|
Afghan American Interdependence After 9/11 set the tone for a new world of doubt and suspicion affecting the foundation of freedom, both internal and foreign policies of Afghanistan and the United States became intertwined. The fate of one country was somehow tied to the other. What happens in Afghanistan matters to Americans of all walks of life. The policies that are crafted in the United States affect the life of all Afghans. From politician to constituent, from general to conscript, from producer to consumer, from investor to laborer, men women, even children are all affected by events in each other’s countries. The new relationship that developed as a result of the US administration’s decision to declare a war on terror and to begin by targeting a regime in Afghanistan that had harbored Arab elements that prepared for a war of terror affected Afghanistan profoundly. It rid Afghanistan of a tyrannical regime that had trampled upon the rights of many of its citizens especially its women and as per any definition was a reactionary system that wanted to drag the country at least a thousand years back in time. The decision to go to war affected the US in many ways. It affected, of course, the economy requiring spending of billions of dollars into war and war machinery. It caused sending of thousands of young American soldiers thousands of miles away to put their lives on the line and defend the values of their civilization. It also provided grounds for politicians of all standings to debate and argue American participation in a war that was happening for the first time in history, not with another country but with an enemy that was almost invisible. The war on terror also involved, through a variety of politicking, a large number of other countries that united in a coalition and took it upon themselves to participate militarily in what began as the US war on terror. The United Nations pressured by a number of big brother countries especially the United States and Britain got involved in the issue. In the United States, President George Bush took it upon himself to lead the war on behalf of his nation and also for the world at large. This role required great effort, risk-taking and diplomatic work for President Bush both inside his country and in the world arena. Besides, the US had other stakes in the region. After the downfall of the Soviet System in the Soviet Union, American relations with countries of the region needed to be reevaluated. Delhi that had become too close to Moscow during the Soviet era, needed to reconsider its interests. The United States that had, out of necessity, come close to Pakistan also because of Cino-Pak proximity, now wanted to befriend India in new ways. India that houses one sixth of the world population is too important for the United States to ignore. Thus the unprecedented historic treaty on nuclear cooperation between the two countries was initialed in New Delhi during the most recent trip of the US President. The treaty has already stirred controversy in American political circles and would certainly be debated thoroughly in the US Congress. On the other hand, US-Pak relations needed to be seen in the new light of realities on the ground. The war on terror, Pakistan Chinese relations as well as Afghan-Pak relationships, that were never smooth enough for either side, helped reshape American policy towards Pakistan. India and Pakistani relations in view of the fact that both acquired, against the wishes of the Western world, nuclear power status were bound to affect American policy in the region. The newly established central Asian countries needed to form new international relations free of the influence of Moscow. New venues needed to be opened for their transactions with the world at large, and Afghanistan, once again regained its strategic position as the crossroads of Asia. And all of this made Afghanistan attractive to the United States. Afghanistan is also a neighbor to Iran. Iranian new administration under President Ahmadinejad has already stirred international controversy regarding that country’s nuclear program. While hard times seem to be foreseen in finding of a solution to the differences between the International Atomic Energy Commission and Iran on the issue, the United States has openly taken a stand against Iranian stance. On the other hand Iranian interests in Afghan affairs and even its interference have caused some degree of apprehension in Afghanistan. Pakistan that was one of the only three countries that recognized the Taleban regime. It was Pakistan that defended and even represented Taleban interests in some of the international political forums. And it is unfortunately Pakistan that is serving as the last trench and training grounds for both Taleban and Al-Qaeda. It may be true that at least on the surface, Pakistan has declared that she will rid the country of Al-Qaeda, but it is also a fact that President Musharraf sees his survival and hold on power as a dictator turned politician in his fear of and support for the extreme right that is supportive of the Taleban and Al-Qaeda. Therefore what Pakistan says and does have not matched much in the war on terror so far. This also affects not only Afghanistan’s relations with Pakistan, but also Afghan-American relations where American and coalition soldiers are put in harms way because of penetration of terrorists from Pakistan into Afghanistan. Under these conditions, Afghanistan finds itself dependent for two major issues on the American and international support. These are security and reconstruction. The United States on the other hand, finds itself dependent on Afghanistan and her success as a democracy that came about because of the US plans for war on terror. Afghanistan’s success therefore, could mean the success of President Bush’s policy that claimed to bring peace and prosperity, through democratic process, in the third world countries or in any region of unrest and disturbance. There are also many that argue this fact. While in these global policies, the cause should be more important than the persons because the results affect nations, yet in this case the people that are on the scene have become, at times, more important than the cause. Thus President George Bush, President Hamed Karzai, President Parvez Musharraf and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh are found to be playing great roles in the regional political scene. The interests of each nation may vary, but the common goal of security and peace will benefit all. That puts an additional historic responsibility on the shoulders of the leaders It may be that many in these countries would oppose the political alliances that have developed among the South Asian nations and their leaders. Many who thrive on criticizing politicians, would call some of the partners in this war on terror as subservient to mightier nations. But the fact is that it is hard to find a group of partners who would be equal in all respects. The new partnership therefore has brought a number of unequal partners together and in a situation like this, it is bound that the mightier partner would claim most of the benefit. In all of this, it is the Afghan-American relationship that play a pivotal role in the war on terror and in the success of the efforts for democratization. Afghanistan, notwithstanding the calls by many of its extremists, cannot call off the military relationship between her and the United States. The United States, notwithstanding calls for a recall of its soldiers engaged in a war on terror and in harms way cannot call off its military exploits in the South Asian country. What is important therefore is not a drastic change in these relations, but a rethinking of management of the partnership in such a way that would win both sides, the hearts and minds of their citizens. There is a greater need for doing this regarding the Afghan nation and the US needs to rethink and reshape its policy and conduct in Afghanistan and show that she is truly a liberator, a protector and a helper in rebuilding of Afghanistan rather than an occupier that operates independent of the host country’s wishes and aspirations. 03/08/06 The views
expressed in the contributed papers are that of the writer (s) and are
not necessarily shared by the Institute for Afghan Studies (IAS).
In addition the IAS can take no responsibility for the quality and
content of contributed material and external links. Please review
our Privacy Statement. |