Afghanistan Post-2014 Open discussion.

[RAW007]

My opinion is that FATA region must go to Afghanistan but KPK may remain with Pakistan.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

My opinion is that FATA region must go to Afghanistan but KPK may remain with Pakistan.

and in my opinion assam hyderabad and indian punjab should be independent

no one asked for your opinion

 

[Armstrong]

There is a serious policy discussion being undertaken by the political elites in Kabul and the narrative is what I have summarized earlier.
Now we need to be objective about the Durand Line as must Pakistan be about Kashmir, the ground realities point to facts that there is no going back, the sooner the region realize the sooner we can move forward.
The same goes for Pakistan, the sooner it realizes that Kashmir is now an integral part of India the sooner it can move forward.
What matters most for Afghanistan is that it under no circumstances wants to be a battle ground for regional rivalries anymore.

The question still being asked by Afghans is whether the Durand Line and the perceived Indian influence is the pinnacle of Pakistani paranoia towards Afghanistan? Afghan diplomats report that on several occasions Pakistani counterparts told them that their sphere of influence goes on to Salang mountain pass. If that is the thinking then will Pakistan be ever satisfied?


Furthermore the question still stands to the ability the of the Pakistani civilian government whether then can force the hawks in the military to buy into this kind of setup?

Kashmir is a separate matter altogether it & the Durand Line issue has no similarities whatsoever so let us not even attempt to draw analogies there.

What you should tell your Afghan Diplomats is that Pakistan was the country that extended a hand of friendship to Afghanistan in '48 & yet your Diplomats & the Government in charge rebuffed it in an extremely condescending way & even opposed our entry into the United Nations; incidentally the only Nation to do so & the one we considered our Muslim Brethren.

From Faqir of Ipi's campaign's against the Pakistani Forces to the Bajaur Invasion of the '60s, from the Baluch Separatists finding refuge in Afghanistan in '48 to the Baluch Separatists finding refuge in Afghanistan in 2013 & from the Pashtunistan Issue being whipped up in '48 to under your Communist Regime - We have been on the receiving end of Afghan Hospitality for the past 65 years.

Please keep that in mind before your Diplomats cry foul off Pakistan's support for the Afghan Taliban.

Pakistan wants nothing more than friendly relations with a Muslim Majority Country like Afghanistan that we've been bound with bonds of brotherhood due to a common faith, history & a common culture & language between our Pukhtoons & your Pukhtoons.

What we want is that you keep your Salang Pass but also have the courtesy of ceasing to think about a Loy Afghanistan & seeing that Khyber Pass as your own !

Both the Pakistani Civilian & Military Apparatus are of one-mind in this !

Don't stoke up the Pukhtoonistan Issue !

Don't host Baluch Separatists !

If you want whole hosts of your country to be ruled by Warlords (as it happened in the '90s & compelled Pakistan into action) then ensure that none of them are used as Proxies against Pakistan !

Have the best of relations with any country on the face of the Earth but don't let your land be used to destabilize us !

If you do that, both the Pakistan Military & the Civilian Executive, would want nothing more than reciprocity to set in with both you & us living in peace as good neighbors & inshallah, when the decades of acrimony have gone past, perhaps as Brothers.

 

[A-Team]

I'd like to answer this thread without predictions of what will or will not happen but with salient facts and in certain cases how these facts compare to similar facts in other nations such as Pakistan.

1. There is currently 30%-40% unemployment in Afghanistan - this is chronic
2. The Soviets left a 400,000 strong security apparatus that was much more capable than today's ANA - I'd encourage you to study the order of battle of the Afghan Air force the Soviets left behind - pretty impressive
3. The Afghans have a far more anemic base of technocrats when compared with Pakistan - An anecdotal comparison is of the number of engineering and technical professionals found in Pakistani Diaspora vs. say Afghan Diaspora: how many Afghan engineers, doctors, etc. do you know? - compare that to Pakistanis
4. The Afghans have a very anemic higher education system - just consider Pakistan's engineering and technical colleges: NUST, UETs, GIK, LUMS, etc. Afghanistan has not been able to build a single university that is remotely as capable (I would encourage you to read my comments at the bottom of the article on foreign policy
5. Afghanistan has a society that has been bathed in almost 40 years of war
6. Afghanistan (at least according to Afghans) has a significant neighbor (Pakistan) with whom tensions are escalating and will probably continue to escalate with Pakistan taking significant countermeasure (to quote General Stanley McChrystal)
7. Markets are amongst the greatest predictors of futures: The Afghan refugees in Pakistan don't seem to be rushing to claim their piece of the Afghan Gold rush, because one simply will not exist (the prefer to persist in Pakistan which itself is a very troubled country)
8. Natural Resources in conflict ridden places tend to fall prey to the resource curse
9. The West is leaving - despite statements to the contrary the mood in the US, especially *inside the beltway* is one of hurried exit
10. The Afghan political process has not been able to evolve to a level that a modern state needs (compare this to Pakistan).
11. Given a choice between Pakistan and Afghanistan - the world will always choose Pakistan - simply because the prospects of a failed Pakistan are scary (they keep Obama up at night) - the prospects of a failed Afghanistan - sad but we have several Somalias in the world - what's one more

