Afghanistan: A View From Moscow [latest]

[nightcrawler]

I cannot embed the document here so visit here
DefenceDog: Afghanistan: A View From Moscow
Some abstracts.

*
What the Russians discovered in the mountains of the Hindu Kush was, above all, the power of militant Islam. They also saw the limits of reforming a traditional society and the impossibility of imposed modernization. They came to appreciate the intricacies of tribal society. They had to discount the power of military force relative to the power of the purse, and the power of the purse relative to the power of religious beliefs and tribal customs
*
Unlike the situation in Iraq—where the U.S. and coalition forces were essentially caught in the cross-fire of a Sunni versus Shi’i civil war—in Afghanistan, the Western powers are a party in a domestic conflict, just as the Soviets were in the 1980s, and the insurgents are fighting under the banner of Islam.
*
The idea of domesticating Islamist radicals is deeply flawed. They cannot be bought. They cannot be held to agreements that start impinging on their interests. They can be manipulated, but not for long. At the end of the day they will disappoint their would-be minders. However, there might be a way to divert their energies toward safer and more productive channels.
*
Pakistan is an even more complex society than Afghanistan

*
It does not have sufficient confidence in the solidity of the Central Asian regimes or in its own capacity to insulate the region from the influence of a victorious Taliban
*
Central Asian countries do not want to be seen as Moscow’s clients; their refusal to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia richly attests to that
*
Even though a number of senior Russians would privately like to see the United States fail in Afghanistan and join the Soviet Union and Britain in that “graveyard of empires,” pragmatic Russian leaders realize that a Western defeat in Afghanistan would result in a rise of radicalism, which they themselves could not contain.
*
it hopes to win a measure of political influence, mostly to ensure that others do not use Afghanistan against Russian interests, including economic ones.
*
However, the more recent intensification of fighting in Afghanistan and the need to enhance U.S/NATO forces there, which Russia basically supports, is at odds with its desire to remove the U.S. military from Central Asia
*
Moscow clearly feels its position in Central Asia is challenged by others, above all by the United States, which it regards as the Other
*
The rise of China has challenged Russia’s position in Central Asia even more massively, fundamentally, and permanently than America’s insertion into the region.
*
Pakistan has the most keys to help resolve the problem of governance in Afghanistan, and it has the most incentive: It suffers more from Afghan instability than any other country. Pakistan acquiesces in following the U.S. policy course, but has no confidence in the effectiveness of the policy.
*
For Moscow, Pakistan had long been its principal adversary’s accomplice. Pakistan served as a base for U.S. intelligence operations against the Soviet Union and, most crucially, was the main base for the Afghan resistance to the Soviet forces in Afghanistan, as well as the conduit for international aid to them. Russia, however, cannot afford to ignore a nuclear-armed Pakistan with a population that has recently topped Russia’s own. Careful not to spoil its relationship with India, Russia has been maintaining and even expanding contacts with the Pakistani government and military. Yet the Russians realize they have little knowledge and even less influence as far as Pakistan’s internal dynamics are concerned. They see Pakistan as a ward of America and China and hope that, in extremis, those two powers will prevent the worst outcome: a “nuclear meltdown.”
*
Afghanistan is also a bargaining chip in Russia’s wider relations with the United States.

 

[muse]

What the Russians discovered in the mountains of the Hindu Kush was, above all, the power of militant Islam. They also saw the limits of reforming a traditional society and the impossibility of imposed modernization. They came to appreciate the intricacies of tribal society. They had to discount the power of military force relative to the power of the purse, and the power of the purse relative to the power of religious beliefs and tribal customs
*
Unlike the situation in Iraq—where the U.S. and coalition forces were essentially caught in the cross-fire of a Sunni versus Shi’i civil war—in Afghanistan, the Western powers are a party in a domestic conflict, just as the Soviets were in the 1980s, and the insurgents are fighting under the banner of Islam.

Excellent, spot on BTW a good number of US and "allied" officers realize this, but this realization is no match for policies which are in effect ideology over experience -- Which American is willing to accept that "Western powers are party to a domestic conflict", something we have been trying to explain to them for years and years -- perhaps there is a method to their madness??

They also saw the limits of reforming a traditional society and the impossibility of imposed modernization

.

Of course some Afghans never tire of saying that women in kabul wore mini-skirts in the 60's and early 70's, as if two streets in a city of 200,000 represented the country or that the totality of enlightened, humane and modern society is encapsulated in Western dress for women - monkey see monkey do -- Even now US policy makers and decisions on the ground are too often colored by notions such as "they are just like us", as if their humanity were a revelation.

Poor US, so many unintended consequences, so much good will, so many good intentions paving the road to ....

 

[Joe Shearer]

The USSR, back then, the USA, then and now, to some extent, but the least of all, Pakistan, and to some extent, in between the former great powers and Pakistan, the Chinese: all four of them make a single mistake about the situation.

