The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
| ~Paules: You will remember that the Taliban swept out of the refugee camps in Pakistan and overran the nation, most of it anyway, in short order. No one saw it coming. The Taliban had been recruiting for years in the camps using Saudi money to establish a system of madrases. It's precisely the Wahhabist interpretation of Islam exported from Saudi Arabia that radicalized the region. I say we need to strike at the root. Why is Afghanistan any more important than Yemen or Somalia in the war on terror? Is it not time we insisted that the House of Saud stop exporting Wahhabist imams? Isn't this really where the problem originates? · Jul 1 at 11:56am |
I won't get into the history of Afghanistan except to point out that from the evidence of the prior period there is nothing intrinsic in the Afghan character to doom it to the sort of chaos we see in the present; that alone was my point—one offered in reaction to the tired status quo consensus that Afghanistan is both ungovernable and a graveyard of all intruders. I agree in large measure on your other fine point about our "allies"; Middle Eastern regimes operate on the principle of 'deniability of culpability' in which they funnel aid and support—often through so-called "private" individuals and foundations, that, in fact, have government sanction—to terrorists, on the expectation that they will never be held to account or U.S retaliation. Shortly after 9/11 we used leverage such as the threat of military tit-for-tat action, cessation of foreign aid, curtailment of immigration into the US, visas, etc. to modulate their behaviors; since then, we were beaten down by our critics and so instead decided for outreach, on the dubious idea that by being nice or engaging in therapeutics (cf. the NASA's chief's interview yesterday with al Jazeera), terrorists will either desist or find less support among the Muslim landscape. We know where that leads.
- Comment (11)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
I think this scene is a good model for our relationships with Middle Eastern "allies." We don't have to like each other. We just have to "do right" by each other. "Liking" is beside the point.
FENCES (by August Wilson) Clip: HOW COME YOU AIN'T NEVER LIKED ME? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBTXS42dj40
May '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
Victor Davis Hanson
Shortly after 9/11 we used leverage such as the threat of military tit-for-tat action, cessation of foreign aid, curtailment of immigration into the US, visas, etc. to modulate their behaviors; since then, we were beaten down by our critics and so instead decided for outreach, on the dubious idea that by being nice or engaging in therapeutics (cf. the NASA's chief's interview yesterday with al Jazeera), terrorists will either desist or find less support among the Muslim landscape. We know where that leads. ·
Perhaps these "critics" played some role in transforming American policy, but unlike the period immediately after 9/11, we've spent some time unsuccessfully trying to eradicate the Taliban and pacify Iraq. And our leverage is less than it once was largely because other countries can't help but notice that we have neither the money nor the will nor the military resources to launch another interminable occupation.
Our current strategy isn't captured by "being nice" or "therapeutics." See Pakistani drone attacks. But in certain countries, given limits on hard and soft power, savvy outreach (which isn't always forthcoming) is our best option.
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
Indeed, Conor. And yet: was there anywhere else we could attempt an occupation to begin with? I've long argued that beyond Iraq and Afghanistan only Syria fit the bill, even back before 9/11. Iran and NoKo are out of reach, but we wouldn't want to occupy them even if we could. We can't and won't wage war on the Saudis.
From a broader view, our strategy is "therapeutic" insofar as it says we can only cope with, and never cure, the 'Afghan problem'. Theatrical niceness is a tactic in that broader strategy. But it may really be true that what's 'wrong' with Afghanistan from our standpoint is incurable. That might not have been true to begin with, but forging ahead means being uncertain that we can cure Afghanistan of what ails us even if we succeed at everything we prudently choose to do.
May '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
Is there even broad American consensus on what is wrong with Afghanistan? Some people seem to think that the answer is, "their government harbored terrorists who attacked us," what I regard as the most prudent and defensible rationale for war.
But if what's wrong is the possibility of terrorist training camps sometime in the future, or the rule of an oppressive government that stokes radicalism and abuses women, I don't think we can cure Afghanistan of what ails it (I am uncertain about the degree to which those things "ail" us, though they're obviously objectionable to us).
