The Drunk Diplomat

NATO and coalition forces are attacking the heart of the Taliban’s financial power. Eradicating the opium production will be a major goal of the surge because the drug trade finances the arms being used in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Afghanistan is a very ethnically diverse country with Pashtu’s and Balochis in the South, Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazarra in the North. I could not find information on the demographics of the Afghan military, but I assume that it is not as ethnically diverse as the country. Therefore, even if the surge succeeds in the short term – eradicating Poppy on a massive scale – I don’t see the Afghan army having the ability to enforce poppy eradication efforts as American and NATO troops leave the country ,as they eventually must. The US still cannot control the drug trade in its own country, so why would poorly trained, ill equipped and unmotivated Afghan regulars be able to enforce poppy eradication in Helmand? The monetary incentives to grow poppy are just to great to ignore for poor Afghan farmers. The Pashtu’s would likely not welcome an Army of Tajiks and Hazarra’s monitoring their territory. Afghanistan is a very tribal country that is in no way like a state found in the Western Hemisphere. I think this is the biggest mental hurdle for Westerns to accept. Creating a traditional state that is found in the Western Hemisphere is an unrealistic goal for NATO in Afghanistan. The Europeans are already clamoring to get out of Afghanistan and once one country begins withdrawing their troops a flood of countries leaving Afghanistan will follow. The European political elite and the European people are not behind the Afghan mission. This is shown by European countries refusing to send troops to Southern Afghanistan, where the majority of the fighting takes place, and the refusal of any European country to send addition troops to Afghanistan for the Afghan surge. Obama is extremely popular in Europe and even his requests were met with inaction.

Unfortunately I think the Afghan surge was a purely political move by the Obama administration. They know that poppy production cannot be stopped by 17,000 addition troops and they know our NATO allies are wavering in their commitment to Afghanistan. We are holding on to the country solely for geopolitical advantage. The country is strategic located in the middle of Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and Iran. However, as a student of history, Afghanistan has been perennially difficult to subdue and mold to aspiring empires. The Russians, British, Chinese, Greeks, Indians, and Persians have at times throughout history tried to control the area and have all failed leading to vast expenditures and causalities bringing some of these empires down. America should not make this mistake. American involvement in overseas expeditions is a huge mistake in the 21st century. The gain in geopolitical advantage and natural resources is more than offset by financial loss, the militarization of foreign policy, the distortion of America’s image – American being perceived as an empire, not a benevolent state, and unnecessary military exposure to hostile powers. The US relies on the Russians to transport nonmilitary goods to Afghanistan, it relies on air bases in Kyrgyzstan – at great monetary costs – to transport military supplies, it relies on Pakistan airspace and seaports to transport military supplies, and more importantly in order for any modicum of success it relies on the people of Afghanistan to reject the Taliban, drug lords, and local warlords. On the latter point, the U.S. had dazzling military success, however, there is no way to ensure long term political success in the country without the support of the Afghan people. When the local populace does not support U.S. goals, victory turns into failure in the news, like Vietnam.
So what should be NATO goals in Afghanistan? To be continued…