Missions Impossible

Is the future of Iraq, as a unified nation of diverse ethnic and religious factions, beginning its own death spiral as sequential bomb blasts devastate Baghdad (Sunni revenge against the dominant Shiite regime), as Kurds pull away from the central Iraqi government demanding their lost oil fields and the concomitant revenues, and as the interests of secular, Sunni and Shiite Iraqis diverge? The latter is brought home by government orders at the start of the month-long period of daytime abstinence – Ramadan – of new restrictions that will apply to all residents: “Now even those seen smoking on the streets will be subject to arrest, according to the new decree issued by the Ministry of Interior. Bars and liquor stores were ordered to close completely for the whole month, also for the first time.” August 23^rd New York Times. Secular residents, used to the more secular governance during American rule, are alarmed. American forces are disengaging and withdrawing; it is up to the local police and military now.

That Ramadan began on the same day this year for both Shiites and Sunnis is seen by some as an omen of peace and unity, a harsh divergence from the bloody post-bombing scenes in the streets of Baghdad residents. There are claims that the old Sunni Bath Party (Saddam Hussein’s regime) is at work sewing violence and discontent among the Sunni minority. It seems that the only major faction that wants a unified Iraq is the Shiite incumbency, which carries ties to the neighboring Iranian Shiite Islamic Republic.

The renewed U.S. efforts in Afghanistan, the next major theater of emphasis for the Obama administration, are beginning badly. Even as recently-added American generals are taking greater care not to hit civilian targets and to appreciate local sensibilities with greater awareness, the growth of Taliban strength in the countryside, the power of the local opium trade and the antipathy of our purported ally Pakistan in our battles to suppress militant Islamic forces suggest that America may be escalating an unwinnable war. Even with “green shoots” of latent communications between American forces and the Taliban, it is not altogether clear that the American retaliation for 9/11 will produce anything close to our stated goals. Afghanistan is a vast country with a most rugged terrain.

Even where American forces have secured villages from Taliban rule, threats of death and cutting off fingers from Taliban leaders against people who voted in the recent elections were more than enough to keep the voter turnout, especially in the countryside, very low. This report, from the August 23^rd New York Times, presents a harsh example in the isolated southern village of Khan Neshin that is all-too-common across Afghanistan: “Something is missing that has left even the recently appointed district governor feeling dismayed. ‘I don’t get any support from the government,’ said the governor, Massoud Ahmad Rassouli Balouch.

“Governor Massoud has no body of advisers to help run the area, no doctors to provide health care, no teachers, no professionals to do much of anything. About all he says he does have are police officers who steal and a small group of Afghan soldiers who say they are here for ‘vacation.’

“It all raises serious questions about what the American mission is in southern Afghanistan — to secure the area, or to administer it — and about how long Afghans will tolerate foreign troops if they do not begin to see real benefits from their own government soon. American commanders say there is a narrow window to win over local people from the guerrillas.

“Securing the region is overwhelming enough. The Marines have just enough forces to clear out small pockets like Khan Neshin. And despite the Americans’ presence, Afghan officials said 290 people voted here last week at what is the only polling place in a region the size of Connecticut. Some officers were stunned even that many voted, given the reports of widespread intimidation.”

In the end, the Afghan people have seen the Soviets come and go in a humiliating defeat, and they watched as early American promises of new roads, hospitals and schools – not to mention peace and stability – all died as the U.S. turned her resources to the Iraqi battlefield instead. The Americans are back with new promises, but the Afghani people remember… and believe that when the U.S. forces leave, as they inevitably will, they will be left with the same drug lords, corrupt officials and Taliban autocrats that were there before.

By the end of 2009, we’ll have 68 thousand troops in this Central Asian nation, up from 20 thousand three years ago, but is it already too late? U.S. Admiral Mike Mullen (Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) sounded this warning (quoted in the NY Times) about the situation facing U.S. forces in Afghanistan: “I think it is serious and it is deteriorating, and I've said that over the last couple of years, that the Taliban insurgency has gotten better, more sophisticated.” Mullen knows that this not entirely a military solution; civilian support for this struggling nation is equally essential. The next 12 to 18 months are critical; either the U.S. wins enough hearts and minds over to the cause – a seemingly elusive quest – or the best we can mount is minimal damage control and a graceful exit.

There is little reason for the average Afghan citizen to support the American efforts and believe the American promises. We’re not a Muslim nation, we do not speak their language or share their customs and we don’t even look like them. Is it only a matter of time before the Americans will leave in frustration? Does our enemy only have to wait us out?

I’m Peter Dekom, and recent American history has seen this before.