Author: Aidan Lewis
About two weeks ago, gunmen killed a female British aid worker who was walking alone on a tree-lined stretch of road in Kabul, Afghanistan. A few days earlier, Taliban slaughtered 40 people on a local bus in the southern city of Kandahar. American bombings take the lives of civilians every week. I’ve stopped tallying the deaths; the military’s careless operations destroy rural communities so often that I can’t keep up with the news anymore. The numbers are simply staggering.
Afghanistan holds a deep and unshakeable place in my heart, and it is constantly at the forefront of my mind when I consider America’s next presidency. I can only hope that President-elect Barack Obama has a better plan for the war-torn nation than that which President Bush has executed. But I am pessimistic, because there is already something gravely wrong with the general mentality, and no one seems to realize it. The predominant view is that shipping several thousand more troops into the afflicted country will have the effect of instant stability. If that is the entirety of the solution, nothing will improve.
Insurgency in Afghanistan has risen dramatically in recent years. One glaring reason for this is the incompetence and reckless disregard of the U.S. military. It proudly flaunts its kill ratio and the number of militant casualties it inflicts in any given operation, but leaves civilian casualties for the media to report. Needless to say, the wave of public support following the U.S. invasion in 2001 has all but died; the Taliban use every callous and inept American bombing as leverage for its cause – and why shouldn’t it? If the killing of innocent people is what divides acts of terrorism from military acts, the U.S. cohort in Afghanistan should seriously contemplate where it stands.
Another factor in Afghanistan’s escalating violence is the instability of Pakistan. After chaotic leadership transitions over the past year and trauma from suicide bombings, the nation is fragile at best. What has not helped is the Bush administration’s parody of diplomacy, one that involves menacing undertones, outright threats, and a refusal to recognize Pakistan’s sovereignty. Perhaps if the U.S. were to exercise respect in its dealings, the two governments might reach some semblance of cooperation in eradicating insurgent networks. Militants already have the advantage of not having to recognize the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The U.S., in theory, is constrained to work within Afghanistan, but recent American bombing operations over the border show that Pakistan’s sovereignty is only nominal at present.
Finally, corruption in the Afghan government has impeded any significant progress. The administration is still rife with nepotism and warlords, and President Hamid Karzai must pander to U.S. and national demands, which rarely coincide. His refusal to implement solid strategies for thwarting the opium and heroin trade poses a tremendous problem to the counterinsurgency undertaking, since this is the Taliban’s primary source of funding. However, the U.S. has not offered any solutions that will eradicate the drug trade while ensuring the sustenance of farmers—it seems to be a this-or-that kind of deal, where the nation must sacrifice either its fight against militants or the survival of its rural populace.
There has to be a better way to help Afghanistan. Simply bolstering the military presence there will not suddenly cure the nation’s problems; in fact, it is very likely that the same mistakes will just be made on a larger scale. President Barack Obama needs to understand the roots of the crisis and what will actually mitigate the violence. The military must stop its indiscriminate bombings, which kill innocent Afghans and only stir up hostility and resentment from the public. U.S. ambassadors to Pakistan should take a less confrontational approach with Pakistani leaders and extend friendship rather than threats. Our government should focus more on encouraging transparency, efficiency and integrity within the Afghan administration. Additional troops will probably play a very small part, if any, in the eventual peace of Afghanistan—there is so much more plaguing the country than a dearth of soldiers.
Until I see a better plan than those that American leaders and new president Barack Obama have proposed thus far, I cannot be sanguine about the situation. There is so much at stake—the security of a nation, the opportunity its citizens have to thrive, and the lives of many innocent people.
Aidan Lewis is a first-year ECLS major. He can be reached at alewis@oxy.edu.
This article has been archived, for more requests please contact us via the support system.
