Drawdown to meltdown!
Faheem Uddin
President Obama’s announcement of promised drawdown of forces from
Afghanistan has evoked a flashback of ‘Gorbachev in Vladivostok’, who
wanted nothing more than an honourable exit from a disastrous war.
During his address to the Soviet Politburo in November 1986, President
Gorbachev said that even after six years of military effort, ‘no end
was in sight’. “In general, we haven’t found the key to resolving this
problem.” Gorbachev’s retreat was an admission of defeat. For the
United States, the picture is not so bleak. Despite a little cost in
blood and treasure, the US does not face an imminent disaster; though
a deferred one it cannot escape. Luckily, Obama understands that
embracing of graceful failure is a better option than a strategic
meltdown. He has asserted his leadership well in time and said:
“America, it is time to focus on nation building here at home”.
Nevertheless, announcement of drawdown without achieving the stated
objectives and without any reference to “conditions on the ground” is
a tacit admission of America’s eroding staying power. Moreover, window
of opportunity for a face saving exit is narrowing down on a fast
pace. Even though United States may be able to carry on military
operations at the current pace for quite some time, American national
will to stay the course viz.a.viz use of military as a tool of first
choice is eroding at a pretty fast pace. The US House of
Representatives matched the national mood by flatly rejecting a bill
to authorize American military operations in Libya. The resolution
failed 295 to 123, with 70 Democrats bluntly crossing over to the
Republican side to oppose the bill. Administration is of the view that
operations in Libya do not qualify to be called a war, however,
Congress thinks otherwise; same corollary is applicable to drone
attacks in Pakistan.Pentagon has termed the drawdown as too speedy and
Taliban have termed it as ‘only a symbolic step’. However, what seemed
to be a modest withdrawal plan has begun to have serious rippling
effects. Taking the US plan to extricate its 33,000 troops from
Afghanistan synonymous to throwing down the towel, the NATO states
seem to be in a tailspin of panic. Most of NATO states which were
enthusiastic to stay much beyond 2014 during their rhetoric at Lisbon
NATO summit, a couple of months ago, are now eager to pullout their
troops fast. Germany and France have promptly announced that they
would look at scaling down their own presence in Afghanistan. France
has indicated that it would carry out a progressive pullback of
France’s 4,000 forces with a timetable similar to the one announced by
the United States. Germany has voiced concern on the safety of its
troops especially when Taliban militias are emboldened and motivated
to hit back following what they conceive as US defeat in Afghanistan.
Germany has also decided to pullout its 4,900 troops deployed in
Northern Afghanistan which have been facing the brunt of combat
operations for quite some time. Other NATO allies including Canada and
Italy have already set the timelines for their troops withdrawal. ISAF
component is already in a state of despair. This coalition of the
unwilling does not have the stomach to continue its presence in
Afghanistan even for a day more. America will cut down 10,000 troops
by the end of this year. Another 23,000 troops will leave next summer.
If Obama loses re-election, he would hand back Afghan war to a
Republican president at the resource level at which he inherited it.
There would still be over 60,000 troops left, out of which 25,000 may
be stationed indefinitely in Afghanistan under an arrangement being
thrusted upon President Karzai. The permanent US military presence in
Afghanistan could be mischievously linked to imaginary threat from
Pakistan. The New York Times’ David Sanger suggests that Islamabad’s
angry reaction to operation Geronimo, “makes it more urgent than ever
that the United States maintain sites outside the country to launch
drone and commando raids against the militant networks that remain in
Pakistan and to make sure that Pakistan’s fast growing nuclear arsenal
never falls into the wrong hands”. Bruce Reidel, a retired CIA spy
with pathological anti Pakistan bias is of the opinion the US needs a
base to strike targets in Pakistan. “The geography is simple: You need
to do that from Afghanistan.”The delusional scenario that Obama built
for his people is that America is drawing down from a position of
strength, though he was not in denial of the fact that many important
dimensions of the Afghan nation-building had gone astray. He hoped
that Afghans would be able to build an alternative to the war economy.
Peace, he said, is achievable, but it has to be led by the Afghan
government, with those who want to be a part of a peaceful
Afghanistan, and break from al Qaeda, abandon violence, and abide by
the Afghan constitution. Here Hillary and Obama are on different
planes. Hillary during her Asia Society speech in February had
postponed these preconditions as end objectives. The Soviets, too, had
thought they could arrange a face-saving political solution. They were
proven wrong when the country soon got into the quicksand of a civil
war. Soon after Obama’s draw-down discourse, Hillary Clinton described
the US-Pakistan relationship as frustrating. However, she said that
“We cannot walk away from this relationship… we cannot repeat the
mistakes of 1989.” But “When it comes to our military aid, we are not
prepared to continue providing that at the pace we were providing it
unless and until we see some steps taken.” Likewise, just before
leaving the office it dawned upon Secretary Gates that Afghan war
could be won without Pakistan. US$ 500 million tranche of Coalition
Support Fund has been held back which was “firmly committed” for
release by 30th June. Further aid is likely to be cut down
drastically. Pakistan has asked Americans to vacate Pakistani base
Shamsi which has been under American usage for surveillance and drone
attacks. The so-called bilateral ‘Strategic Dialogue’ is now in
abeyance, sine die.It is amply clear that America has decided to
abandon Afghanistan and dump Pakistan. Partnership with the US has
never been easy yet recent spate of doubts and uncertainty has
reinforced strains and fault lines. The war that is being abandoned in
Afghanistan rather abruptly has the potential of reversing the
frontiers and find its way into Pakistan as indeed other countries
bordering Afghanistan. Presently all American options towards Pakistan
are primed towards a single objective of putting extra pressure on
Pakistan, on one pretext or the other. Gorbachev and Obama are the
same side of the coin as far as post war dealing with Afghanistan and
Pakistan is concerned. Pakistan needs to understand this quickly and
adjust to fast changing realities. Recent initiative by Iran to hold a
trilateral summit with Afghanistan and Pakistan on the issue of
terrorism needs to be expanded to include all countries bordering
Afghanistan.