EDITORIAL : THE OUTLOOK, AFGANISTAN

               

 

Obama’s Headache

Now days US President Obama is under mounting pressure, and in his Wednesday's prime-time address, he has to make a key decision about his civil and military commit ment in Afghanistan. When he won the white house, Mr. Obama obviously acted against his party's willingness of opposing wars former President Bush waged. He bravely refocused to Afghanistan, which was marginalized after US military faced tough challenges in Iraq. He decided to send 33000 more troops in Afghanistan in order to take the momentum from Taliban-led militants, though his own Democratic Party members generally opposed the notion.

Now he has reached absolutely to other part of what he started. He pushed for military surge and persuaded MPs to vote for only through promises to start military drawdown soon after taking the control of the situation. Presently, however some believe that the "set objectives" are somehow realized, but there are still huge doubts. Though Taliban-led militants lost areas under their control but they still can carry out attacks anywhere at will. Frequently, the most key places like ministries in cities mostly out of militants' reach have come under attacks, which show the fragile security situation.

Moreover, at home he is facing new rounds of pressure. The US sovereign debt is extremely large—around fourteen trillion dollars. He blatantly failed to gain votes of MPs for increasing the previously-set level of sovereign debt. The budget deficit is also too high as government expenses are quite larger then its revenue. Now the only choice ahead is to bring down the budget deficit, which largely affects military budget consisting 20 percent of government's entire annual financial budget. Meanwhile, Americans are increasingly turning against war and they are pushing government to do something with high unemployment rate at home rather then wasting their taxed money on nation building in Afghanistan. The process is further accelerated after assassination of Osama bin Laden as they got feelings that their dangerous enemy does not exist any more.

Here in Kabul, he is dealing with somehow unwelcoming ally—President Karzai. Afghan president now, more then ever, bluntly criticizes his foreign allies, as his June 18, 2011, statements showed when he claimed foreign countries were "pursuing their own interest in Afghanistan". Such an approach of Kabul officials deal severe blows to Obama's administration as Americans might draw grim picture from their Kabul allies, which will prove consequential for Afghan people. It is important for President to note that without US presence in the country; his government will collapse within months. And, thus, he should keep his secret feelings for them for the sake of entire people.

No Security, no Economic Prosperity

Deep concerns over insignificant foreign investment - largely due to deteriorated security condition – exist in Afghanistan and countries supporting it to eco nomically stand on its own feet. The United States alone has spent 19 billion dollars to support the economy of Afghanistan. Its other allies have too, invested considerable amounts of money to boost up the economic condition of this country. The effectiveness of these aids has been quite low as the living standard of people remains pathetic. More than 50 percent of Afghans are estimated to be living below the line of poverty and the international aid has only filled the pockets of corrupt officials and people associated to them. Investment is conceived the backbone of an economy. Over the last ten years, investment in Afghanistan has been limited. There have investment merely in few sectors such as banking, telecommunication, beverages and others and have had very little impact on the life of people.

Over the last ten years due to insufficient investment poverty has become more concerning as the rate of unemployment is rapidly rising. Agriculture, one of the main sectors which around 70 percent of population of Afghanistan depend, face grave hindrances and no prominent effort is in place to address them. Local production is almost zero as the industrial sector continues to suffer lack of attention from government side and other friend countries of Afghanistan. The mining sector is considered the only sector that can bring Afghanistan out of the grave economic problems it is facing today. But this sector too, will need long terms until security improves and government find capability and capacity to properly make uses from it.

The root of all evils in Afghanistan is the 'worse security' that hampers all sorts of social, political and economic developments. As far as security conditions remain so or severe, problems in Afghanistan will continue multiplying and no prosperity can be hoped for this country. Whether it is increased investment or anything else that can foster economic condition in Afghanistan, is not achievable without having brought security condition under thumb.