Now here is the bottom line:
.. Compare how Afghanistan stands in comparison to Pakistan
.. Pakistan is faring rather poorly to put it mildly
.. Now extrapolate that to how you expect Afghanistan to fare ... sadly the prognosis looks rather bleak

Under the tenure of Dr Najeebullah the Afghan army, the police and Khad numbered around 80K, plus militias from Dostum. The Afghan state collapsed not because the Mujahedeen defeated them on the battlefield but because the Soviet Union changed gears and stopped funding Dr Najeeb’s regime, which I don’t see the West doing to Afghanistan now. As a matter of fact the all out Mujahedeen attack, orchestrated by the likes of Hamid Gul met a crashing defeat in Jalalabad. Please do keep in mind that the Mujahedeen facing the Dr Najeeb’s government were more formidable comparing to the Talibs of today.

What differentiates Afghanistan for today from the one in the 1990s is that Afghans have tasted the bitter memories of the civil war, the rule of the Taliban, the destruction of their cities and social fabric, they under no circumstance want to go back. The 10 years rule of President Karzai although not perfect but has provided the Afghans with a breathing space where they have access to the Internet, over 30 TV stations, over 100 radio stations. There over 10,000 young Afghans abroad pursuing Bachelors, Masters and PhD, they have seen the world, are well connected and use Facebook and Twitter. This phenomenal shift although seldom discussed in the media has a tremendous effect on the Afghan psyche.

In short there is no going back for Afghanistan back to dark days of the Taliban or the Civil war, the sooner the region realizes the better. Afghans are willing to head to the legitimate demands of the neighbors but will not bow down or let go of the achievements that they have made over the last 10 years.
Remember neighbors may think that they have all the cards but they forget that they are also burning in the very fire that they have so well made.

Bottom line, the perspective of the Afghan side has been laid clearly and the ball is in the court of the neighbors to decide what kind of Afghanistan they want to see, a friendly Afghanistan or an Afghanistan ruled by chaos which in the end will burn you too.

 

[A-Team]

Lets not discuss the past for both your country and mine has a poor track record. You talk about the Ballouch and the TTP operating from Afghanistan and forget that Fata is currently the HQ for global terror infrastructure which has carried out over 700 sucided bombings in Afghanistan and has killed thousands over the last 10 years, bottom line lets put the history to the books and find a solution that can get your country and mine out of this mess.

As said we are willing to head to your legitimate demands and we expect that you do the same. Fair ?

 

[pakistani342]

Lets not discuss the past for both your country and mine has a poor track record. You talk about the Ballouch and the TTP operating from Afghanistan and forget that Fata is currently the HQ for global terror infrastructure which has carried out over 700 sucided bombings in Afghanistan and has killed thousands over the last 10 years, bottom line lets put the history to the books and find a solution that can get your country and mine out of this mess.

As said we are willing to head to your legitimate demands and we expect that you do the same. Fair ?

I think you are making the mistake of conflating two very separate classes of issues:
1. What should be done, what is right, what is fair, what is moral what will benefit everyone, etc.
2. What is achievable, what is realistically possible, what type institutional change is possible, etc.

The AfPak reality, sadly is:
1. The Pakistani deep state seems to be convinced that an Afghanistan under an administration that emerges from the current set up will be strategically detrimental to Pakistani Interests - this seems to be the overwhelming consensus on all sides of the debate

2. The Pakistani deep state seems convinced that a Power sharing formula - similar to the one in Lebanon is probably the most advantageous to its interests over the near to mid term (10 years) where the taliban are one party in the Afghan dispensation

3. The Pakistani deep state seems convinced (and rightly so) that these strategic partnerships Afghanistan is signing will not be worth the paper they are written on - in the realm of realpolitik Afghanistan matters not as long as it does not pose an security threat to the West - and it seems that the West thinks a counter Terrorism approach is best suited to achieving that - the 9 to 12 bases that the West may maintain post 2014 will not be used under any circumstance to help the Afghans settle scores against Pakistan - the sooner Afghans understand this the better

4. It also seems that the Pakistani deep state seems to think that the level of insurgence due to the TTP and Baluchistan is one they can tolerate at the moment and is not an existential threat - no matter what the public pronouncements are -

5. It does not seem that the Afghan Taliban are willing to play by the new democratic playbook - and as long as they find willing patrons amongst the Pakistani deep state the prospect of turning Afghanistan into a regional roundabout is a non-starter

Given the above - no matter what is right, what is prosperous, what is moral will remain out of reach for Afghanistan.

