Tag: Pakistan

It takes a region

The Pickering/Brahimi report on negotiating an end to the war in Afghanistan is on less than firm ground in claiming that its publication happens to coincide with the perfect moment to launch negotiations to end the insurgency in Afghanistan (see my previous post), but its discussion of the regional interests in Afghanistan is better framed.  They do not limit themselves to Pakistan, as so many reports seem inclined to do, but look farther to Iran, India, China and Russia.

Still, they leave me with a lot of question marks.  They don’t deal with Pakistan’s ISI, which seems rather more wedded to the Taliban than the rest of the Pakistani government.  In fact, they treat “Pakistan” as a unified actor, which is certainly not the way it has acted in the past, and I don’t know many analysts who expect it to act that way in the future.

They cite Iran’s interests in controlling drugs, protecting Shia, preventing the Taliban from returning to power and maintaining influence in Herat.  But they don’t deal with Tehran’s apparent willingness to provide some military support to Taliban insurgents inside Afghanistan.

The report counts China as a possible influence in the right direction on Pakistan.  Beijing might certainly wish it so, as Afghanistan’s minerals are appetizingly close by.  But I wonder whether the Pakistan that would have to be influenced is all that interested in what the Chinese have to say on Afghanistan.  Again there is that unified actor question.

The treatment of “Central Asian states,” (aka the Stans, I think) and Russia is rather cursory, with a reference to their interests in a stable Afghanistan, their worries about U.S. presence and the possibility of jihadis breaching their borders.  It seems to me that they have been surprisingly non-meddling, even helpful.  How do we account for that, and is there something more they can do?

The discussion of how the proposed international “facilitator” would deal with the various layers of neighborly and other international interest is well done.  The idea would be a series of bilateral consultations, to precede any multilateral meeting (one coming up in Istanbul).

The suggestion that international peacekeepers may be needed post-settlement I find mind-stretching.  It’s a bit difficult to imagine Afghanistan safe for peacekeepers, Muslim or not, rather than peace enforcers.  But of course that is just the point:  if there is a broad political settlement, most of the insurgency would presumably go away.

All of this may be wishful thinking.  But it is more realistic wishful thinking–maybe even “visionary” thinking–than believing we are going to be able to withdraw from Afghanistan by 2014 without a negotiated political settlement.

I have feared the terms of that settlement inside Afghanistan for human rights, in particular for women.  I’ve too often sat in State Department meetings where assistant secretaries promised not to sell out human rights, only to discover a week later that is precisely what was done.  And what real leverage do we have over how women are treated in a Helmand governed by Taliban?  The best of intentions somehow go astray when faced with the need for a power-sharing agreement with people who have been violating human rights for years, if not decades.  That conflict of interests and values, again.

 

 

Tags : , , , ,

The world beyond Egypt

I’ve been so caught up in Egypt for 10 days, and Tunisia before that, I’m feeling the need for one of those quickie updates, so here goes (even if there is relatively little progress to report):