Afghanistan and SCO

President Karzai attended the 10th anniversary summit of the Shanghai Coopera tion Organization (SCO) in Astana, Kazakhstan on Wednesday, June 15, 2011. The SCO, comprised of China, Russia and the Central Asian countries except for Turkmenistan, is primarily a security organization focusing on its member countries' security-related concerns such as terrorism and extremism. Other areas of concern for this regional organization is regional economic cooperation as well as military collaboration in terms of holding joint military drills to enhance the "inter-operability" of the member countries' military forces. Intelligence sharing and counter-terrorism activities are also important areas of cooperation among the SCO member countries. For example, a Regional Anti-Terrorism Structure founded under the SCO mandate has been actively pursuing counter-terrorism operations and has so far successfully foiled hundreds of terrorist plots.

The Afghan delegation headed by President Karzai participates in the annual SCO summits as a guest but the groundwork is being quietly laid for granting Afghanistan the observer status from where the road to full membership will be much smoother. For our country Afghanistan, SCO is an extremely important and relevant regional security and cooperation organization given the immense potential that it holds for Afghanistan especially after 2014. The challenges of terrorism and extremism that Afghanistan is grappling with and the danger of overflowing this instability to the surrounding regions especially the Central Asian region has put Afghanistan high on the agenda of the SCO. The situation in post-2014 Afghanistan, when the majority of foreign forces will leave Afghanistan, was an important issue of discussion in this year's summit. The member countries are increasingly finding themselves compelled to dramatically increase their presence here in Afghanistan in terms of greater cooperation and providing assistance to our country in diverse fields.

Kazakh President Nurusultan Nazarbayev revealed the kind of thinking that SCO harbors towards a post-2014 Afghanistan by saying it is possible that SCO will take the responsibility of many issues in Afghanistan after the withdrawal of foreign forces in 2014.The urgency of and the truth in this stated position of the SCO member countries cannot be overstated since the extremist militant groups such as the Taliban are ready to fill the vacuum in post-2014 Afghanistan if the western countries decide to disengage from Afghanistan in any significant scale. In sum, President Karzai and the government of Afghanistan's willingness to pursue beneficial partnerships with the SCO is welcome.

Afghanistan, in addition to its allies in the West, also needs strong partners from the East since these countries' contribution and assistance toAfghanistan especially post-2014 will be critical to safeguarding the gains Afghanistan has made in recent years and also further building upon the achievements.

Struggling for Survival

2011 was entitled as the year of change. Wide ranges of demonstrations across the Arab world and the world socio-political developments marked great changes this year. In Syria, as in some other Arab countries, the spreading waves of public uprising are uprooting the longtime regime of Bashar Al-Assad. Feeling isolated by the ever-spreading public protests, he said on Monday June 20, 2011 that dialogue could lead to a new constitution and even the end of his Baath party's monopoly on power but refused to reform Syria under "chaos." He said dialogue was underway that could lead to a new constitution and raised the possibility of elections and an end to the ruling Baath party's dominance, a key opposition demand. However, opposition says it is too late to hold back change in Syria. Following Assad's speech on Monday, pro-democracy activists said the three-month-old "revolt" in Syria must go on. They said his speech only deepened the crisis. The Coordination Committee, an umbrella group of activists calling for street protests, called for "the revolution to carry on until all its aims have been achieved."

According to many politicians and analysts in Syria, the government of long time President Assad is enjoying its last moments in power. Having announced a series of reforms following the riot was given a kick start in wider parts of the country, Assad has failed to talk into the angry protestors. The opposition, political activists and human rights organizations say, Bashar Al-Assad didn't like but was forced to concede some of the reforms that Syrians were denied from since his Father, Hafiz Assad, came to power following 1963 coup d'état.

In addition to the long standing opposition, International pressure on Syria has increased recently. According to a statement on the website of Erdogan's office on Monday, U.S. President Barack Obama and Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan "underlined the necessity to speed up the reform process in Syria in order to meet the demands of the Syrian people". Reiterating his country's stance against Syria's recent developments, Turkish President Abdullah Gul said Monday that Assad should have been more "clear-cut" in promises of reform during a speech Monday, Anatolia news agency reported. "One must read between the lines in his speech. He should say loud and strong in a clear-cut manner: ... 'We are passing to a pluralist system, we will organize democratic elections that conform to international standards,'" Anatolia quoted Gul as telling journalists.

