Sunday, July 11, 2010

two views on solving af-pak: 1. partition afghan, 2. balkanize pak

jul 10th, 2010

it is clear that the source of the problem is pakistan, not afghanistan. so here are two views on how to fix things, although in effect they converge on one idea -- reducing the power and geographic reach of the ISI:

1. from former us ambassador to india robert blackwill: divide afghan, in effect bring back the pre-2001 status quo with the northern alliance and the taliban with their zones of influence. this is an explicit admission that the US entry into af-pak has been futile, despite $300 billion and thousands of dead western troops.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=AACEE164-18FE-70B2-A8E30566E50DFB3A

The Obama administration's counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan seems headed for failure. Given the alternatives, de facto partition of Afghanistan is the best policy option available to the United States and its allies.

After the administration's December Afghanistan review, the U.S. polity should stop talking about timelines and exit strategies and accept that the Taliban will inevitably control most of its historic stronghold in the Pashtun south. But Washington could ensure that north and west Afghanistan do not succumb to jihadi extremism, using U.S. air power and special forces along with the Afghan army and like-minded nations.

Enthusiasts for the administration's counterinsurgency strategy, or COIN, are likely to reject this way forward in Afghanistan. They will rightly point out the many complexities in implementing de facto partition.

De facto partition is clearly not the best outcome one can imagine for the United States in Afghanistan. But it is now the best outcome that Washington can achieve consistent with vital national interests and U.S. domestic politics.

There are many reasons for this.

Even if President Barack Obama adds a year or two to his timeline for major progress, the COIN strategy appears unlikely to succeed. Given the number of U.S. combat forces now fighting, the Taliban cannot be sufficiently weakened in Pashtun Afghanistan to drive it to the negotiating table on any reasonable timeline. True, the Afghan Pashtun are not a unified group. But they do agree on opposing foreign occupation and wanting Pashtun supremacy.

... deleted

2. from the huffington post on how the imaginary homeland pakistan is a chimera that is sustained only by the scheming ISI whose main motivation is self-aggrandizement. splitting it up into pashtun, baluch and sindhi nations would be a step in the right direction.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-hughes/balkanizing-pakistan-a-co_b_635950.html

Breaking Pakistan to Fix It
The argument for Balkanizing Pakistan or, more specifically, fragmenting the Islamic Republic so it's easier to police and economically develop, has been on the table since Pakistan's birth in 1947 when the country was spit out of a British laboratory. And lately, the concept is looking more appealing by the day, because as a result of flawed boundaries combined with the nexus between military rule and Islamic extremism, Pakistan now finds itself on a rapid descent toward certain collapse and the country's leaders stubbornly refuse to do the things required to change course. But before allowing Pakistan to commit state suicide, self-disintegrate and further destabilize the region, the international community can beat them to the punch and deconstruct the country less violently.

To quell any doubts about Pakistan's seemingly uncontrollable spiral into darkness, just recently, Foreign Policy Magazine ranked Pakistan as the tenth most failed state on earth and it would seem its leaders are hell bent on securing the number one slot - an honor it can add to their already dubious distinction as the world's largest incubator of jihadist extremism. Afghanistan will never see peace or prosperity with a neighbor like Pakistan and the U.S. will always be threatened by terrorist plots spawned in Pakistan's lawless regions - like the most recent Times Square bombing.

The most popular approach to fragmentation is to break off and allow Afghanistan to absorb Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which would unite the Pashtun tribes. In addition, the provinces of Balochistan and Sindh would become independent sovereign states, leaving Punjab as a standalone entity.

... deleted


3 comments:

Anonymous said...

....and,of course, India will be completely unaffected by whatever comes to pass in it's own backyard.
Think again!

sansk said...

seemingly good until you get to think about it.
Does cutting a cancerous tumour into two (and still leaving it inside his body)is good for the patient ?

Even a small number of motivated islamists can become cancerous danger to any non-islamist society.

So, until this is resolved, balkanization/break up of any muslim nation won't help.

san said...

Strongly disagree - Pak needs to be broken up, in order to stop its harassment of its neighbors.

I can't picture any situation where the breakup of Pak harms India. Breakup of Pak is the best thing that can happen to India, along with breakup of China.

Once Pak is broken up, then we will be much more evenly matched against China. They will no longer be able to harass us like before. I'm sure they're reading such articles with dismay.