Home > Afghanistan and Pakistan > Ahmed Rashid: US can succeed where USSR failed

Ahmed Rashid: US can succeed where USSR failed

In a lengthy essay in The National, an Abu Dhabi-based English-language daily, Afghan author Ahmed Rashid writes that the U.S., despite failures during the Bush administration, can still find victory in Afghanistan.

Rashid has an interesting point of view: As he narrates at the start of the essay, he was in Kandahar in 1979 when the Soviets began shelling. But he says the Soviet apparatus was far too backward and positively antique to effectively meet the challenges it faced in Afghanistan.

Barack Obama has pledged to withdraw US troops from Iraq while stepping up the American commitment in Afghanistan. He has yet to fully flesh out the policy he will pursue, but seems to understand that what is required is a “comprehensive surge” that goes beyond new troops and new tactics to increase and coordinate development and reconstruction, provide security to the Afghan people and embark on a diplomatic initiative to bring Afghanistan’s multiple meddling neighbours together to stabilise the country and end the sanctuary the Taliban still enjoy in Pakistan. Obama has appointed a special envoy to the region, the seasoned senior diplomat Richard Holbrooke, and has begun to get tough with the Karzai government over corruption and the drugs trade.

The Bush administration lacked an overarching strategy for Afghanistan and its neighbours, and Obama does not want to repeat that mistake. He has already announced orders to close the prison at Guantanamo Bay and he will soon make a historic speech in a Muslim capital, where he is likely to repudiate Bush’s “global war on terror” and announce a policy of talking to militant groups, including the Taliban, while continuing the pursuit of global jihadists. Bush left regional diplomacy largely in the hands of the Pentagon, while Obama will restore the role of the State Department. Several senior administration officials have acknowledged that they cannot “shoot their way to victory” in Afghanistan.

—David Graham, Trinity ’09 and editor

  1. bruce lawrence
    February 6, 2009 at 8:04 am

    Just came from a Harvard seminar where all folks on hand, with crimson ties aflutter, agreed that Afghanistan may be even tougher than Palestine to solve, and perhaps long run even more crucial.

    Why? Afghanistan links to Kashmir, links to the faultine between impoverished, disenfranchised, mostly Muslim South Asians and their neighbors, who happen to be non-Muslim surfers on a rising tide of global prosperity – temporarily flattening but not long term likely to stay flat.

    In short, they see the political-diplomatic end game through the economic, and perceptual, lens of asymmetry in resources and opportunities defined, then projected in religious terms, us vs. them, Muslims against the rest, etc.

    It’s not a hopeful analysis but it does have more than a grain of truth.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: