FACEBOOK
TWITTER
“Churchill’s Choice” for Afghanistan
AMERICA MUST SWALLOW ITS EGO; LET THE WISDOM PREVAIL
By General Mirza Aslam Beg
Afghanistan Ethinic Map
General McChrystal, having read ’s Memoirs, has opted for the new strategy for Afghanistan, named as ‘Churchill’s Choice’, defined in these words:
“The more an outside army sought to impose order, the more ferocious the Afghan response. Brute force of arms, was not only insufficient and ineffective, but likely to foment greater antagonism. Therefore, there was the option of pulling-out and working through and with the tribal system, and leaving the tribals to their blood letting.”
The new strategy, therefore was formalized during the Strategic Dialogue with Pakistan, with high expectations that the Pakistan Army, having ‘Steam-rolled’ the Taliban from North Waziristan, will be ready to support the surge against the Taliban, but on his return to Pakistan, General Kiyani has poured cold water on their hopes, by saying “Pakistan has no intention to launch ‘steam-roller operations’ in North Waziristan, nor it can provide any military support to the coalition forces surge inside Afghanistan.” So the hope for ‘brick-by-brick demolition of jehadi infrastructure’ is dashed to the ground, as much as the effort to capture Marjeh in the Helmand province, and the hoisting of the American flag on a mud-hut of Marjeh bazaar. The surge will now turn towards Kandahar, inviting a befitting response from the Taliban. This encounter, certainly, will not be a stalemate, as in Marjeh, but a turning point of the surge operations.
There certainly is no possibility of a quick-fix military success, to be presented to the nation before the mid-term elections, nor the option of “pulling-out and leaving the tribals, to their blood-letting”, by implementing the Maldives Plan. In fact the Maldives Plan would be the recipe for disaster. This option was used in 1990, after the Afghan Mujahideen and the government of Pakistan together provided the safe exit to the Soviet troops but for the exit of the occupation forces now, neither Pakistan nor Taliban can provide any such guarantee.
Obama’s dash to Kabul to announce the pre-mature success of the Strategic Dialogue, was a crude attempt to fool the American public, because the ‘surge strategy’ has failed and so has the Maldives Plan before it could be launched. What then is the option? The answer is “find peace with the Taliban of Afghanistan”, which is possible, if the occupation forces try to understand the genesis of Taliban of today and the way forward to negotiate peace with them. The Taliban of today are very much different from the Taliban of 1988-89. The Taliban of today are what the CIA website, ‘The Long War Journal’ describes in detail. Add to it the ‘hard core of young Taliban’, born during the last thirty years, under the shadows of war, who know nothing but to fight, for their freedom. They have seen no pleasures of life – la courtesy foreign invasions, by the Soviets and the Americans. They live in a state of anomie, where life and death have little meaning for them. Two super powers and the pride of Europe, the NATO forces stand humbled by them. They are a phenomenon, least understood, yet one can understand them, if there is the willingness to engage with them.
How to engage with them is the real problem. Because of the obsessions to call them “terrorists”, there is a hesitance to talk to them. One has to get rid of this obsession and treat them as ‘freedom fighters’, who, during the last three decades have sacrificed their two generations in order to “preserve their freedom, their values and traditions, which do not find harmony with the American plans and policies for Afghanistan.” Mulla Umar
There exists a serious trust deficit between the Taliban and USA, who betrayed them in 1989 at Geneva and again in 2001 at Bonn, by denying them power-sharing which they deserved as the winner and also being the majority, i.e. 55% of the population. The Maldives Plans which has now been hatched and is to be implemented, will be another betrayal and a disaster for peace.
Pakistan and the other stake-holders do not want a Talibanised Afghanistan. They have no right under any law to make such a demand. It is, for the people of Afghanistan to choose the form of government best suits them. Amongst our immediate neighbours, China follows the Communist/Socialist ideology and is the most peaceful country in the world. Iran follows the Islamic Ideology and despite such provocations from Israel and pressures from USA, has maintained its cool. Similarly, Afghanistan under the Taliban will follow the Islamic ideology, respecting the rule of law and distributive justice. In fact, the world has to remain engaged with them to ameliorate their sufferings of the last thirty years, caused by foreign aggressions. Pakistan and the USA, in particular therefore have “to recalibrate their positions and harmonize their interests with Afghanistan for a lasting peace in the region.”
It is not Karzai and his government, which will look after the American interests when they are gone from Afghanistan. The Taliban can provide such a guarantee, if we remain engaged with them to create mutual confidence and the promise to invest in rebuilding the country which has suffered untold misery, death, destruction and deprivation, at the hands of the two great powers – Russia and America. They owe to the people of Afghanistan, not in blood, or flesh, any more, but in kind, if they decide to save the day and abandon the Churchill’s Choice of “leaving the tribes, to their blood letting.
______________________________________________________________________
General Mirza Aslam Beg is the former Chief of Army Staff, Pakistan. After retirement, he established his Think Tank,
‘FRIENDS’ at Rawalpindi. He holds independent views that are widely respected and given serious thought. He contributes his articles regularly to www.opinion-maker.org
Short URL: http://www.veteranstoday.com/?p=25346
Posted by Raja Mujtaba on Apr 6 2010, With 0 Reads, Filed under WarZone. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. Both comments and pings are currently closed.
COMMENTS
To post, we ask that you login using Facebook, Yahoo, AOL, or Hotmail in the box below.Don't have a social network account? Register and Login direct with VT and post.
Before you post, read our Comment Policy - Feedback
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Veterans Today. Veterans Today said: Veterans Today: “Churchill’s Choice” for Afghanistan http://bit.ly/bApyq3 [...]
[...] “Churchill's Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
[...] “Churchill's Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
General Aslam Beg, who is representing the vested interests of Pakistan in Afghanistan, purposefully mixes three phenomenon with each other.
1) Mujahideen
2) Taliban
3) Pashtuns.
1) When he talks about Mujahideen who fought against the Soviet Forces in the 1980s he is using the word “Taliban” to connote the the former. The general must be reminded that it the Taliban was a later creation of the Pakistani Army intelligence (ISI) in the 1990s and the two should not be mixed.
2) Mujahideen (or what Ronald Reagan called them the “freedom fighter”) was referred to all those who were fighting against the Soviet Invasion and its stooge government in Kabul. The important thing is that in their ranks you could find members of all ethnic groups of Afghanistan (see the ethnic map provided by the General). However, the Taliban in the 1990s and today are an exclusive Pashtun phenomenon. No members of other ethnic group is part of their moment today or int he 1990s (the exception is a small number of Badakhshani Taliban).
3) The Taliban today are an inter-Pashtun problem not a “nation” problem of Afghanistan. The General tries to show that the Taliban are a Pashtun resistance (or even national resistance) and they represent 55% of Afghanistan. He provides the CIA website to back up some of his baseless claims. The same website gives the Pashtun Population of Afghanistan 42% and as I said the Taliban are a tiny minority among the 42% Pashtun population.
In conclusion the General knows that the non-Pashtun ethnic groups resisted the Taliban and Talibanism in the 1990s in Afghanistan and they definitely will do the same today.
I think, it is time the General went and prescribed solutions to the problems of his own country: Paskistan. Until the Paskistani General like Asalam Beg come to the conclusion that their interests are served with all others in a peaceful region (South and Central Asia) and do not abandon the idea of dominating Afghanistan, peace and tranquility will elude us. They should learn from other regional co-operations inf the world.
Aslam Beg – the man famous for calling the Taliban “our boys” back in 1996 when they took Kabul. He treats the his American audience with utter contempt by his brazen and amaturish attempt to decieve them – mixing the Mujahideen whom fought against the Soviets and the his own “boys” – the Taliban.
One other thing to add – these Pakistani generals – seem to think that they are the continuation of the British India that attempted to colonise that land west of the Durrand Line – quoting Churchill.
They and all of Pakistan will be burnt for such delusions.
[...] “Churchill's Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
GEN(R) Beg writes as though he thinks America is not aware of the concept of reconciliation or reintegreation. Does he seriously believe the United States wishes to usurp the will of the Afghan people, not support and foster it? Is he aware that there’s this thing called a counterinsurgency that the US is waging? (There’s manuals and stuff written on that.) Oh, and does he seriously believe an American flag was raised over Marjah? It was an Afghan flag, and if you want to see it click here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcSTK9ZGzio
If the Taliban are so great, and the good General seems to paint ‘Taliban’ with a pretty wide brush, why do they make peace agreements with Pakistani officials and then unleash waves of attacks on Pakistani citizens? And oh yeah, US interests in Pakistan, like the consulate. Yesterday. For anyone to believe the thesis of this article he would have to have been born today.
[...] “Churchill's Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
[...] “Churchill's Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans T… [...]
[...] “Churchill's Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
[...] “Churchill's Cһοісе” fοr Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
[...] “Churchill’s Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
[...] “Churchill's Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
[...] “Churchill's Choice” for Afghanistan : Veterans Today [...]
Keep posting stuff like this i really like it
General Sahib,
I am humbled by your article.
But you never mentioned if the Taliban can advocate for women’s rights, education and integration of Islamic schools as Turkey’s reformation currently being modeled.
In addition, respect of Shias, Hindus and other religions and not showing cockiness for their version of Islamic values and supremacy–since Allah has created us all equal.
Also a reconciliation and call for forgiveness as what they did to other minorities during their reign akin to Hazaras, Uzbeks and Tajiks and vice-versa.
As an Afghan Pashtun, I will be the first one to call upon the world that we are ready to embrace each other.
But I see vagueness in their approach as well as deep down mistrust between the regional powers that causes the Indo-Pakistani proxy wars and involvements in Afghanistan’s internal affairs.
I understand that Pakistan has an interest in Afghanistan and so should Afghanistan in Pakistan.
Pakistan’s Panjabi dominant government has never integrated Pashtuns and considers them as second class citizens.
I think you have laid out the foundation but there should be more to add and fix.
Hope to see your reply sir.
Thank you,
Khalil Nouri