FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

America’s Shambles in Afghanistan

In the course of research for a paper on US-Pakistan relations I came across a speech given by President Obama in March this year, titled  ‘A New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan’.  It was interesting and quite informative, if misguided and engagingly ingenuous, but the riveting sentence that leapt from the page to my astonished eyes was the declaration that  “The United States of America did not choose to fight a war in Afghanistan.”

It’s a bit like being told  “Hitler didn’t cause World War Two”, or reading a newspaper headline like  “Republican Politician Tells Truth” or “Netanyahu Says Arabs are Human”  But the Obama assertion was even more bizarre.

Nobody grabbed America’s collective nose and ordered it to send special forces to go to Afghanistan’s Tora Bora region on 7 October 2001, along with a few dozen British colleagues and a now-rich bunch of raggy baggy Afghan warlords who took millions of CIA dollars in enormous shrink-wrapped bundles and then sat down on their money and did nothing – until they sent the cash to Dubai and Geneva, courtesy of the corrupt Kabul Bank. The prime mover in that farce (for such it was, alas, in spite of instances of exceptionally courageous conduct by US and British soldiers;  I have had a first-hand description of the operation, but alas can’t recount it because of the UK’s Official Secrets Act), was the White House.  The pathetic Blair of Britain followed in his usual fashion, desperate to have bonding photographs taken alongside the grinning Bush.

It was most certainly the United States of America that chose to invade Afghanistan.  And it was the United States that manipulated the United Nations Security Council into a Resolution that seemed to give justification for its unwinnable war.

Two researchers in the British House of Commons have produced a paper titled ‘The Legal Basis for the Invasion of Afghanistan’.  These analysts are not bleeding-heart liberals;  they are intelligent, independent assessors of fact. And they wrote :  “The military campaign in Afghanistan was not specifically mandated by the UN – there was no specific Security Council Resolution authorising the invasion – but was widely (although not universally) perceived to be a legitimate form of self-defence under the UN Charter.”

The whole thing was a con-job. And dozens of nations were summoned to give it a slimy veneer of quasi-legitimacy.  They were all duped – or chose to be manoeuvred – into committing blood, young lives and treasure to the preposterously named “Operation Enduring Freedom.”

While writing this piece I went to the website icasualties and saw that yet more young foreign soldiers had been killed.  Boys of 19 and 20 are dying in Afghanistan for . . .   for what?   There are no names of Afghan soldiers, of course, because they don’t matter to the West – any more than the deaths of Pakistani soldiers matter to Western politicians and generals who demand that “Pakistan must do more to combat terrorism.”  What they mean is that even more soldiers of the Pakistan army and Frontier Corps should sacrifice their lives in order to make things easier for the West to claim that things are improving in its Afghan catastrophe.

Had there been no invasion of Afghanistan by foreign troops, Pakistan would not be in the dreadful situation in which it now finds itself. The fanatics came over the border and found sanctuary amid the lawless, savage, but culturally hospitable Pushtun tribes, which at that very time were being encouraged, with signs of modest success, to join mainstream Pakistan.  But the displaced militants began energetic campaigns of propaganda and hatred, and then wreaked havoc by brainwashing home-grown barbarians to develop their own brand of evil mayhem.

Pakistan had no suicide bombings until 1995 when an Egyptian citizen tried to drive a bomb-truck into his embassy in Islamabad. There were no other attacks until 2005, when there were two, by sectarian religious fanatics. But then the foreigners’ war in Afghanistan really got going, and in 2007 there were over fifty suicide attacks in Pakistan,  most of which directly targeted military forces. Since then it’s been a hideous growth industry.  Last year fifty bombings killed over 1100 people, and so far this year the score is 500 dead innocents.

Thank you, Operation Enduring Freedom. And thank you, too, America, for the deaths of over 3,000 soldiers of the Pakistan army and Frontier Corps, because none of them would have been killed were it not for your war in Afghanistan.

Kabul’s US-endorsed and fraudulently elected government and its supporting foreign military forces whine about Pakistan being unable to control movement of militants to and from Afghanistan, and certainly it is impossible to do this – as the US well knows but won’t admit.  Across its own fenced and heavily patrolled  border with Mexico, which costs an annual 6 billion dollars to maintain and has over 20,000 border agents, pass hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants and thousands of tons of drugs every year.

Ignoring its own backyard cross-border shambles, the US demands that Pakistan commit its soldiers to invade its border Tribal Agency, North Waziristan to fight militants who – undoubtedly – cross the border to Afghanistan to fight there.

This operation – or, rather, long series of operations, because it would take years if mounted,  would require some 60,000 soldiers, of whom a thousand would be killed in a two-year campaign – were that all the time it would take. There would be at least 3,000 Pakistan army and Frontier Corps soldiers wounded, with hundreds of them maimed for life.  There would be thousands of widows, orphans and grieving parents and families.

The aim of the US and its dwindling number of international supporters in Afghanistan is not intended to further stability in Pakistan – because a North Waziristan military operation would mightily increase the numbers of suicide and other attacks throughout the country.  Their objective is to make it  easier for them to claim that their war in Afghanistan is going well, as part of President Obama’s ‘New Strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.’  Thousands of civilians would have to flee from their homes in Waziristan. The social and economic cost would be immense throughout the country.

Does Pakistan think this is a price worth paying?

***

The US Chairman of the Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mullen, stated unequivocally on September 22 that Pakistan’s government and armed forces “use violent extremism as an instrument of policy”,  and were responsible for the recent attack on the US embassy in Kabul, as well as “the 28 June attack against the Inter-Continental Hotel in Kabul and a host of other smaller but effective operations.”

