strategic planners need to take an integrated view of what Afghanistan represents in terms of the challenge to its global supremacy as the unipolar superpower. The United States can ill-afford to view it in a limited perspective of an Afghanistan-Pakistan flashpoint.

What one is witnessing in Afghanistan today is that Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and China are inducing a Vietnam-like situation where out of sheer strategic fatigue, the United States is prompted to exit Afghanistan.

“Afghanistan: United States/NATO Strategic Fatigue Spawns Dangerous Alternatives” SAAG Paper 2902 dated 29 October 2008, of this Author has analyzed these aspects in detail.

In the current global power-play where China subtly and not so subtly is engaged in challenging United States global supremacy, a Vietnam type exit from Afghanistan by the United States would be strategically disastrous.

United States long-term military embedment in Afghanistan is an American strategic imperative both for its own national security interests and also for regional and global security.

The United States strategic review currently underway in Washington should therefore be geared towards this end and future American options calibrated accordingly.

The contextual background having been laid out, this Paper would now proceed to shed light on the following perspectives:

United States Military Embedment in Afghanistan: A Continuing and Long Term Strategic Imperative
United States Afghanistan Policy Options: Need to Jettison its Pakistan Baggage
US Af-Pak Policy’s Regional Approach Needs to be Implemented
United States Military Commanders Advice Should Have Over-riding Priority in US Afghanistan Policy Blueprint

United States Military Embedment in Afghanistan: A Continuing and Long Term Strategic Imperative

Afghanistan’s notable geo-strategic and geo-political significance outweighing that of Pakistan (an illogical obsession with US strategic planners) stands vividly highlighted in an earlier Paper of this Author.

The United States today is at strategic cross-roads in Greater South West Asia and its contiguous regions. With the passage of time the original strategic aims of the US military intervention in Afghanistan in 2001, namely regime change in Kabul and liquidating the Al Qaeda – Taliban terrorist infrastructure there stand superseded by more pressing and wider global US strategic priorities.

In the vast geographical expense stretching from Japan to Israel, the United States has no forward military presence to give it strategic coverage and exercise of influence over the Asian Heartland, dominated by China, an emerging adversarial power to the United States.

US & NATO Forces -stabilized Afghanistan, nurtured as a democratic and moderate Islamic nation with US munificence has all the potential to emerge as a strong US ally in a crucial strategic region of the world. Unlike the Pakistan Army, the Afghan people have an honor-code and there are no visible anti-US sentiments except those fanned by Pakistan in Afghan areas contiguous with Pakistan.

Long term strategic imperatives which should prevail in US policy formulations are as follows:

Afghanistan as a base for extension of American influence in Central Asia.
Afghanistan as a base for neutralization of Pakistan Army’s nuclear weapons arsenal.
Afghanistan as a firm base for any US operations against China in any possible future confrontation.
Afghanistan as a base for exercising political and military influence in the Gulf Region.
Afghanistan as a base for containing fall-out from possible disintegration of Pakistan.

A continued and long term United States military embedment in Afghanistan becomes a crucial imperative for US strategy in terms of its global strategic formulations.

United States Afghanistan Policy Options: Need to Jettison its Pakistan Baggage

In the last ten years, enough Papers of this Author have endlessly emphasized that Pakistan and the Pakistan Army is a strategic mill-stone around America’s neck. The over-riding preference given to Pakistan Army in US strategic planning has not brought forth commensurate strategic gains for the United States in the last sixty years.

United States strategic woes whether it was 9/11 or General Musharraf’’s double-timing of the United States by fostering continued de-stabilization of Afghanistan, WMD proliferation by Pak Army Generals and giving China land routes to the Indian Ocean and naval base in Gwadur, all arise from the United States distorted perspectives of Pakistan’s strategic utility.

Currently, the situation in Afghanistan can be retrieved in United States favor, if the United States jettisons its Pakistan baggage from its policy options. The United States can restore the situation in Afghanistan within six months, if it resorts to the following:

Cut off all financial aid to Pakistan.
Cut off all military aid and weapons supplies to Pakistan Army.
Intensify drone attacks against Afghan Taliban ensconced in Baluchistan under Pak Army protection
Restrain China and Saudi Arabia from a controlling role in Pakistan. The United States has leverages to do so.

Finally, if Pakistan is still not amenable to desist from its disruptive activities in Afghanistan against US interests, the United States should impose economic sanctions against Pakistan. For far too long Pakistan has blackmailed USA with its nuclear weapons factor.

