Comments on Frud Bezhan “Reconciliation plan unlikely to bring peace”, 23/07/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/reconciliation-plan-unlikely-to-bring-peace/story-e6frg6ux-1225895825085
I have little expertise in Afghanistan and the Taliban, to be blunt to start.
However, while you argue that the Taliban does not have popular supports, your third point to support your argument seems contradict and undermine your argument.
You appear inadvertently acknowledge that the Taliban may be better than some warlords, that indirectly implies that the Taliban may have some popular support in some regions.
One should not compare the Taliban with an ideal situation. Rather, one should take into the Afghanistan broad environment in which the Taliban operates into account when consider to do a deal or not with the Taliban.
Showing posts with label Afghanistan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Afghanistan. Show all posts
2010-07-23
2009-08-24
Rethink the Afghanistan strategy of the NATO forces
Comments on Amin Saikal “Afghanistan: a British nightmare?” 23/08/2009, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2009/08/23/afghanistan-a-british-nightmare/
The military and political reality in Afghanistan after a few years war led by the US with participation of NATO countries appears to suggest that the US led NATO forces strategies are ineffective and poorly targeted.
It is not right to turn almost the whole of a significant ethnic group into an enemy. The purest approach that the Taliban is all evil and should be destroyed needs to be evaluated carefully whether itself may be ethnic “cleansing” and reflects intolerance of another religion or a branch of a religion.
The objective of that war should be the overthrown of the Taliban from power and that has been achieved. While it is important to limit the hardline elements of the Taliban to export terrorism, the justice for destroy the Taliban completely is questionable at the least. It either has become or is in danger of becoming some sort of ideology.
If the Taliban, whether it is in Afghanistan or Pakistan, can stop its exports of terrorism and terrorists to other regions and do not engage in terrorism in their own regions, the war against them perhaps should be called off. If they do engage in terrorism or export it, then the international community can pursue a strategy to stop them from doing it.
It has been reported that the Afghanistan president has called for dialogue with the Taliban. If Afghanistan is willing to do that, why would the international community, supposed to help them, is not willing to do it? Does it indicate that the strategy by the NATO forces is contrary to what it says to help the Afghanistan?
The military and political reality in Afghanistan after a few years war led by the US with participation of NATO countries appears to suggest that the US led NATO forces strategies are ineffective and poorly targeted.
It is not right to turn almost the whole of a significant ethnic group into an enemy. The purest approach that the Taliban is all evil and should be destroyed needs to be evaluated carefully whether itself may be ethnic “cleansing” and reflects intolerance of another religion or a branch of a religion.
The objective of that war should be the overthrown of the Taliban from power and that has been achieved. While it is important to limit the hardline elements of the Taliban to export terrorism, the justice for destroy the Taliban completely is questionable at the least. It either has become or is in danger of becoming some sort of ideology.
If the Taliban, whether it is in Afghanistan or Pakistan, can stop its exports of terrorism and terrorists to other regions and do not engage in terrorism in their own regions, the war against them perhaps should be called off. If they do engage in terrorism or export it, then the international community can pursue a strategy to stop them from doing it.
It has been reported that the Afghanistan president has called for dialogue with the Taliban. If Afghanistan is willing to do that, why would the international community, supposed to help them, is not willing to do it? Does it indicate that the strategy by the NATO forces is contrary to what it says to help the Afghanistan?
2009-07-29
War in Afghanistan and strategy to defeat terrorists
Comments on David Miliband “Taliban can be beaten”, 29/07/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25849657-5013479,00.html
It is important to recognize the extreme complexity of ethnic, religious, historical and geographical situations of what is Afghanistan. It appears that from this complexity and from many historical lessons and / or experiences that at some stage national reconciliations will have to be given a prominent role in resolving the conflict in Afghanistan.
Foreign troops, mainly Western NATO troops, must have a workable definition of fighting and defeating terrorists and a clear and effective strategy to do it.
While it was understandable that the war the NATO troops engaged in Afghanistan to overthrow the former Taliban regime in power of Afghanistan, because it had harbored Al Qaeda, the main international terrorist group that was responsible for some major terrorist attacks worldwide including the 9/11. But even within that regime it was unlikely to be all the same and there could be different groups with different views, aims and objectives.
