| Welcome to Global Village Space

Saturday, April 13, 2024

What’s next for Afghanistan after US exit?

According to Amjed Jaaved, a host of factors forced the US to decide to exit Afghanistan. Furthermore, the war was too costly in terms of loss of lives and US dollars. Both the American troops and the "governors" struck a compromise with cultivators even in Taliban-controlled areas for unbridled cultivation of poppy.

The situation in Afghanistan is in a state of flux. Even before the vacation of the notorious Bagram Airbase, the Taliban have been encircling major Afghan cities under the hostile rule. Though well trained and well-armed, the Afghan troops usually preferred to take to heels rather than ferociously resist the Taliban onslaughts.

The US president, in an interview, said that he decided to exit from Afghanistan as the objective of taking out Osama bin Laden had been achieved besides limping Al-Qaeda. The European troops had already left Afghanistan quietly.

Thus, the Afghan government is now faced with the grim challenge of facing the Taliban with about 25000 troops and 650 US marines. The US is now more concerned about rescuing about 50,000 contractors (translators, informants, and their ilk).

Read more: Washington must save the Afghan peace process while there is still time

In an interview, the US president boasted that America had achieved the main objective of taking out Osama bin laden and limping Al-Qaeda. The affluent Afghans, in search of a better future, feel cheated. They thought that the USA longed for warding off obscurantism and transforming the Afghan society into a vibrant enlightened polity.

They question the costs of war in money and human toll. The US spent US$2.261 trillion on the Afghan war during the period from 2001 to April 2021. About 1,74, 868 lives were lost. They included US military 2,442, contractors 3846, other/allied troops 1144, Afghan troops and police 69,000, Taliban 51,191, and Afghan civilians 47,245.

Afghan government’s misjudgment

American mothers were unwilling to contribute any more aluminum caskets to Arlington Cemetery. American mothers became war-weary after receiving 58,200 body packs during the Vietnam war. The majority of Americans believe America failed to achieve its goals in Afghanistan (PEW Research Center poll). They were fed up with wars started by the US presidents. This issue exerted an impact on presidential elections also.

The Afghan government presumed that the Americans would never leave Afghanistan. They would never strike a deal with the Taliban. The government never prepared itself to make the most of the training and equipment provided by the Americans. It never tried to become a viable force after the American exit.

Read more: Afghan government not serious in peace process says Russia

The Afghan government failed to notice that the Taliban had become flexible during the course of the war. They were striking compromises with not only the Americans but also with the Northern Alliance. The Taliban were no longer fully under Pakistan’s influence. They held negotiations even with India to Pakistan’s disenchantment.

The Americans, on the other hand, struck many compromises with the Taliban. They began to ignore SOS calls from the government troops under Taliban fire. Devoid of air cover, the Taliban used to have breakfast with about 20 to 40 casualties of Afghan troops each day.

The Afghan debacle is the cumulative outcome of the Afghan government’s across-the-board mismanagement and shifting goalposts of the US objectives.

Read more: Afghan government’s Kabul Process: Do the political elites really want peace?

Why Taliban’s narrative appeals to the lay mind   

The Taliban see the USA as an aggressor. They draw inspiration from (22:39-40) which says, “Permission to fight is given to those on whom war is made because they are oppressed . . . those who are driven from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah.”

Taliban fighters rightly say, “The Americans have the watches, but we have the time.” Taliban’s thinking is akin to Vo Nguyen Giap’s, “I could lose every battle and still win the war. US Secretary of Defence Robert McNamara had worked out that I was controlling the frequency and scale of engagements to deep my losses just below the birth rate that way the Vietnamese could fight forever.” (Nigel Cawthorne, Victory: 100 Great Military Commanders, 2003, Arcturus Publishing Limited, London).

Read more: Taliban want an Islamic system in Afghanistan, reveals spokesperson

Ghani admitted on 60 minutes, that without the US and NATO support, his government would fall in six months. With the Afghan border fenced, over 30,000 fleeing traitors (besides troops and Black Water contractors) may have to be airlifted to Oman, Qatar, and Bahrain through airborne brigades and the US 5th fleet, if the Taliban win. Over 60 percent of physical area, and over 90 percent ideological areas, is already under the Taliban’s influence.

Lessons of history

History is on the Taliban’s side. USA’s 18,000 troops plus 27,000 contractors (Black Water) proved to be handy prey. Despite the lure of dollars in elite leaders, the majority of Afghans nurture an independent mind and loathe foreign dominance.

In 1842, 16,000 British troops evaporated. In 1942 (WWII), the British again failed to civilize (gun-point democratize) Afghanistan. Britain realized “masterly inactivity” is the best policy vis-à-vis Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is commonly known as the graveyard of empires. Several rulers tried to overpower it, but it was in vain. They had to bite the dust. Genghis Khan lost a son during the siege of Bamian. Alexander the Great had to beat a hasty retreat. In the nineteenth century “Great” Britain, at the height of imperial power, invaded Afghanistan. It was humbled, marking the beginning of the British Empire. They never again attacked Afghanistan taking refuge under their strategy of “Masterly Inactivity.”

Read more: Afghanistan: A graveyard of empires?