 

[pakistani342]

Under the tenure of Dr Najeebullah the Afghan army, the police and Khad numbered around 80K, plus militias from Dostum.

I'll have to research this - I probably misunderstood a piece I read recently which I though seemed to indicate that the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan had a security force roughly 400,000 strong - I'll withdraw this assertion for now.

However at the same time there seems to be an overwhelming consensus that the forces of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan were far more capable that what will be ready by 2014 - as I said I would encourage you to look at the structure of just the Afghan Air Force.

Another fact that people ignore is that the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan's institutions and security forces were the culminations of decades of modernization and peace - what you have today was put together with 2 generations lost to war - Afghanistan simply does not have the technical base to build modern institutions and will not have so for possibly another 40 years (see Rory Stewart)

The Afghan state collapsed not because the Mujahedeen defeated them on the battlefield but because the Soviet Union changed gears and stopped funding Dr Najeeb’s regime, which I don’t see the West doing to Afghanistan now. As a matter of fact the all out Mujahedeen attack, orchestrated by the likes of Hamid Gul met a crashing defeat in Jalalabad. Please do keep in mind that the Mujahedeen facing the Dr Najeeb’s government were more formidable comparing to the Talibs of today.

Even if your points are correct - they are wholly irrelevant to your original assertion - one which outlined how Afghanistan can secure itself against Pakistan and achieve prosperity.

For that to happen the Afghan government needs to dominate the geographic, political, economic spaces - the insurgents simply have to deny space - which they have done when the West's support and interest was at its peak and Pakistan's patronage of the insurgents relatively restrained.

What differentiates Afghanistan for today from the one in the 1990s is that Afghans have tasted the bitter memories of the civil war, the rule of the Taliban, the destruction of their cities and social fabric, they under no circumstance want to go back. The 10 years rule of President Karzai although not perfect but has provided the Afghans with a breathing space where they have access to the Internet, over 30 TV stations, over 100 radio stations. There over 10,000 young Afghans abroad pursuing Bachelors, Masters and PhD, they have seen the world, are well connected and use Facebook and Twitter. This phenomenal shift although seldom discussed in the media has a tremendous effect on the Afghan psyche.

Look these are all good pronouncements but they don't hold any water.

In my first post I asked you to compare Afghanistan to Pakistan which is in a different class. Despite that Pakistan is doing very poorly ... so by analogy Afghanistan will fare far worse.

Onto specifics:
1. " Afghans have tasted the bitter memories ya da ya da" - seriously, the corrupt government, the insurgency? Wishing very hard for something will not make it come true
2. There over 10,000 young Afghans abroad pursuing Bachelors, Masters and PhD -- for people to pursue higher education they must have had a sold primary education, there must be good universities - the number might be true but I ask you to question what are these people studying ? I again encourage you to go look at AUAF - it is a typical example of how things stand - I will copy paste my comments at the bottom of this post

In short there is no going back for Afghanistan back to dark days of the Taliban or the Civil war, the sooner the region realizes the better. Afghans are willing to head to the legitimate demands of the neighbors but will not bow down or let go of the achievements that they have made over the last 10 years.
Remember neighbors may think that they have all the cards but they forget that they are also burning in the very fire that they have so well made.

Bottom line, the perspective of the Afghan side has been laid clearly and the ball is in the court of the neighbors to decide what kind of Afghanistan they want to see, a friendly Afghanistan or an Afghanistan ruled by chaos which in the end will burn you too.

Look I don't know how old you are - or if you have seen how institutions and the world works - and I don't know if you realize - someone like myself is on your side - I want Afghans to be prosperous, I want Pakistan not to interfere in Afghanistan (and vice-a-versa) and that your pomegranate trees bloom and the gardens of Paghman enchant again - however you cannot simply wish this to happen.

Again think, we in Pakistan have much more of everything you have yet we are in such a sorry state.

here are my comments on AUAF:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whitney Grespin has done a commendable job writing a puff piece on the American University in Afghanistan titled "A diamond in the rough"l you can read it here.

