Ashley J. Tellis explains why Pakistan must rethink its Afghanistan policies, or risk defeat
Irrespective of how the coming security transition in Afghanistan pans out, one country is on a surprising course to a major strategic defeat: Pakistan. Every foreseeable ending to the Afghan war today—continued conflict with the Taliban, restoration of Taliban control in the southern and eastern provinces, or a nationwide civil war—portends nothing but serious perils for Islamabad. But judging from Pakistan’s behavior, it appears as if this fact has eluded the generals in Rawalpindi.
Pakistan’s Enduring Aim
Ever since the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, Pakistan has had one simple strategic goal on its western frontier: ensuring that Afghanistan remains a stable but subordinate entity deferential to Pakistan’s sensitivities on all matters of national security. Such deference was sought for a host of reasons. Islamabad wanted a guarantee that Kabul would not reignite the dispute over the countries’ common border (the Durand Line) and would not seek to mobilize the region’s Pashtun populations in support of either absorption into Afghanistan or the creation of a new nation. The Pakistani leadership also aimed to ensure that Afghanistan would not enter into close geopolitical affiliations with other, more powerful countries, such as the United States or India, in order to increase Kabul’s autonomy from Islamabad.
Amid the chaos that emerged after the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, Pakistan settled on supporting the Afghan Taliban as its strategic instrument for securing Kabul’s compliance with its objectives. Although the Taliban were not always dependable surrogates on these matters, they appeared better than other Afghan rivals, and hence Islamabad—despite its denials—has stuck by them to this day.
Whatever the intended benefits of this strategy, it has alienated both the broader Afghan populace and the government in Kabul, which now views Pakistan as a habitually hostile neighbor. It has also undermined the U.S.-led international stabilization effort in Afghanistan, as well as hopes for a peaceful security transition—not to mention infuriating Washington, which now views Pakistan as a perfidious partner. And it has provoked heightened regional rivalry involving Afghanistan’s neighbors, especially Iran, India, the Central Asian republics, and Russia, all of whom are determined to prevent a Pakistani-supported Taliban takeover of Afghanistan.
Worst of all, Islamabad’s strategy promises to fundamentally undermine Pakistani security. Every one of the three possible outcomes of the Afghan security transition leaves Pakistan in a terrible place.
Photo Credit: ISAFmedia via Flickr
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Able Lawrence
The most durable solution to the Afghanistan Problem is to actually fulfill the aspirations of the majority of Pathans by creating a Pashtunistan. Pashtun majority regions in Pakistan also can be added to this. This way Pashtuns will get their wishes fulfilled and outsiders (of all kinds) would not have any legitimate interests left. Pakistan also will be freed of a lot of head ache. The remaining minority regions in Afghanistan can then accede to the neighbouring states (according to ethnicities) of Iran, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan Afghanistan, a hotchpotch of a state that cannot be governed by anyone other than a Genghis Khan will cease to exist as a state and a problem. Pashtuns devoid of any other ethnic rivals would have no option to unite and ponder their united future.
Girish
Pakistan sucks..!!
naik
Pakistan and Afghanistan are two-neighbor country in world but unfortunately, both did concentrate the real demand of people who want to peace and tranquility in the region. Today is a very past era and the people cannot derail easily. Therefore, thousands of people have killed for nothing and further people are being prepared to do so. So, kindly understand the demand of time and not waste billions of dollars for conspiracy one another and spend the amount only for the peace and reforms.
Naik Mohd Loralai Quetta Pakistan.
cruiser
can't expect anything, but pak-bashing from the indian stooge called Ashley tellis, the crap of an article doesn't need a re-look, except for pointing out to ashley that "haggling over transit fees" is already solved and there was no haggling over it from pakistan as your big daddy panneta made it out to be. so enjoy the humble pie
confused
Even if the analysis is considered correct, the article should note that the so-called 'international community' has much more to lose in each and every scenario, as long as they continue to malign and isolate Pakistan. Afghanistan is a land locked country which will always be dependent on Pakistan to link to the outside world, just as the NATO supplies are dependent on Pakistan keeping its routes open. I would also recommend the authors of such articles to not confuse 'Kabul' or 'Afghanistan' with the Northern Alliance. By giving a moral justification to NA rule you are ignoring the shameful slaughter of tens of thousands that they enacted the last time they were in power (prior to the Taliban government) and legitimizing the rule of a bunch of self obsessed warlords who will themselves begin an armed struggle between one another over the drug trade the very day NATO and the US exits from that country. The West needs to realize that it failed in Afghanistan, destabalized Pakistan in the process & intensified regional disharmony, unless of course, that was its aim from the start.
D’ard
By about 2017, there will be a Pashtunistan, Balochistan, Hazaristan(propped up by or annexed to Iran) , Greater Uzbekistan, Greater Tajikistan, a rump Punjab-istan and Sindh-istan but NO AFGHANISTAN and NO PAKISTAN !! Just like the cuurent CARs (Central Asian psuedo-Republics).
Sid
Utter nonsense! The whole article is based on 'assumptions' & conjecture as to what 'might' happen.. Various factors are thoroughly ignored by the author.. The issue of 'Pashtunistan' never came up when the Taliban ruled Kabul from 1994 till 2001.. To even bring up the topic of 'Pashtunistan' is evident of the author's ignorance of the realities on the ground where there is no enthusiasm for any type of 'Pashtunistan'.. Guess these type of authors have to make a career out of blabbering something to appear 'professional analyst'..
As for the 'other' states in the region trying to thwart pro-Pakistani Taliban govt in Kabul or their control over much of Afghanistan; the author again ignores, that all such options have already been exercised by countries like India, Iran & others from 1994-2001 with little or no success.. The Northern Alliance saturated Karzai puppet regime that governs Afghanistan today is nothing but a benevolence of America & ISAF..
The author also 'assumes' that Karzai or his stooges will remain in power post-withdrawal era.. The puppet Karzai regime is but a house of cards ready to fall down when the general population has lost complete belief in the corrupt system that exists today and when the rag-tag Afghan armed forces melt away in the face of Taliban onslaught when US & ISAF troops aren't there to babysit them..
The only country heading towards defeat in Afghanistan is the United States of America.. Pakistan gains most when the western troops propping up a failed artificial regime in Afghanistan leave..