Colonel (retd) Anil Athale
As we enter the second decade of the 21st century, there is increasing skepticism and doubt over America's ability to win the war in the Afghanistan-Pakistan region.
Many analysts describe it as another Great Game, alluding to the 19th century competition between Russian and British Empire for influence in Central Asia. Others, particularly the uneasy Pakistani analysts, predict this will be America's 'Second Vietnam.' Yet many others have called it the 'Second Jihad', after the first one against the Soviet occupation.
The current conflict is certainly all that, yet unlike all the previous ones. Rather than hedge my bets and use the cliche of 'time will tell' et al, the unambiguous answer to the question posed is, yes the US will win this war.
There are far too many myths woven around the whole issue, and it is time these are debunked in order to understand the reality.
Myth No.1: The Afghans have never been subdued and the US will meet the fate of other invaders.
This myth has gained currency due to the two defeats/reverses that the British suffered as well as the Soviet defeat in the first Jihad. Students of history know that the Sikhs under Maharaja Ranjit Singh ruled over this area with an iron hand and were successful in squashing local resistance. Such was the fear of the Sikhs that even today Pashtun mothers tell unruly children to behave, or else 'Hari Singh Nalawa will come and take them away.'
The British had only a limited aim of not letting Russians gain ground there, if they were serious enough or if the stakes were high, even in the 19th and 20th century itself, Afghanistan would have become a colony like many other nations in Asia and Africa. This is like the argument about the so called independence of countries like China or Thailand during that era…….It was no special quality that saved these countries from direct rule but the geo-politics of that era. Many Chinese (including Jackie Chan in one of his movies) belittle Indians on this issue.
Myth No.2: The Afghan and Pakistani Jihadis defeated a super power like Soviet Union. They can defeat another superpower as well.
Jihad I, that went on between 1979 and 1987 was a joint enterprise with American arms and technology, Saudi money and Pakistani management. The current conflict sees the Taliban isolated from support of any major power. Drug money is compensating for the loss of Saudi support, but there is no technological support from any advanced country. Lest it is forgotten, right up till 1983-84 the Soviet Union was winning the contest. It was the induction of high tech weapons like the Stinger Missiles that turned the tide against the Soviet Helicopters. Pakistani safe heavens and managerial support also played a part. Today with the US breathing down the neck of Pakistanis, it is unlikely that either the safe heavens or Pakistani guidance will be available to the Taliban.
Another fact that is conveniently forgotten is that even after the Soviet troops left Afghanistan in 1987, the Najibullah regime continued to resist Taliban successfully. It was only the defection of Rashid Dostum with an army division and the direct intervention by Pakistan army regulars that led to his defeat. In the changed circumstances, neither is a possibility. The defeat of Afghan army, largely based on the Tajik and Uzbek elements, would not be easy. If the Americans are as ruthless in Af-Pak as they were in Iraq, it is very likely that the Taliban will be so weakened that the US can safely withdraw after 18 months.
Myth No.3: Af-Pak can become second Vietnam for the US.
US President Barack Obama himself alluded to this recently, telling his West Point audience that Af-Pak was no Vietnam. Here, the US is not fighting for some vague theory like the 'Domino Effect' in South East Asia, but perceives a direct threat to its security. Consequently, the stakes are much higher. Neither have the Americans forgotten the nearly 5,000 of its citizens killed on 9/11.
Many students of Vietnam War have come to a conclusion that the war was lost not so much on the battlefield as in the American drawing rooms. It had become a hugely un-popular war with a vibrant anti-war movement. Prominent personalities like Vanessa Redgrave and Jane Fonda were anti-war activists. There were demonstrations on university campuses. Is there a single group coming forward to support the Taliban?
Like in the Jihad I in Afghanistan, the Soviet Union and China gave their full backing to the Vietcong rebels fighting Americans. The flow of arms and technology from these two made a huge difference to the Vietnamese resistance. Right from the Peninsular War of Napoleonic era to the American war of independence, in every single successful revolt the rebels have had a support of an industrial power. Such is the killing capacity of modern conventional weapons that primitive societies, howsoever brave and hardy, cannot withstand the modern armies.
Concern for human rights and collateral damage can impact a military operation. But such is the image of Taliban and its brutal regime that the world is likely to turn a blind eye towards the civilian casualties in this war.
The real danger is the spill over of the Taliban to the neighbouring Pakistan and India. In some sense this is already happening, and Pakistan has seen a spate of suicide attacks. Hopefully this will turn the public opinion away from extremists. Otherwise, there is a real danger of nuclear-armed Pakistan being taken over by the barbaric Taliban. The hold of religion is so strong there that a recent survey showed that 86 per cent of Pakistanis believe religion must have a role in politics.
It is anybody's guess what turn events in Pakistan will take once Taliban have been vanquished.
In retrospect, it is the reckless American policy during the Reagan era of 1980s that created the Frankenstein of Taliban and Pakistan's nuclear capability. An Afghan woman quoted in a Pakistani newspaper 'The News' (Dec 14,2009) makes a stunning revelation that the syllabus taught in Madarssas in the refugee camp "were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines. These textbooks were, ironically, developed in the early 1980s under a USAID (US Agency for International Development) grant to the University of Nebraska and its Centre for Afghanistan Studies."
Need one say more?
9/11 defined the first decade of the 21st century; the American victory or destruction of Taliban may well be the major event of the second decade of the 21st century.
India must, however, be ever vigilant to prevent the spillover of this war into our country.
Also read: Afghan tribe signs pact to keep Taliban out | Pakistan should talk to the Taliban: Imran Khan | US tells Afghans to grow grapes not opium poppy | No Afghan solution possible without India: Germany | US in position to 'win 2010' in Afghanistan: Senator
Colonel (Dr) Anil Athale is Chhatrapati Shivaji Fellow of the USI studying insurgency, and the co-ordinator of Inpad, a Pune-based think tank.
More by Col Anil Athale