  • Iran:  P5+1 Ankara meeting at the end of January went badly, some say because Ahmedinejad did not take advantage of what the Americans were offering.  I don’t think we’ve heard the last of it.
  • Pakistan: Messy (that’s what I call it when a President has to call for a roundtable conference), but no big crisis.
  • North Korea:  Quiescent for the moment, but mil/mil talks have stalled.
  • Afghanistan:  Lots of reports of military progress from David Petraeus, and some sign that the Taliban may be looking for negotiations, or at least that is how I interpret their putting out the word that they might break with Al Qaeda.
  • Iraq:  some Arab/Kurdish progress that will allow oil to flow north.  My friend Reidar Visser doesn’t think that’s good, but I do.
  • Israel/Palestine:  Biggest news has been the Palestine papers, widely interpreted to suggest Palestinian weakness, ineptitude or both.  I think they show the Israelis overplaying their hand to no good purpose.
  • Egypt:  Trouble.  This is what I said at the end of the year:  “succession plans founder as the legitimacy of the parliament is challenged in the streets and courts.  Mubarak hangs on, but the uncertainties grow.”  Did I get it right?  All but that part about the courts anyway.
  • Haiti:  Presidential runoff postponed to March 20.  President Preval’s favorite will not be on the ballot; former first lady Mirlande Manigat will face singer Michel Martelly.
  • Al Qaeda:  No news is good news.
  • Yemen/Somalia:  Yemen’s President Saleh has so far proved immune to Egyptian flu, but itmay not last forever.  Parliament in Somalia has extended its own mandate for three more years, dismaying the paymasters in Washington and other capitals.  Nice democracy lesson.
  • Sudan:  The independence referendum passed, as predicted (no genius in that).  Lots of outstanding issues under negotiation.  President Bashir is behaving himself, some say because of the carrots Washington has offered.  In my experience indictment has that effect on most people.
  • Lebanon:  Indictments delivered, not published, yet.
  • Syria:  President Bashar al Assad is doing even better than Bashir of Yemen.  No demonstrations materialized at all.
  • Ivory Coast:   Gbagbo and his entourage are still waiting for their first-class plane tickets.  African Union is factfinding, in preparation for mediation.  Could this be any slower?
  • Zimbabwe:  Mugabe continues to defy, sponsors riot in Harare.  No real progress on implementation of powersharing agreement with the opposition.
  • Balkans:  Bosnia stuck on constitutional reform, Kosovo/Serbia dialogue blocked by government formation in Pristina, Macedonia still hung up on the “name” issue.  See a pattern here?  Some people just recycle their old problems.
  • Tunisia:  At last some place where there is progress:  the former ruling party has been shuttered.  Don’t hold your breath for that to happen in Egypt!

PS:  on Algeria, see this interesting piece.

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The end is nigh…

Not really, but 2010 is coming to a close.  Never easy to look ahead a year, but let me give it a try.  It’ll make for a nice mea culpa post a year from now.  And if I cherry pick a bit maybe I’ll be able to claim clairvoyance!

  • Iran:  the biggest headache of the year to come.  If its nuclear program is not slowed or stopped, things are going to get tense.  Both Israel and the U.S. have preferred sanctions, covert action and diplomatic pressure to military action.  If no agreement is reached on enrichment, that might change by the end of 2011.  No Green Revolution, the clerics hang on, using the Revolutionary Guards to defend the revolution (duh).
  • Pakistan:  it isn’t getting better and it could well get worse.  The security forces don’t like the way the civilians aren’t handling things, and the civilians are in perpetual crisis.  Look for increased internal tension, but no Army takeover, and some success in American efforts to get more action against AQ and the Taliban inside Pakistan.  Judging from a report in the New York Times, we may not always be pleased with the methods the Pakistanis use.
  • North Korea:  no migraine, but pesky nonetheless, and South Korea is a lot less quiescent than it used to be.  Pretty good odds on some sort of military action during the year, but the South and the Americans will try to avoid the nightmare of a devastating artillery barrage against Seoul.
  • Afghanistan:  sure there will be military progress, enough to allow at least a minimal withdrawal from a handful of provinces by July.  But it is hard to see how Karzai becomes much more legitimate or effective.  There is a lot of heavy lifting to do before provincial government is improved, but by the end of the year we might see some serious progress in that direction, again in a handful of provinces.
  • Iraq:  no one expects much good of this government, which is large, unwieldy and fragmented.  But just for this reason, I expect Maliki to get away with continuing to govern more or less on his own, relying on different parts of his awkward coalition on different issues.  The big unknown:  can Baghdad settle, or finesse, the disputes over territory with Erbil (Kurdistan)?
  • Palestine/Israel (no meaning in the order–I try to alternate):  Palestine gets more recognitions, Israel builds more settlements, the Americans offer a detailed settlement, both sides resist but agree to go to high level talks where the Americans try to impose.  That fails and Israel continues in the direction of establishing a one-state solution with Arabs as second class citizens.  My secular Zionist ancestors turn in their graves.
  • Egypt:  trouble.  Succession plans founder as the legitimacy of the parliament is challenged in the streets and courts.  Mubarak hangs on, but the uncertainties grow.
  • Haiti:  Not clear whether the presidential runoff will be held January 16, but things are going to improve, at least until next summer’s hurricanes.  Just for that reason there will be more instability as Haitians begin to tussle over the improvements.
  • Al Qaeda:  the franchise model is working well, so no need to recentralize.  They will keep on trying for a score in the U.S. and will likely succeed at some, I hope non-spectacular, level.
  • Yemen/Somalia:  Yemen is on the brink and will likely go over it, if not in 2011 soon thereafter.  Somalia will start back from hell, with increasing stability in some regions and continuing conflict in others.
  • Sudan:  the independence referendum passes.  Khartoum and Juba reach enough of an agreement on outstanding issues to allow implementation in July, but border problems (including Abyei) and South/South violence grow into a real threat.  Darfur deteriorates as the rebels emulate the South and Khartoum takes its frustrations out on the poor souls.
  • Lebanon:  the Special Tribunal finally delivers its indictments.  Everyone yawns and stretches, having agreed to ignore them.
  • Syria:  Damascus finally realizes that it is time to reach an agreement with Israel.  The Israelis decide to go ahead with it, thus relieving pressure to stop settlements and deal seriously with the Palestinians.
  • Ivory Coast:  the French finally find the first class tickets for Gbagbo and his entourage, who go to some place that does not recognize the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (no, not the U.S.!).
  • Zimbabwe:  Mugabe is pressing for quick adoption of his new constitution and elections in 2011, catching the opposition off balance.  If he succeeds, the place continues to go to hell in a handbasket.  If he fails, it will still be some time before it heads in the other direction.
  • Balkans:  Bosnians still stuck on constitutional reform, but Kosovo gets a visa waiver from the EU despite ongoing investigations of organ trafficking.

