Follow @Kalpoint_com

London Conference Rushing for exit

Posted on: Tue February 09, 2010

Those with interest in the military history would know that withdrawal in face of mounting enemy pressure is one of the most difficult operations to execute. The luxury to pack up and run away to fight another day in face of a determined enemy who would like to drive home the advantage of his superiority is simply not available. Every situation has its own peculiarities but invariably it requires, of the weaker side, a well thought strategy coupled with grit, determination and sufficient pluck to instill the fear of God into an overbearing enemy before breaking contact in a clean manner. For US and Nato that moment has arrived in Afghanistan and London Conference, held on 28 January, made the design manifestly obvious to all and sundry.

As would Ernest Hemingway quip, the London conclave was a moment of truth and while the US and her Nato allies seemed to take the scenario in good stride it was India that found it hard to retain composure. The moment called for serious introspection and reflection on her part since the deliberations over the manner to bring calm in Afghanistan appeared cross grained to Indian ambitions for dominance in the post US/Nato scenarios in Afghanistan.

Many Afghan related international meetings had preceded the London Conference. In addition to the Nato summit in Strasbourg and the Oct 2009 defense ministerial summit in Slovakia there have been at least three regional or international conferences dedicated to Afghanistan in the past year alone.

During Jan 2010 there was a trilateral conference in Islamabad involving Iranian, Pakistani and Afghan foreign ministers followed by a trilateral Pak-Afghan-Turkish summit in Istanbul. The Istanbul meeting was followed by a gathering of Afghanistan s six neighbours and international stakeholders in the same city. A prominent aspect of Istanbul deliberations was the exclusion of India from the Afghan related parleys; an aspect that served as a rude shock to India s relentless endeavors to remain a major stakeholder in the Afghanistan imbroglio.

Objective of London Conference was to rally public support in favour of political and military strategy for Afghanistan; a war which is becoming increasingly unpopular in US and the Nato countries. As US and her allies mull withdrawal scenario the Conference sought to evolve consensus in laying down important bench marks that would see Afghan Army assume total responsibility for fighting insurgency; relieving the foreign troops to head home from a highly painful and seemingly open ended war.

Days earlier, David Miliband, while testifying to the US Foreign Relations Committee called it a decisive moment in Afghanistan adding that transferring lead responsibility to Afghan forces would be a critical aspect. During the same session Ambassador Holbrooke, called the Conference an opportunity to create momentum in Afghanistan; implying that Afghanistan had reached the high water mark as far as the US and Nato military involvement was concerned.

The message coming from Washington and London is clear; instead of relying solely on the force of arms, exploiting the potential of winning hearts and minds in Afghanistan is essential to create conditions for success of the counter insurgency strategy being followed by General McChrystal in Afghanistan.

The contours of the evolving US/Nato plans to disengage were made evident by the pronouncements of the London Conference. First; there is a deadline of five years for transition of war effort from Isaf to Afghan government. Point 10 of the CommuniquÈ stipulates for the Afghan government to start conducting the majority of operations in the insecure areas ... within three years and within five years handle physical security in trouble spots.

It is pertinent to note that President Obama has already announced that US troops would start leaving Afghanistan in the summer of 2011 and Nato countries would, in all probability, beat the US schedule in their dash for the exit.

Second, the US and its allies are prepared to differentiate between the good and the bad Taliban and deal with them accordingly. Seventy nations at the Conference raised $140 million to entice lower level Taliban fighters into shunning violence by reintegrating them into the Afghan society.

Afghan president has already extended an olive branch to Taliban by inviting them to the second Loya Jirga in the coming days. It is pertinent to note that UN emissaries are reportedly in contact with the Taliban leadership and UN has removed five Taliban leaders from a sanctions list; including the former Taliban Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmad Muttawakkil. More than 140 names remain on the list, however.

Third, the conference has opted for a regional solution , involving the key regional countries that can begin to take responsibility for regional stability in the wake of US withdrawal. Despite a perceived change from mailed fist policy, for those who want to see US depart there remains a caveat; the State Department has released a report outlining plans to maintain a robust multi year civilian presence in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The report notes that even as the US military mission is not open ended US will remain politically, diplomatically and economically engaged in both countries to protect enduring US interests.

The London Conference has proved to be quite a dampener for the Indian ambitions seeking a dominant role in the affairs of Afghanistan. The major setback has been the resurrection of Taliban their nemesis in Afghanistan as a legitimate and reckonable political and military force. There is a growing acceptance that India has used its leverage in Afghanistan to stir destabilization and using its presence to rake trouble in Balochistan, Fata and elsewhere.

Indian thesis that Taliban share al-Qaeda ideology and its monolithic composition comprised terrorists alone that primarily seek to attack US mainland has lost credibility. Close affinity of RAW with CIA tentacles in Afghanistan has generated skewered inputs, far removed from the ground realities resulting into faulty policy formulations and resultant escalation in US/Nato casualties.

Exclusion from Istanbul Conference and a second row seats for the Indian diplomatic posse at London Conference reflect the manifest Indian irrelevance to the current and evolving Afghan situation. For India, befittingly, it is a time to sit and reflect the doom of its propaganda driven Afghan policy, which has brought so much instability, chaos and bloodshed in the region.

Courtesy : The News