It is unlikely to be a correct policy to destroy all the people who may support Taliban, or some elements of the Taliban, like the Pashtuns. That may potentially be “ethnic cleansing”, or close to it.
For some time, the current Afghanistan government/president has called for reconciliations with the Taliban people, asking for dialogue with them. If the Western countries still refuse to accept or accommodate what the Afghanistans are asking, one would really wonder what the west what to do in Afghanistan.
The west must stabilize Afghanistan and contain potential threats from some elements within Afghanistan for international security. We must let Afghanistan people govern Afghanistan and work with them to achieve our objectives.
The Western forces have caused damages to the Taliban, but also paid a significant price. Even the military reality requires a strategic rethink of how to achieve peace and stability, as opposed to emotional revenge for the sake of ill defined military victory.
Unless we totally and thoroughly isolate the most extreme elements of extreme organisations that may pose terrorism, it will be extremely difficult to defeat terrorists and we will pay heavy prices for the wrong strataeies and tactics aiming at achieving our very objective.
It is important to recognize the extreme complexity of ethnic, religious, historical and geographical situations of what is Afghanistan. It appears that from this complexity and from many historical lessons and / or experiences that at some stage national reconciliations will have to be given a prominent role in resolving the conflict in Afghanistan.
Foreign troops, mainly Western NATO troops, must have a workable definition of fighting and defeating terrorists and a clear and effective strategy to do it.
While it was understandable that the war the NATO troops engaged in Afghanistan to overthrow the former Taliban regime in power of Afghanistan, because it had harbored Al Qaeda, the main international terrorist group that was responsible for some major terrorist attacks worldwide including the 9/11. But even within that regime it was unlikely to be all the same and there could be different groups with different views, aims and objectives.
It is unlikely to be a correct policy to destroy all the people who may support Taliban, or some elements of the Taliban, like the Pashtuns. That may potentially be “ethnic cleansing”, or close to it.
For some time, the current Afghanistan government/president has called for reconciliations with the Taliban people, asking for dialogue with them. If the Western countries still refuse to accept or accommodate what the Afghanistans are asking, one would really wonder what the west what to do in Afghanistan.
The west must stabilize Afghanistan and contain potential threats from some elements within Afghanistan for international security. We must let Afghanistan people govern Afghanistan and work with them to achieve our objectives.
The Western forces have caused damages to the Taliban, but also paid a significant price. Even the military reality requires a strategic rethink of how to achieve peace and stability, as opposed to emotional revenge for the sake of ill defined military victory.
Unless we totally and thoroughly isolate the most extreme elements of extreme organisations that may pose terrorism, it will be extremely difficult to defeat terrorists and we will pay heavy prices for the wrong strataeies and tactics aiming at achieving our very objective.
2009-07-22
Rethink the war in Afghanistan
Comments on Paul Kelly “PM must think like a war leader or quit field”, 22/07/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25816658-12250,00.html
It is important win the war in Afghanistan, but it is even more important to think about and formulate the best strategies to win it.
The experience of the war so far seems to suggest that the war strategies have not been successful, or even the right ones. Obama and other world leaders must reflect on that and rethink their approaches.
It seems that the focus of the war there needs to change. Rather than fighting the Taliban as a whole, it is better to fight the real core of terrorists within that group. It is likely that not all Taliban fighters are terrorists. They may have a religious belief that is different or a bit more radical than others, as long as they don’t engage in terrorism, they should be allowed to have their belief.
Further, it may need to be carefully considered if it would be better to even accept a conditional peace with the Taliban fighters to end terrorism.
There is a need for fresh thinking in the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. World leaders must show leaderships.
It is important win the war in Afghanistan, but it is even more important to think about and formulate the best strategies to win it.
The experience of the war so far seems to suggest that the war strategies have not been successful, or even the right ones. Obama and other world leaders must reflect on that and rethink their approaches.
It seems that the focus of the war there needs to change. Rather than fighting the Taliban as a whole, it is better to fight the real core of terrorists within that group. It is likely that not all Taliban fighters are terrorists. They may have a religious belief that is different or a bit more radical than others, as long as they don’t engage in terrorism, they should be allowed to have their belief.
Further, it may need to be carefully considered if it would be better to even accept a conditional peace with the Taliban fighters to end terrorism.
There is a need for fresh thinking in the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan. World leaders must show leaderships.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