The erstwhile Soviet Union rushed its troops to Afghanistan in aid of the tottering Afghan government. In retaliation, the USA and its allies cobbled up Afghan resistance, mujahideen, to fight the Soviet forces. The Soviet Union had its nose bloodied on Afghan soil. It retreated.

Meanwhile, several component countries under the Soviet umbrella rebelled. The Soviet Union broke into congeries of several independent republics, confining the Union to Russia.  A Taliban government emerged at the helm after Soviet departure.

The sole superpower, the USA, attacked Afghanistan to oust the Taliban. The ostensible reason was that the Taliban had sheltered Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the 9/11 attack on the twin tower of the World Trade Centre in New York. The Taliban had no answer to incessant aerial bombing. Their government collapsed. For a while, it looked as if the Afghan invincibility had been proved to be a myth. After decades of fighting, it dawned on the USA that the Afghan intervention was a misadventure.

Read more: Here’s a list of the US’ top failures in Afghanistan

Poppy cultivation in Afghanistan

The puppet Afghan governments were more interested in making money than fighting the Taliban. Like American soldiers, Afghan trainees too realized it pays to connive at Taliban presence and let farmers grow poppy.

Afghanistan became a kleptocratic state where every government posting and promotion depends on power and patronage.

Afghanistan produces 92 percent of the world’s opium, with the equivalent of at least 3,500 tonnes leaving the country each year. This racket was secured by drug kingpins like Ahmed Wali Karzai, the beloved brother of former president Hamid Karzai, and other influential persons.

Read more: Red gold: Afghanistan saffron production grows

The essence of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC)’s policy is that there is a causal (a priori or cause-and-effect relation) between poppy cultivation and the ongoing insurgency. Afghan government handpicks pliable provincial governors for the eradication of poppies.

These governors feed fictitious figures to the UN agencies about their landmark achievements in rooting out poppy cultivation at its various stages. These focal nodal prodigies have created the euphoria that government-controlled provinces are poppy-free.

Aside from euphoric reviews, the factual position is that poppy cultivation in Afghanistan is flourishing by leaps and bounds. The governors are motivated more by self-interest than by national objectives. They are minting money from all quarters, including India’s intelligence agency, Research, and Analysis Wing.

Read more: What stops Indian Army from taking over Afghanistan?

The RAW is more interested in turning influential Afghans against Pakistan and planting insurgents in Pakistan-Afghanistan border areas, than in poppy eradication. The RAW understands that there is no single fail-safe panacea for eradicating the poppy curse. Exterminating the menace of poppy lies outside the RAW’s mandate.

Poppy: A cash crop

Aside from the RAW’s machinations, the problem of poppy cultivation calls for a closer look from a multi-dimensional perspective. Afghanistan has a predominantly agrarian economy. Opium production contributes35 percent of Afghanistan’s Gross Domestic Product while cereal crops only about 27 per cent.

There is no industrial structure to name, despite its tall claims, India has not been able to lay tangible industrial infrastructure to boost the Afghan economy. Afghanistan is one of the world’s least developed countries and the poorest in Asia. In terms of Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, the majority of the country’s population is concerned about physical needs (food, clothing, and shelter).

Read more: Afghanistan, world’s least peaceful country: Who is responsible?

Poppy cultivation is the main avenue of physical security in Afghanistan. There is a symbiotic relation between Afghanistan’s needs for socio-economic security and poppy cultivation. Majority of the population is preoccupied with how to survive by ensuring food security by getting employed in poppy cultivation. Yet, they find it difficult to make ends meet.

The UNODC’s observation that about 14 percent of Afghans are employed in poppy cultivation, but does not reflect the real-life situation. The agricultural production system is mostly dependent on seasonal rainfall and poor water management. As such, productivity per hectare is low. The centuries-old traditional cultivation system impedes their economic progress.

The system is pivoted on salaam that is a cash advance given on security of future crop yield. Poppy is the favorite crop by way of security rather than wheat, black cumin, or some other crop. Afghan government could veritably be termed a poppy syndicate because of its lack of interest in poppy eradication. The governors look like custodians of poppy-growing lands. How could this coterie axe its own interest?

Read more: Pakistan’s exports to Afghanistan rise by 15%

Questions with no answers?

Peace in Afghanistan may remain elusive for quite some time due to a complex situation. It has too many stakeholders. Besides the USA, Pakistan, and Taliban, India (Chahbahar Port), Iran, China, and Turkey (Turkmen-Turkic community) also have stakes in Afghanistan.

The Afghan economy is in shambles and needs economic support. Could the US spend $43 billion (it would save annually from exit) on Afghanistan’s development? Could China, India, Iran, and Turkey together (besides the USA) start a nouveau Marshall Plan in war-ravaged Afghanistan to avoid a clash of interest?

Read more: Afghanistan: Important Questions for the Future

What about the post-exit 250,000-strong Afghan army with the Taliban? Will there be no spill-over effect of Talibanenforced Shari’a on modernist Pakistan? How would rebellious Pakistani Taliban and recalcitrant elements in Balochistan react to the US exit? Will the Ashraf Ghani government and other puppets reconcile, at heart, to US exit?

Mr. Amjed Jaaved has been contributing freelance for over fifty years. His articles are published in dailies at home (The News, Nation, etc) and abroad (Nepal. Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, et. al.). He is the author of eight books including Kashmir: The Myth of Accession. The views expressed in the article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.