There are no passive players in the region. Each player has the capacity to act. No country is so supine and powerless as to be helpless in front of a strong opponent. Resistance was delayed, but inevitable. So:

• Afghanistan was NOT available to Moscow to play at social engineering.
• Afghanistan was NOT available to Washington to play sidekick.
• Afghanistan was NOT going to roll over and play dead when Pakistan tried to capture its decision-making.
• Afghanistan is UNLIKELY in the extreme to give Pakistan pain, just because India might be pleased at the thought.
• And, above all, Afghanistan is unlikely to allow the Chinese to rape it for its natural wealth.

The same calculus applies to Central Asian countries, ESPECIALLY in the context of Chinese interest.

This creates a very interesting situation, and a very complex one. Things will not go the way analysts and pundits think, and frankly, I suspect that the fifty-year prospect for south and central Asia is quite different from what people have seen so far in their crystal balls.

 

[muse]

I suspect that the fifty-year prospect for south and central Asia is quite different from what people have seen so far in their crystal balls.

indeed, do tell.

 

[nightcrawler]

...& nowhere in the whole article I have seen an fragment of USSR notion at capturing Pakistan. Sad our forefathers had started a war which we are fighting ...to be killed

 

[r3alist]

Poor US, so many unintended consequences, so much good will, so many good intentions paving the road to ....

you are too generous, more like too much self importance, too many notions of american destiny/exceptionalism and you can throw delusions of god like power into the mix as well

 

[muse]

you are too generous, more like too much self importance, too many notions of american destiny/exceptionalism and you can throw delusions of god like power into the mix as well

Must admit that you have that right.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

while our society is complex and highly diverse, very silly to compare it to Afghanistan where there is weak social fabric. Ours is a much more united country --ethnically and otherwise. Politically, there are divisions but that isnt due to ethnicity but upbringing and in some cases economic interest.

supporting the mujahideen was a noble cause in 1980s, to rid the region from communist aggression. It was a noble mission, a noble cause. We shouldnt regret it nor should we ever apologize for it.

post soviet Afghanistan and the inaction that ensued is what has led to some of the problems we are facing today....given the factionalization of Afghanistan and the stakes involved, everyone with different strategic objectives supports different groups. They all have blood on their hands. But when a national security and strategic interests are concerned, you have to be willing to deal with people whose record(s) may not be clean --and in the case of Afghanistan --will likely NOT be clean or fully washed.

 

[Watani]

Of course some Afghans never tire of saying that women in kabul wore mini-skirts in the 60's and early 70's, as if two streets in a city of 200,000 represented the country or that the totality of enlightened, humane and modern society is encapsulated in Western dress for women

North of Afghanistan in particular has been very open to changes, modernisation, etcetera. The problems have always been the tribal southern areas who saw modernisation a threat to Islam in Afghanistan. And a very great example of it is the rejected former leader Amanullah Khan who could have changed the history, present AND future of our country. Unfortunately, some people will never learn. And very unfortunately, that's the fear I carry about tribal Afghans.

while our society is complex and highly diverse, very silly to compare it to Afghanistan where there is weak social fabric. Ours is a much more united country --ethnically and otherwise.

Afghanistan once was a very united nation, maybe for except some political idiots. You would hardly identify a Pashtun or Tajik in Kabul, or a Tajik or Uzbak in Mazar, for example. Even today it's by far not as bad as people make out of it, but it's a huge HUGE shame that we ruined our unity of nearly three centuries for the sake of something very pathetic as 'politics'.

supporting the mujahideen was a noble cause in 1980s, to rid the region from communist aggression. It was a noble mission, a noble cause. We shouldnt regret it nor should we ever apologize for it.

The problem is that those Mujahideen were even supported before Afghan-Russian war in which I see no noble cause whatsoever. Whether you regret or not is your own choice, but then there should be no regrets regarding millions of Afghan refugees, Taliban expansion into Pakistan, political enmity between both countries, etcetera either since these all came as a result. No?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

North of Afghanistan in particular has been very open to changes, modernisation, etcetera. The problems have always been the tribal southern areas who saw modernisation a threat to Islam in Afghanistan. And a very great example of it is the rejected former leader Amanullah Khan who could have changed the history, present AND future of our country. Unfortunately, some people will never learn. And very unfortunately, that's the fear I carry about tribal Afghans.

my father used to go from Parachinar to Kabul as they had movie theatres, dance halls etc.
they were good and happier days....more innocent too, less political.

people could be a bit more ''human''

in those days Pakistan was also a rising star though we had no cinemas in our country at the time.

problem is not tribalism. Tribals always set aside differences and united especially during times of war. Problem is the inter-ethnic rivalries and suspicion. Educated, like-minded people like yourself must work hard and reverse this trend. I have faith in people like you.

