4 Comments to “Engaging with the insurgents”

1. s anand, Ph.D scholar 5 February 2010 at 07:19 #

   I fully agree that the universal values democracy, human rights and religious harmony must take deep roots in accordance with afghan culture, custom and tradition.Ordinary human beings are essentially peace-loving and history shows that insurgency, anywhere in the globe including in Afdhanistan, thrives only when it is funded, armed and politically backed by parties with vested interests. There is no doubt that Taliban/Al Qaeda are just prolonging the war to tire out NATO and biding time to re-occupy the country. Therefore, it is important to cut-off the extra-territorial influence which emanates from the Afghan-Pakistan border regions. The efforts should necessarily be political, backed by a well-thought out military strategy, to cut-off the jihadi culture and organised terrorist infrastructure coming from across the border, which is the root-cause of afghan problem.

   Reply
2. Provincial View 4 February 2010 at 17:59 #

   In my humble opinion NATO should do more on post-combat strategies than merely thinking of bribing some combatants or the local political leaders… Bribery only gives birth to multiple other social challenges, never resolving anything in the long term! You get them money and they buy more bullets or more explosive materials… You get them money and they use them in bribing officials or in buying votes… You get them money and they use them in raising poppy fields and shipping it to the occidental markets… You give them money and they will find methods in cheating others of their cut…

   NATO needs to BUILD something in order to create new social values for the Afghan people (this should be the praised “new momentum”). NATO needs to create a composite post-combat force made up of: gendarmes and specialized police officers (who could get a new perspective on the emergent problems with drugs and other forms of organized crime), surveillance engineers and technicians (who could create shields of “technological peace” between the “silent communities” and the wild exterior), economic and commercial advisors (selected for their intelligence not by corporation allegiance), agricultural experts (who could get some sort of food out of those arid and desolate areas), Doctors and pharmacists (who could help the suffering and who could ask the right amount of help from NATO’s member states), civil and religious activists recruited from the “good Arabs” (is better to preach through someone familiar), etc.

   I have my doubts when it comes to private contractors but it is the only way for this war to get a facelift. Strong and professional private companies (from all the member states) should be implicated in building instead of destroying (as they are doing now)… Sadly but truly, only corporations have the know-how and the manpower that is needed in order to achieve such goals in a short period of time! They have selected for years the greatest brains that the market had to offer, and they have “emptied” various countries in search of “valuables” that could be sold on the international markets. So, the corporations must be challenged in washing some of the guilt and sins they bear on their shoulders after the unfair or brutal treatments they imposed onto undeveloped countries anywhere on the globe.

   The road to democracy will be tough and many mistakes are yet to be done in Afghanistan, but we need to BUILD there instead of bombing or endlessly searching (trough deserts and mountain tops) for some boogey warriors that do regular terror acts. And yes, Secretary General is right when telling us (finally!!!) that not all the rebel combatants are religious lunatics and that they are responding in a violent way to the toughness of their lives (and those of their families)!!!

   Reply
3. Dieter Stanzeleit 4 February 2010 at 10:09 #

   Yes the London strategy is excellent, however there are 2 questions:
   1. to give money to ,the Afghani’ that sounds too vague, because whoever would get funds all payments should include 3 obligations: 1. no corruption, 2. peace, 3. to build up some honest business with that money
   Therefore please take care not to waste money for an unlimited time. Maybe first you have to find and train Afghani and build up an administration there being able to distribute the funds in the proper way.
   2. What means ,democracy’? You can’t change habits being developed within the last 100 years. Please focus on realistic steps first.
   Dieter Stanzeleit

   Reply
4. David H Lewis 4 February 2010 at 00:51 #

   Ah excellent Anders! At last a little less “war, war” and a little more “jaw, jaw” (talk, talk)!
   Many of the insurgents fight for small amounts of money, you tell us, – just like NATO soldiers then (except they get very big $ to occupy and shoot up the Afghans country)!
   Anyway, your basic idea of paying off the rebels (or “freedom from NATO fighters” perhaps?) seems excellent but does it go far enough? AfG is a very poor country so why not give each and every Afghan man, woman and child a $100k and then leave them in peace. The $billion or so cost would be a very small price to pay to extract NATO from its Afghan quagmire. It must cost at least that much to maintain NATO’s presence just for a few months. In the meantime NATO might pay big PEACE BONUSES to communities that refrain from violence. That would give everybody a shared incentive to discourage hotheads and to co-exist peacefully with the authorities. You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar!!

   Reply

Leave a Reply