I felt that there are important gaps in her article which I've tried to highlight below:

After reading this article I took a quick sojourn to AUAF's site. As a layman I look at two things in a University to get first impressions - 1. The Faculty and 2. The Student Population. The website of AUAF does allow one to evaluate the Faculty. Here are a few quick notes:

1. The Business Faculty comprises 9 Faculty members. Out of which one is a Professor, one an Instructor, the rest are Assistant Professors.

2. Only one out of the 9 Business Faculty members has an Afghan sounding name the rest appear (by name to be Foreigners and primarily Americans.).

3. Out of the 9 Business Faculty members only 5 have PhDs (though all from decent institutions)

4. The English and Humanities Department has 16 Faculty members, out of which 9 appear to support the English as a second language program (ESL); None appear to be Afghan and only 2 appear to have PhDs

5. The Information Technology and Computer Science department has 5 Faculty members, out which 4 are full time, none of the full time Faculty have PhDs, none of the full time faculty appear to be Afghan (unless you count the one Pakistani who might stand in for one), and surprisingly half seem to have degrees in Arts (MA, BFA, etc.)

6. The Department of Science and Mathematics has 12 teaching faculty (not counting the lab assistants) out of which 8 are full time, 7 have PhDs, surprisingly 7 appear to be Afghans

7. The Political Science and Law department has 10 faculty, 7 of whom are full-time, 4 who hold PhDs, 5 appear to be of Afghans

Looking at the faculty bios and some of the other stuff I was left with the following impressions:

1. It seems a lot of the faculty are shall we say helicoptered in and I have a feeling will helicopter out before long. One can’t really blame them for that - they are after all in Afghanistan.

2. AUAF’s current standing as nursery to provide the country with what I imagine is sorely needed engineering and technical talent seems dismal at best.

3. Now if we examine this in the context of AUAF being one of the premier institutions of higher learning in a nation of 30 million with a huge diaspora: dismal again is what comes to mind.

4. Now if we look at this in the perspective of over 600 billion dollars that have been pumped into this country: dismal is again what comes to mind.

5. But, for me the impression that was the starkest was: “Where are the Afghans?” and I think it is worth remembering that Afghanistan has one of the largest diaspora populations in the world, and especially in the West, many of whom have advanced degrees. It seems that Americans, Canadians, Australians and even Indians and Pakistanis seems far more invested in educating Afghans than the Afghans themselves who seem more interested in attending Galas.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Sedqal]

Accepting durand line is suicidal for any afgan ruler. The best they can do is say it in private to pakistani leadership.

These sayings in the private don't mean anything. IF Afghan govt proposes a thorough proposal which among other things also includes acceptance of Durand Line Pakistan should involve international bodies, local Pakhtoon political parties and everything else under the sun so the new status of Durand line is widely known.

If that happens public opinion will be against any adventurism from Pakistani side in Afghanistan. Which will have its impact on military decision making.

 

[pakistani342]

Under the tenure of Dr Najeebullah the Afghan army, the police and Khad numbered around 80K, plus militias from Dostum.

@A-Team -- here is an except from here

At its peak the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) numbered closed to 400,000 towards the end of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, with significant operational capabilities and equipment. This is close to the US-NATO target for ANSF post-2014.

Admittedly I have not checked out the guys references and he does do a good job of providing links at the bottom of the page - would be interested in seeing your resources that point to the contrary.

 

[Marwat Khan Lodhi]

I dont think taliban can co-exist peacefully with others in Afghanistan, others also wont tolerate the "terrorists".............A civil war is imminent............a long and non-resolving one.

 

[A-Team]

I think you are making the mistake of conflating two very separate classes of issues:
1. What should be done, what is right, what is fair, what is moral what will benefit everyone, etc.
2. What is achievable, what is realistically possible, what type institutional change is possible, etc.

The AfPak reality, sadly is:
1. The Pakistani deep state seems to be convinced that an Afghanistan under an administration that emerges from the current set up will be strategically detrimental to Pakistani Interests - this seems to be the overwhelming consensus on all sides of the debate

2. The Pakistani deep state seems convinced that a Power sharing formula - similar to the one in Lebanon is probably the most advantageous to its interests over the near to mid term (10 years) where the taliban are one party in the Afghan dispensation

.

I have been a bit slow in responding, been occupied lately

You sir have raised some interesting points and I commend you knowledge of the region, I will try to respond to some of your arguments.

When you talk of Lebanon-style setup then you give weight to the views of the hawks on the Afghan side, for instance Amrullah Saleh the ex-intelligence chief has been saying all along that Pakistan will not stop unless it has a Hezbullah type buffer in Afghanistan mainly in the Pashtoon built...if that is the case then we should say good bye to the good neighborly relations for good.