Afghanistan once was a very united nation, maybe for except some political idiots. You would hardly identify a Pashtun or Tajik in Kabul, or a Tajik or Uzbak in Mazar, for example. Even today it's by far not as bad as people make out of it, but it's a huge HUGE shame that we ruined our unity of nearly three centuries for the sake of something very pathetic as 'politics'.

we pray for your success....contrary to popular belief and propaganda, Pakistan supports a unified and stable Afghanistan. A progressive one. And one that recognizes and respects the borders and would like to work towards prosperity of the people on the ground.

The problem is that those Mujahideen were even supported before Afghan-Russian war in which I see no noble cause whatsoever. Whether you regret or not is your own choice, but then there should be no regrets regarding millions of Afghan refugees, Taliban expansion into Pakistan, political enmity between both countries, etcetera either since these all came as a result. No?

it was a huge cost to pay
mistakes were made...we made also mistakes I think.

the enemy at the time was soviets...but now biggest enemy is dis-unity and 'religious' motivated extremism. It has afflicted both countries --and the region. Other problem is Uzbekistan where all the extremist-leaning people and their sympathisers have been driven out like cattle and now stirring up trouble elsewhere.


my question to you -- what solution do you have to end the factionalization, drugs issue and corruption in Afghanistan? What steps can Pakistan take to help, and how can we secure the restive rugged long border between our countries

 

[Watani]

^ As long as there is corruption in Afghanistan and as long as warlords keep eating money of the poor, drugs problem is endless. As impossible as it sounds, Afghans need to raise against warlords more than anyone else because THIS is the time we get help from many countries and this much money is never going to flow into Afghanistan again, ever! Afghanistan isn't an EXTREMELY poor country, warlords and 'foreign aid workers' snatched our money and keep doing it until and unless they aren't stopped. Unity, prosperity, education will all come once we permanently get rid of both Taliban and NA as both are cancer to the country, neighbouring country's relationships, and national unity. They are the leftovers of the disaster we faced past few decades, and they are also the MAIN cause of it.

Another solution which COULD benefit both countries is a very, very tight security on both sides of the border. Pakistan won't be accused of terrorism in Afghanistan and Afghanistan won't be accused of terrorism in Pakistan, and finally both nations can look deeper into their own problems and sort it out. Again the problem there is that we got thousands of Pashtun families on both sides of the border who will not allow the borders to be fenced even over their dead body and nor make an ID card in order to visit their 'second home', which is very reasonable from their side. Afghans and Pakistani families visit back and forth daily, trucks with goods come into Afghanistan daily. No matter how much a Pakistani may want to ditch Afghanistan, no matter how much Afghanistan may want to ditch Pakistan, a die hard fact is that we both CANNOT ignore eachother. We have been involved with eachother so much that even bigger foolishness will be to completely ignore eachother. Both countries should politically be very wary of eachother, but personally we need to get along and accept the reality that especially the border areas are culturally, linguistically, and naturally inseparable. So only thing Pakistan can do is, as individuals, get to learn Afghans and Afghanistan as individuals rather than in political perspective. As long as we keep speaking politics, we will never get along. Never.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

can we sticky your post......couldnt agree with you more

well said, sir, well said.

 

[nightcrawler]

@
Watani; good post ...& I thought there was no internet in Afghanistan...silly me

@ Zolfiqar; how can we amend this??

For Moscow, Pakistan had long been its principal adversary’s accomplice. Pakistan served as a base for U.S. intelligence operations against the Soviet Union and, most crucially, was the main base for the Afghan resistance to the Soviet forces in Afghanistan, as well as the conduit for international aid to them. Russia, however, cannot afford to ignore a nuclear-armed Pakistan with a population that has recently topped Russia’s own. Careful not to spoil its relationship with India, Russia has been maintaining and even expanding contacts with the Pakistani government and military. Yet the Russians realize they have little knowledge and even less influence as far as Pakistan’s internal dynamics are concerned. They see Pakistan as a ward of America and China and hope that, in extremis, those two powers will prevent the worst outcome: a “nuclear meltdown.”

look the wording adversary’s accomplice as compared to adversary alone

 

[muse]

Many have begun using the Tet offensive analogy with regard to events in Afghanistan, that is to say the beginning of the end -- And it's interesting how the Northern Alliance and it's sponsors have chosen to react, increasingly, it seems that these forces are being fed information that suggests they no longer see the US in the same terms as they once did and think that simply talking to the Talib is unacceptable (of course this was the Indian line, but this is changing) so the threat now is that should the Talib ever be rehabilitated, then perhaps Afghanistan as it is understood today will also come to an end and multiple state like entities can replace it -- this would be a disaster for Pakistani policy planners and perhaps that in itself will ensure that US occupation continues