Professor Hanson is right that "there is nothing intrinsic in the Afghan character to doom it to the sort of chaos we see in the present," and insofar as that's a contested point, good on him for refuting it. I just don't think that it tells us very much about the bigger picture. Perhaps the country is only an ungovernable graveyard for some intruders. Are we among them? That is the more apt question.
Jun '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
Thank you, Dr. Hanson, for answering me personally. We will know in time if Afghanistan is indeed governable. On this point we'll just have to agree to disagree until the circumstances sort themselves out. I still have my doubts that a tribal society mired in ancient blood feuds can accept the fruits of modernity, but time will tell.
Jun '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
One trillion dollars worth of minerals could alter the equation. Opium poppy could start looking more like barley, living standards could begin to rise, and educational opportunities start flourishing. But they will still be Muslims, and I consider that alone to be a lot of baggage to overcome. How many of our brightest and best lives must we sacrifice for this mission? The goal of "winning" in Afghanistan seems even more vague than in Iraq, but than my mind wanders back to those minerals.
Jun '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
A trillion bucks in minerals could also ignite a civil war as tribal factions squabble over the spoils. This could make "blood diamonds" look like small potatoes in comparison. Lacking the rule of law, I see no better outcome.
Jun '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
Paules: "A trillion bucks in minerals could also ignite a civil war as tribal factions squabble over the spoils. This could make "blood diamonds" look like small potatoes in comparison. Lacking the rule of law, I see no better outcome."
I agree, assuming we withdrew our military. It would also lure other evils into the country to reap the wealth. Now that this cat seems to be out of the bag, we may be forced to stay in country, if for no other reason than to mine and manage their new found wealth
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
Part of the problem, I'd argue, is that actually Afghanistan is mired in modern feuds -- problems much more akin to those of the era of religious war in Europe than anything particularly ancient. In ancient times, the Greco-Bactrian empire that succeeded Alexander's ruled Afghanistan for hundreds of years. The problem with today's fundamentalist Islam is that it's simultaneously reactionary and characteristically modern, in theological-political terms: obsessed with scriptural literalism, intent on fusing temporal and ecclesiastical power, etc. Radical Islam isn't reacting against modern thought, per se, but democratic life -- the force of equalization in the world, which levels all hierarchies, detaches people from the land, erodes the authority of aristocratic institutions and persons, and encourages individual religious interpretation. Before crafting an answer we must know the problem.
May '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
It strikes me that this whole line of argument is wrong. It seems to me that American policy has been based around the twin ideas of, "We are nice people," and "We want them to like us." But it isn't at all clear to me that the history of the world shows that to be the modus operandi, generally.
What would our policy look like if it was based on the ideas: "We don't care whether you like us or not," and "Behave yourselves and play nice and don't screw with us because you'll regret it if you do"? Obviously, the present administration couldn't pull that off without inspiring worldwide snickers...or even guffaws.
Jean Danielou has said, “Truth consists in the mind giving to things the importance they have in reality.” But America persists in pursuing a policy that is based upon an idealistic unreality. The difference between Obama and Bush is simply which unreality they prefer.
May '10
Re: The Consensus on Afghanistan is Wrong
The neoisolationist sentiments here expressed really "prove" that the Broken Windows theory is a lie. I guess it makes no difference what sorts of criminality we countenance out there as long as 1) it is far enough away, 2) we have a nice gated community over here in which to hide, 3) the bad guys resist surrendering immediately, and 4) we don't want to put up with the length of time and the effort required to actually do the job. I believe that the so-called "Powell Doctrine", regarding only using the military if we can be guaranteed of accomplishing all of the objectives very quickly and cleanly, may be the worst disservice that any general ever perpetrated on his country.
We don't have to pacify or rule Afghanistan. But anyone who believes that 1) we will have long term peace and security in our world, with Haqqani's and Hekmatyar's organizations in business and cooperating with the Islamists in Pakistan plus Al Qaeda (remember, Haqqani is still Zawahiri's protector), and 2) that this can be accomplished while advertising our cold feet and our pull-out deadlines, is smoking high-quality Afghan opium.