Now Mullen isn’t the sharpest knife in the box, and has made many fatuous statements ever since he got into a position in which he thought that he could get headlines by making fantastic statements;   but even for him, this was a lulu.  He has also declared that the government and intelligence service and army of Pakistan have killed, or want to kill, American citizens. He has announced that Pakistan “jeopardises not only the prospect of our strategic partnership, but also Pakistan’s opportunity to be a respected nation with legitimate regional influence.”

He has utterly destroyed any tiny lingering trust between America and Pakistan.

Then, amazingly, on the one hand he declares that Pakistan is an international pariah and not to be regarded as reliable on any account, and then says “With Pakistan’s help we have disrupted al-Qaeda and its senior leadership in the border regions and degraded its ability to plan and conduct terror attacks”. This is so illogical and off-the-planet as to make one wonder if he had had a bevy of Scotches before he went in to the legislators’ Committee to which he testified.

And I’ll tell Mullen something he doesn’t know:  Yes, Pakistan’s intelligence agency does have liaison with extremists.  The Directorate of Inter Services Intelligence maintains contact with all sorts of loony, barbaric and evil organisations.  Just as does the CIA.  It does so, because it knows the people of these groups are ruthless, powerful and extremely dangerous and it wants to have a handle on what they do, and, if possible, engage them in negotiations on behalf of government.  Just like the CIA did with, for example, Libya’s lunatic and murderous Gadaffi.

Mullen’s wacky pronouncements have pushed US credibility in Pakistan to an even further low, which might have been expected, given what his boss, defence secretary Panetta, has been spouting.

The US is threatening to invade Pakistan rather than endorse ongoing and extremely delicate negotiations with tribal and other fanatics in its western regions.  The intention was made clear when Panetta, referring to Pakistan’s supposed support of militant operations in Afghanistan, declared that “We’re not going to allow these types of attacks to go on.”

I’ve got news for Mullen and Panetta.  If they imagine the Pakistan Army will be a pushover like the Iraqis, they have another think coming.  If US forces attempt an incursion into Pakistan in North Waziristan or anywhere else they will meet reaction not only from the tribes and militants but from a proud and professional army which will not accept flagrant violation of national sovereignty. I know the Pakistan Army, and I state flatly that man-for-man it will hammer any opponent, no matter if the skies are horizon-filled with US bombers.

Does America think this is a price worth paying?

More articles by:

Brian Cloughley writes about foreign policy and military affairs. He lives in Voutenay sur Cure, France.

August 20, 2018
Carl Boggs
The Road to Disaster?
James Munson
“Not With a Bomb, But a Whimper” … Then More Bombs.
Jonathan Cook
Corbyn’s Labour Party is Being Made to Fail –By Design
Robert Fisk
A US Trade War With Turkey Over a Pastor? Don’t Believe It
Howard Lisnoff
The Mass Media’s Outrage at Trump: Why the Surprise?
Faisal Khan
A British Muslim’s Perspective on the Burkha Debate
Andrew Kahn
Inhumanity Above the Clouds
Dan Glazebrook
Trump’s New Financial War on the Global South
George Wuerthner
Why the Gallatin Range Deserves Protection
Ted Rall
Is Trump a Brand-New Weird Existential Threat? No.
Sheldon Richman
For the Love of Reason
Susie Day
Why Pundits Scare Me
Dean Baker
Does France’s Economy Need to Be Renewed?
Weekend Edition
August 17, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Daniel Wolff
The Aretha Dialogue
Nick Pemberton
Donald Trump and the Rise of Patriotism 
Joseph Natoli
First Amendment Rights and the Court of Popular Opinion
Andrew Levine
Midterms 2018: What’s There to Hope For?
Robert Hunziker
Hothouse Earth
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Running Out of Fools
Ajamu Baraka
Opposing Bipartisan Warmongering is Defending Human Rights of the Poor and Working Class
Paul Street
Corporate Media: the Enemy of the People
David Macaray
Trump and the Sex Tape
CJ Hopkins
Where Have All the Nazis Gone?
Daniel Falcone
The Future of NATO: an Interview With Richard Falk
Cesar Chelala
The Historic Responsibility of the Catholic Church
Ron Jacobs
The Barbarism of US Immigration Policy
Kenneth Surin
In Shanghai
William Camacaro - Frederick B. Mills
The Military Option Against Venezuela in the “Year of the Americas”
Nancy Kurshan
The Whole World Was Watching: Chicago ’68, Revisited
Robert Fantina
Yemeni and Palestinian Children
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Orcas and Other-Than-Human Grief
Shoshana Fine – Thomas Lindemann
Migrants Deaths: European Democracies and the Right to Not Protect?
Paul Edwards
Totally Irrusianal
Thomas Knapp
Murphy’s Law: Big Tech Must Serve as Censorship Subcontractors
Mark Ashwill
More Demons Unleashed After Fulbright University Vietnam Official Drops Rhetorical Bombshells
Ralph Nader
Going Fundamental Eludes Congressional Progressives
Hans-Armin Ohlmann
My Longest Day: How World War II Ended for My Family
Matthew Funke
The Nordic Countries Aren’t Socialist
Daniel Warner
Tiger Woods, Donald Trump and Crime and Punishment
Dave Lindorff
Mainstream Media Hypocrisy on Display
Jeff Cohen
Democrats Gather in Chicago: Elite Party or Party of the People?
Victor Grossman
Stand Up With New Hope in Germany?
Christopher Brauchli
A Family Affair
Jill Richardson
Profiting From Poison
Patrick Bobilin
Moving the Margins
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail