Obama’s Af-Pak Strategy
06 Apr, 2009 · 2841
Amit Kumar Gupta is critical of the new American strategy for not addressing the root causes of the problem in Afghanistan and Pakistan
A new strategy has been unveiled by the Obama Administration, for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. The most prominent feature that stands out is its intent to make Afghanistan self-supporting in terms of its security, and also enabling it to shore up its government authority. For this to fructify, President Obama will deploy approximately 4,000 American troops to train Afghan security forces and seeks to build an Afghan army of 134,000 and a police force of 82,000.
Obama, in his strategy also seeks international support, and calls the ongoing threat an international security challenge and not just an American problem. Similarly, he envisages a new ‘contact group’ for Afghanistan and Pakistan, which would include the United Nations, along with NATO, Central Asian States, the Gulf nations and also Iran, Russia, India and China.
The new American strategy moves a step forward and emboldens its strategic partnership with Pakistan, by stating that “the future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan.” And hence, pledges to accord a sum of US$7.5 billion to Pakistan, over a five-year period, so as to strengthen its infrastructure and its democracy. A little understatement too follows, that, “Pakistan must demonstrate its commitment to rooting out al Qaeda and the violent extremists within its borders,” and Obama once again repeated that he would not be providing ‘a blank cheque’ to Pakistan. [To this, his skeptics agree, that obviously, he will not be providing a blank cheque, but a cheque, having a huge sum penned on it].
One underlying fact that arises from this strategy, which is also pointed out by Rasul Bakhsh Rais, is that, the US, “is seeking an honorable exit from Afghanistan, but not before the Afghan state has developed the capacity to defend its social and political order against those who challenge it with violence” (Daily Times, 31 March 2009).
An all-embracing strategy, it has created high expectations among the citizens of Afghanistan, but has also succeeded in leaving a smirk on the Pakistani countenance. To many, it still sounds like a strategy of George W Bush Jr. Many are even going to the extent of stating that, Bush and his policies are back, but in a fresh and a different skin, talking a new talk, but still walking the old walk. Nonetheless, it makes no sense, getting into an argument, as to whether, it is a Bush or an Obama strategy. The fact of the matter is it is an American strategy and this new strategy of the US has failed to address several principal issues
Obama has missed out on the very fact of clandestine ties between Pakistan’s military intelligence agency [ISI] and the Taliban along with other extremist groups. The strategy has also been criticized on the point that, it seems to be more about outsourcing, relying heavily on a state, that in itself is facing numerous quandaries.
Equally serious has been the benighted comments about al Qaeda. Obama seems to be of the misperception that al Qaeda and the other extremist groups, are composed of a fixed number of members, who can be maimed or decimated. He fails to take notice of the fact that nobody is born an al Qaeda or Taliban extremist and has not addressed the ‘root cause’ of this entire mayhem. Among other things, Obama has also missed out on the issue of radical madrassas, functioning within Pakistan. The anomalies seem to be many and the inexperience of the Obama administration is becoming more evident.
Obama, in his strategy also seeks international support, and calls the ongoing threat an international security challenge and not just an American problem. Similarly, he envisages a new ‘contact group’ for Afghanistan and Pakistan, which would include the United Nations, along with NATO, Central Asian States, the Gulf nations and also Iran, Russia, India and China.
The new American strategy moves a step forward and emboldens its strategic partnership with Pakistan, by stating that “the future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan.” And hence, pledges to accord a sum of US$7.5 billion to Pakistan, over a five-year period, so as to strengthen its infrastructure and its democracy. A little understatement too follows, that, “Pakistan must demonstrate its commitment to rooting out al Qaeda and the violent extremists within its borders,” and Obama once again repeated that he would not be providing ‘a blank cheque’ to Pakistan. [To this, his skeptics agree, that obviously, he will not be providing a blank cheque, but a cheque, having a huge sum penned on it].
One underlying fact that arises from this strategy, which is also pointed out by Rasul Bakhsh Rais, is that, the US, “is seeking an honorable exit from Afghanistan, but not before the Afghan state has developed the capacity to defend its social and political order against those who challenge it with violence” (Daily Times, 31 March 2009).
An all-embracing strategy, it has created high expectations among the citizens of Afghanistan, but has also succeeded in leaving a smirk on the Pakistani countenance. To many, it still sounds like a strategy of George W Bush Jr. Many are even going to the extent of stating that, Bush and his policies are back, but in a fresh and a different skin, talking a new talk, but still walking the old walk. Nonetheless, it makes no sense, getting into an argument, as to whether, it is a Bush or an Obama strategy. The fact of the matter is it is an American strategy and this new strategy of the US has failed to address several principal issues
Obama has missed out on the very fact of clandestine ties between Pakistan’s military intelligence agency [ISI] and the Taliban along with other extremist groups. The strategy has also been criticized on the point that, it seems to be more about outsourcing, relying heavily on a state, that in itself is facing numerous quandaries.
Equally serious has been the benighted comments about al Qaeda. Obama seems to be of the misperception that al Qaeda and the other extremist groups, are composed of a fixed number of members, who can be maimed or decimated. He fails to take notice of the fact that nobody is born an al Qaeda or Taliban extremist and has not addressed the ‘root cause’ of this entire mayhem. Among other things, Obama has also missed out on the issue of radical madrassas, functioning within Pakistan. The anomalies seem to be many and the inexperience of the Obama administration is becoming more evident.
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