If the year turns out this way, it won’t be disastrous, just a bumpy downhill slide.  Hard to see it getting much better than that, but I could have made it much worse:

  • Iran:  weaponizes and deploys nukes.
  • Pakistan:  finally admits it can’t find two of its weapons, which have likely fallen into AQ hands.
  • North Korea:  goes bananas in response to some provocation, launches artillery barrage on Seoul.
  • Afghanistan:  spring Taliban offensive sweeps away Coalition-installed local institutions; Kandahar falls.
  • Iraq:  Kurds and Arabs fight, without a clear outcome.
  • Israel/Palestine:  Israel attacks Hizbollah in Lebanon, third intifada begins with Hamas suicide bombings inside Israel.
  • Egypt:  Muslim Brotherhood challenges Mubarak in the streets, prevents orderly succession process.
  • Haiti:  hurricanes, food riots, political strife, reconstruction blocked.
  • Al Qaeda:  big hit inside the U.S., thousands die.
  • Yemen/Somalia:  both go south, with AQ establishing itself firmly on both sides of the Bab al Mandab.
  • Sudan:  post-referendum negotiations fail, fighting on North/South border, chaos in Southern Sudan.
  • Lebanon:  Hizbollah reacts with violence to the Special Tribunal indictments, taking over large parts of Lebanon.  Hizbollah/Israel war wrecks havoc.
  • Syria:  succeeds in surreptitiously building nuclear facilities on commission from Iran, Israeli effort to destroy them fails.
  • Ivory Coast:  Gbagbo tries to hold on to office, imitating Mugabe’s successful effort.  Ouattara plays ball and accepts the prime ministry, pressured by internationals who don’t want to do what is necessary to airlift Gbagbo out of there.   A real opportunity to demonstrate the effectiveness of international solidarity is squandered.
  • Zimbabwe:  Mugabe succeeds, Tsvangirai is out, state in virtual collapse.
  • Balkans:  the EU unwisely begins implementing the acquis communitaire in Republika Srpska due to delays in formation of a national Bosnian government, investigations in Kosovo drag on and make progress towards the visa waiver and other EU goodies impossible.

There are of course other places where we might see bad things happen:  Venezuela, Burma, Nigeria, Kyrgyzstan, Saudi Arabia, Russia–but I’ll leave the imagining to you.

Happy New Year!