Pakistan cannot subsist for a day without United States munificence and generosity. Regrettably for reasons best known to US policy establishment, the United States has hesitated to exercise these leverages to bring Pakistan Army to heel.

Even today, the Pakistan Army Generals in their recent Corps Commanders Conference have criticized the United States, virtually threatened the Pakistani President not to yield to the provisions of the Kerry-Lugar Bill and dictated the recall of Hussein Haqqani, the Pakistan Ambassador to the United States. All this because the Pakistan Army Generals do not want to be held accountable for the utilization of US aid funds and submit themselves to civilian government oversight.

Surely, the United States strategic interests in Afghanistan cannot be held to ransom by a puny, politically unstable and a financially impoverished nation like Pakistan, its nuclear weapons notwithstanding Surely the United States enjoys the clout to tame the Pakistan Army from its strategic delinquencies which thrives on doles handed out to them by the United States.

US Af-Pak Policy’s Regional Approach Needs to be Implemented

One of the notable policy formulations of the US Af-Pak Policy enunciated in March 2009 was the co-opting of regional stake-holders in Afghanistan to bring about stabilization.

The regional stake-holders in Afghanistan’s stability are Russia, Iran, India and China.

In terms of convergence of views and interests on stability in Afghanistan, it can be asserted that Russia, Iran and India enjoy a remarkable congruence.

China as a strategic patron of Pakistan cannot be said to have convergence of views with Russia, Iran and India on Afghanistan. In fact its inclusion could lead to disruptive tactics on behalf of Pakistan and stall stabilization efforts of other regional stakeholders.

The United States has in the last six months soft-pedaled the regional approach primarily because of Pakistan’s objections to India’s presence in Afghanistan’s reconstruction. India's legitimate interests in Afghanistan and its reconstruction efforts post-2001 cannot be ignored.

Afghanistan is not the strategic preserve of Pakistan, and this US sensitivity to Pakistan Army’s concerns should be thrown out with the rest of the US policy baggage on Pakistan.

The United States inescapably cannot rule out Russia, Iran and India from their legitimate interests in Afghanistan. None of them have attempted to de-stabilize Afghanistan and all of them enjoy a good rapport with Afghan President Karzai.

United States Military Commanders Advice should Have Over-riding Priority in US Afghanistan Policy Blueprint

The United States has already executed this precept where from the US Ambassador downwards, some of America’s finest military commanders have been placed to manage Afghanistan and retrieve the situation.

The reviewed US strategic blueprint should give priority to security and stability of Afghanistan without political tags of Pakistan attached. The military commanders should be left alone to get along with their tasks and not be prompted to make political statements.

A recent report quoted the US Commander in Afghanistan to the effect that if only India could reduce its signature in Afghanistan, it would lessen Pakistan’s concerns and contribute to stability in Afghanistan. It was an unwarranted and distorted summation.

The General’s correct message to the Pentagon should have been that stability in Afghanistan was achievable if Washington could coerce Pakistan into reducing its Al Qaeda-Taliban support signature at least within Pakistan’s national boundaries.

That aside, Washington should not hesitate to provide its military commanders in Afghanistan the resources to fight a winnable war. The old military axiom applies to Afghanistan and that is when a blow has to be struck, do it with a sledge-hammer and with full force.

Concluding Observations

Global supremacy does not come cheap and one place where United States global supremacy is being sought to be challenged and diluted is Afghanistan.

Irrespective of the policy and strategic setbacks of the United States in Afghanistan and which were not the making of US & NATO Forces there, but because of Pakistan and its patrons, the United States still commands national resilience to retrieve the situation in Afghanistan.

Pakistan is the problem in Afghanistan. Pakistan cannot be the solution in any US strategic review on Afghanistan currently underway.

Countries opposed to US global military predominance and US military presence in Afghanistan are busy hypnotizing the United States into a Vietnam style trance of strategic fatigue and induce USA to exit Afghanistan.

Vietnam left deep scars on United States national psyche and its global image. To avoid repetition of a second Vietnam, the US strategic review in Afghanistan should incorporate a firm commitment for a long term military embedment in Afghanistan to sustain its global predominance and image. Such a firm commitment would erase the current ambiguities in United States policies on Afghanistan which stymie the success of its military operations.

(The author is an International Relations and Strategic Affairs analyst. He is the Consultant, Strategic Affairs with South Asia Analysis Group. Email: drsubhashkapila.007@gmail.com)