Permanent War
KABUL/BERLIN (Own report) - The debate around the modalities for troop withdrawals, due to begin next year, has become livelier, even before today's opening of the International Afghanistan Conference. A US expert in the Washington establishment proposes that Afghanistan be divided along an east-west axis. In the thereby separated north of the country, a continued loyalty to the West could be expected. The South will have to be continuously disciplined through warfare - with air power and Special Forces. The strategy is also being discussed in the German capital. According to a prominent German military expert, the current combat operations are aimed at temporarily "showing stability" to prevent a total collapse of Afghanistan once withdrawal begins and to avoid the impression of a NATO defeat. PR catchwords are also being coined in Berlin to try to make the withdrawal seem legitimate. The foreign minister claims: "The international community has lived up to its promises." At today's Afghanistan conference, the Kabul government must expound upon its "plans for the further stabilization of the country".
No European Standards
In a government statement, July 9, the German Foreign Minister, Guido Westerwelle announced that today's meeting in Kabul will not be a "donor conference". It will more serve the purpose of "reaching an agreement between NATO and the Afghan government on a plan" focused on "the concrete conditions" for the initiation of troop withdrawal ("transfer of responsibility to the Afghans"). "European standards at the Hindu Kush" cannot be created, declared Guido Westerwelle in reference to the catastrophic situation, the western occupiers will probably leave behind in Afghanistan.[1] As was suggested by the German government's Afghanistan Commissar, Michael Steiner, NATO can, in no case, be blamed. Kabul should expect western support only on a "basis of reciprocity" i.e. "good governance" and a "war on corruption" - a yardstick that neither the West's own puppet government nor western occupation authorities have been able to live up to.[2] Westerwelle's and Steiner's statements show a growing estrangement toward the Afghan government and are designed to prepare public opinion for a troop withdrawal.
Like in Vietnam
A few days ago, former State Secretary in the German Defense Ministry, Lothar Rühl, commented on preparations for troop withdrawal. Rühl, one of Germany's most prominent military policy experts, writes that "western intelligence services, the highest military commanders, as well as European governments" [3] are counting, at best, on being able to refer to a "fragile stability" in Afghanistan by the time the planned troop withdrawal begins next summer. Therefore Supreme Commander Gen. Petraeus' assignment, according to military and government officials, is to "show stability," to prevent the country "from collapsing at the boot heels of the withdrawing foreign troops." "This is how an obvious defeat - such as in Vietnam (1973-1975) - is to be prevented. Accordingly, the current western offensives, producing the highest number of casualties since the beginning of the war in Afghanistan, is particularly aimed at preventing NATO's total humiliation - and holding the option of future military interventions open for the war alliance. No one is expecting an about-face in the military situation.
The Skies over "Pashtunistan"
At the same time, the debate over troop withdrawal modalities, scheduled to begin in 2011, are becoming livelier. Experts in Washington's establishment have surged forward over the past few days with new proposals, aimed, in one way or another, at maintaining control over developments in Afghanistan. About two weeks ago, Robert Dean Blackwill, a former high-ranking member of the US National Security Council, has recommended a "de facto partition" of the country. The southern, majority Pashtun inhabited regions of Afghanistan, which is the stronghold of insurgency ("Taliban") should be seceded. The western occupation forces could withdraw from "Pashtunistan" and establish their bases in Northern Afghanistan, where the majority of the non-Pashtun population is "largely sympathetic" to the West.[4] Thereafter pro-western forces in the north of the country - mostly warlords[5] - could be aided in consolidating their power. With the help of NATO allies and non-Pashtun tribes, "Pashtunistan" could then be disciplined with air power and Special Forces. The attacks must hold down those openly anti-western forces. "In the context of de facto partition, the sky over Pashtun Afghanistan would be dark with manned and unmanned coalition aircraft - targeting not only terrorists but, as necessary, the new Taliban government in all its dimensions."[6] This proposal amounts to waging a permanent war on "Pashtunistan" from abroad to keep it in a state of chaos.[7]
Like in Somalia
Richard Nathan Haass, who had been a close advisor to former Secretary of State, Colin Powell, and currently President of the influential Council on Foreign Relations in New York, proposed an alternative last weekend. In his opinion Blackwill's proposals are too risky because they could incite Pakistan's 25 million Pashtuns to break out of Islamabad's control and join "Pashtunistan". Haass is pleading for the continued existence of a formal Afghan state and for a close cooperation with some of the warlords, particularly in the North - but largely without this being linked to reconstruction aid. The Taliban would have to be attacked with U.S. air power and Special Forces. "Fighting would likely continue inside Afghanistan for years." Haass - like Blackwill - proposes to reduce the number of soldiers and underlines that with air power and Special Forces they would suffer less casualties than in the current counterinsurgency. Such situations, explains Haass "call for more modest and focused policies of counterterrorism along the lines of those being applied in Yemen and Somalia."[8]
Permanent Intervention
Proposals such as those from Blackwill and Haass are also being discussed in the German capital. Already at the beginning of this month, the German foreign minister forged ahead with plans providing for the withdrawal of most troops while launching precision attacks against insurgents. At the Hindu Kush, "wish dreams" must be overcome, declared Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg. To counter "terrorist elements" effectively, an "international coordination of the deployment of intelligence services and special forces" should be initiated. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[9]) NATO's General Secretary Anders Fogh Rasmussen pleads in a similar direction. He told the German press that Afghanistan would also need NATO's "permanent aid" even if NATO units "change to a supportive function."[10] "Permanent aid," de facto, would mean permanent intervention.
China's Rise
Robert Dean Blackwill notes why a (partial) withdrawal from Afghanistan is so imperative from a western point of view. This move would allow Washington, according to the former member of the National Security Council, "to focus on four issues more vital to its national interests," namely "the future of Iraq, the Iranian nuclear weapons program, nuclear terrorism - and "the rise of Chinese power."[11] The last aspect already suggests major confrontations of the future.
[1] Regierungserklärung von Bundesaußenminister Guido Westerwelle vor dem Deutschen Bundestag zu Afghanistan vom 9. Juli 2010
[2] Berlin: Afghanistan bekommt neue Hilfe nur gegen Leistungen; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 19.07.2010
[3] Vor dem Endspiel am Hindukusch; www.faz.net 16.07.2010
[4] Robert D. Blackwill: A de facto partition for Afghanistan; dyn.politico.com 07.07.2010
[5] see also Die Kolonialisten kommen zurück, Klassische Warlords and Marc Thörner: Afghanistan-Code
[6] Robert D. Blackwill: A de facto partition for Afghanistan; dyn.politico.com 07.07.2010
[7] see also Killer Teams
[8] Richard N. Haass: We're Not Winning. It's Not Worth It; www.newsweek.com 18.07.2010
[9] see also Post-Treatment Elements
[10] Vier deutsche Soldaten bei Anschlag auf Patrouille verletzt; www.abendblatt.de 19.07.2010
[11] Robert D. Blackwill: A de facto partition for Afghanistan; dyn.politico.com 07.07.2010