@A-Team -- here is an except from



Admittedly I have not checked out the guys references and he does do a good job of providing links at the bottom of the page - would be interested in seeing your resources that point to the contrary.

My figure is based on the first hand knowledge of several army generals who served in the higher echelons of Dr Najeeb's defense ministry .

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Accepting durand line is suicidal for any afgan ruler. The best they can do is say it in private to pakistani leadership.

Making it an issue when it really isn't one is a bigger suicide for them as they've learned

My opinion is that FATA region must go to Afghanistan but KPK may remain with Pakistan.

I hail from FATA region. Good luck finding any takers on that

 

[A-Team]

Although I can acknowledge some of your points but I don’t share your gloomy picture of the current state and the future of Afghanistan. To be frank Afghans are more concerned with corruption in the state apparatus than the Taliban, Afghans ask is why are we giving so much attention to a proxy group, make institutions stronger, focus on the economy and the Taliban will be irrelevant. Have you seen the reaction of the Afghan of the government and the civil society to the opening of the Taliban office, they think that peace talk is worth a shot but not at the expense of what we have achieved over the last 10 years.

I also don’t share your opinion that since Pakistan has more educational institutions and a better educated class and thus by default Afghanistan will fare worse, I say that the main problem that Pakistan is facing is actually self created, the psyche of Pakistani establishment is domination through proxies and that is back firing. I would also like to add that Afghans may have disagreements but at the core we are very united as a nation. We are a dirt poor country but even 30 years of war has not made Afghanistan divided, but can u say the same about Pakistan? Do u really think Pakistan will stand as one piece should a similar threat face it ?

Pakistani establishment knows very well that Afghanistan will not able to pose a conventional threat to Pakistan but they must realize the amount of hatred they are creating in the minds of the normal Afghans is just phenomenal and anyone if cornered will fight back.

In short the region will fare well if Pakistan starts working with the Afghan state and not proxies and thus a strong Afghan state will be able to negotiate and sell the idea of Durand Line (in addition to others) much better to the Afghan nation.

 

[Uzair Younus]

To understand a post-US scenario in Afghanistan, you must understand the history of that country. And by history, I do not mean the history from 1980 onwards. I am talking about the history of that country from the first colonial invasion by the British in the 19th century. Afghanistan is a country of tribes and has always needed strong leaders to unite it. When strong leaders die, rival tribes fight bitter wars to gain power. Today's Afghanistan, while united under the ANSF, is still a tribal and fractured land. The US will not have the money to bankroll this ANSF, which, in all estimates, requires a few billion dollars a year. Who will pay all this money? Afghanistan still has no industries or any real economy. The army will collapse eventually as there is no strong leadership visible on the horizon. In all likelihood, Afghanistan will continue to remain a fractured society and history will repeat itself.

 

[pakistani342]

When you talk of Lebanon-style setup then you give weight to the views of the hawks on the Afghan side, for instance Amrullah Saleh the ex-intelligence chief has been saying all along that Pakistan will not stop unless it has a Hezbullah type buffer in Afghanistan mainly in the Pashtoon built...if that is the case then we should say good bye to the good neighborly relations for good.

Again I think it is very important to separate facts and inferences from desirables:

1. On a Lebanon style formula:

a. like anything else it is difficult to predict if it will actually come to pass
b. However you can see how the vital signs of it being birthed:
i. There has been a lot of talk now in the beltway think tanks of some how accommodating the Taliban by giving them some provinces
ii. You can see news reports that Pakistan suggested it to the Afghan Ambassador (not even pretending anymore)
iii. You can see a lot of liberal writers fervently writing against such an accommodation
iv. You can see the Afghan Government being sidelined in the talks
v. You can see how Pakistan sees this as possibly the Least of the worst options available
vi. You can see that even India has recently changed tack - they probably see that it is a likely eventuality
vii. Plus, this arrangement has been tested (in Lebanon of course) seems like a workable arrangement
viii. As you have said, people like Amrullah Saleh, who at a tactical level is a very smart individual (tough completely unimaginative at the strategic level) are echoing the same thing

2. On: "we should say good bye to the good neighborly relations for good"
I think all this talk of bonhomie is just a *desirable* - Pakistan/Afghanistan have had an acrimonious relationship since the birth of Pakistan (arguably even under the Taliban) - and further acrimony does not seem to avoidable under any realistic scheme open to either Afghanistan or Pakistan.

My figure is based on the first hand knowledge of several army generals who served in the higher echelons of Dr Najeeb's defense ministry .

Yes, I must admit I don't have a good handle on this item - I am researching this though - however I still stand by my quantitative comments that I made in my earlier posts.