Tags : , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Christmas presents from Muslim friends

There is something cooking–maybe something good–involving Turkey, Pakistan and Afghanistan.  The Muslim Santa Claus yesterday delivered Karzai welcoming the idea of the Taliban opening an office in Turkey and Turkey announcing a military exercise involving Pakistan and Afghanistan scheduled for April.  These were outcomes of the fifth AfTuPak (my coinage, I think) meeting since 2007, when Turkey’s hyperactive non-secular government (I hesitate to call it Islamist because of the implications to non-Turkish ears, even if that too would be accurate) undertook to help improve relations between Kabul and Islamabad.

This comes on top of revival (admittedly for the umpteenth time) of the TAPI pipeline proposal involving Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India, a proposal still far from realization but a clear sign of rapprochement among the countries involved.

Somewhere in the bowels of the State Department someone may be grumbling about all this, calling it a pipedream, as American diplomats (and intel analysts) tend to do about anything not conceived in Washington.  But surely Clinton, Gates and Obama understand that this kind of effort among Afghanistan and its neighbors can have positive repercussions.  If it works, someone can discover that it all really was invented in DC (maybe even Holbrooke’s last legacy).  Anything that gives Afghanistan and its neighbors, most especially Pakistan, a common stake in peace has got to be rated a plus.

David Petraeus is sounding a lot happier about Pakistan’s cooperation these days.  Some of this will just be salving old wounds, but maybe, just maybe, there was something more going on while we were all enjoying the holiday yesterday.

Tags : , , ,

Has anyone really read the Afghanistan report?

I’ve been hoping all day to offer analysis of the Afghanistan strategy review, but I can’t find the full text.  That hasn’t stopped anyone else.

So far as I can tell, everyone is commenting on the five-page “overview” as if they’ve read the whole thing.  The Washington Post tells you it hasn’t seen the whole report.  PBS Newshour doesn’t make any claims, but doesn’t post the whole report, so I’ve reached my own conclusion. Democracy Arsenal claims to have read the thing, but then says nothing that hints at content beyond the five pages.  So I thought I should say a few words on why it is not a good idea to comment based on an overview.

The overview is 80 per cent spin.  The higher ups in the U.S. Government don’t do a lot of rummaging around in paragraph 178 of a report, but they do look at what is more commonly called the “executive summary.”  And they make sure it says what they want it to say, whatever is in the report.  Then they get that five pager out to the press and commentators (some of them get it earlier than others of course) in the often justified hope that they can keep the news coverage on side.

The most important part of any government report is what it does not say.  You can’t really tell that from the summary, overview or whatever you want to call it.  But I’ll guess:  judging from this “overview,” it says nothing about corruption and lack of legitimacy of the Karzai government; it says relatively little about local governance and economic development; it says little about lack of cooperation from Pakistan or negotiations with the Taliban.

I don’t really see how a strategy review can be useful (except for PR purposes) without dealing with those issues, so I’m inclined to give this one a failing grade, without having seen it.  But that wouldn’t be fair, would it?  Maybe we should all withhold judgment and give ourselves some time to read the whole thing, calmly and thoughtfully.

Tags : , ,

Pakistan: what me worry?

Islamabad is busy pooh-poohing U.S. concerns and treating them as signs of bias against Pakistan, but anyone sensible would worry about that country’s highly enriched uranium (HEU) as well as about the security of its nuclear weapons.

As a science counselor at the American Embassy in Rome in the late 1970s, I visited one of Italy’s research reactors, which like Pakistan’s ran on HEU.  It contained, as my guide pointed out, more than enough HEU to make a nuclear weapon.  The U.S. has been busy collecting this material, and replacing it with less dangerous stuff, for some years now. No one responsible would pooh-pooh the concerns–and lots of proud countries have collaborated in getting the HEU into more secure places, including well-known U.S. toady Belarus.

We won’t I imagine find much about Pakistan’s nuclear weapons in the diploleaks, since those cables will likely be more restricted in distribution.  But if Pakistan can’t respond more responsibly on HEU, it makes me worry even more about their nukes.

Tags : ,
Tweet