European officials have also expressed deep concerns on current events in Syria and the country's forces brutal crackdown against public protests. However, Syria's neighboring foe has predicted collapse of Assad's government in a near future. In an interview with the Associated Press, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said Assad might be forced out within six months.

With the expanding international support for pro-democracy protestors, indications say that Syria will also join countries that faced regime change or, at least, recognized remarkable democratic reforms. Syrian protestors have learnt great lessons from Arab world revolutions and would prefer not to concede so easily. In consequence, Syria will surely continue seeing further stages of public demonstrations and international pressures on Assad's government to abide by the public demands to quit power. Not much time has remained for his decade-long government to keep monopoly on power. The Syrian protestors have had enough chances to express wrath against the government and demand democratic reforms. Their voices are now heard globally. The regional and international countries have enhanced pressures against Assad's government. However, he still enjoys full support and crackdown assistance from the Islamic Republic of Iran and the Lebanese Hezbollah.

Pakistan Army Decides to Pick out the Culprits

Recently, there have been discussions of links of important figures from Pakistan Army with terrorist organizations. Especially, after the Mehran Base Assault, Pakistan Army was under immense pressure regarding the same allegations. There have been rumors that there are individuals within the security forces themselves who provide highly confidential information to the terrorists regarding security arrangements and security check points. Now, it has turned out to be a fact that there are individuals in Pakistan Army who, against the rules in the institution, have some connections with fundamentalist organizations. The arrest of Brigadier Ali Khan on Tuesday, June 21, 2011, has proved this fact.

Brigadier Ali Khan has been on routine GHQ posting and is alleged to have contacts with Hizb-ul-Tehrir a fundamentalist organization that was banned in 2004 by former Pakistani President Pervez Musharaf. The DG ISPR, Major General Athar Abbas has confirmed his arrest and has mentioned that he would be probed about the allegations. But he avoided detailed information with the view that further details may hamper the investigations.

The incident like discovery of Al-Qaeda Chief, Osama Bin Ladan, from Abbotabad and the Meharan Base Assault and now the Arrest of Birgadier Ali khan do point at the facts that there have been soft hearts in Pakistan Army for the terrorist organizations. This also relates to the reasons of the some drastic incidents in the war against terrorism. Pakistan Army itself seems to have realized this fact. Recently it seems to have turned very active in picking out those soft hearts beating in sympathy of terrorists. The arrest of Brigadier Ali Khan is a very important success in the same regard; in addition, the fact that his arrest has been made public by Pakistan Army shows that Pakistan Army, as an institution, seems to have declared to be against any sympathy for the terrorist organizations.

The lack of evident and firm stand against terrorism by Pakistan has been affecting them badly in the recent years. Once, it had opted for going against terrorism, it had to be very rigid in its stand. The ambiguity in this regard provided a chance to certain culprits both in Pakistani Politics and Pakistan Army to take complete advantage, influencing the effective steps against terrorism and the credibility of Pakistan as an anti-terror ally. Though Pakistan has sacrificed much in this war against terrorism, in the form of loss very precious, including important political figures, security personnel, and mostly civilians, stillAmerica and the neighboring Afghanistan and India have persistently been questioning the Pakistani position and have been pressurizing Pakistan to do more against terrorism. It is just because the culprits within the concerned institutions have been hampering the process from becoming completely effective.

With this arrest, at least, Pakistan Army has made it clear that with culprits existing within the force itself, it would never be able to win a decisive war against terrorists. It has to carry on the same rigid stand in order to trace the likes of Brigadier Ali Khan within its personnels and make them accountable of their misdeeds. It will certainly help them in securing itself further by cutting down the information sources that provide clues to the terrorists regarding the security forces and their properties. It would also be helpful in cleaning the institution from sectarian differences that may arise because of connections of personnels with extremist organizations. Moreover, this particular stand would help it earn its credibilility and prestige as an institution and would definitely assist them much in winning the war they have been fighting against terrorism for the last ten years with a series of valuable sacrifices.