Sgt Bales' secret and an Afghan
endgame By M K Bhadrakumar
Despite the insistence by Washington that
the Kandahar killings a week ago were a "rampage"
by an "apparently deranged" or "probably deranged"
American sergeant, Afghan people believe in the
finding by their parliamentarians that up to 15 to
20 US troops were involved. The Afghan president
Hamid Karzai also agreed the US version is "not
convincing."
Even within the Afghan
military establishment, the opinion publicly aired
by the Afghan army chief of staff Sher Mohammad
Karimi's condemnation of the US troops will
prevail. Lieutenant General Karimi who visited the
scene of the crime called it a pre-meditated
massacre carried out by a number of US troops.
This is going to make the signing of a
strategic agreement between Washington and Kabul
before the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
(NATO) summit in Chicago in May highly
problematic. Washington expects Karzai to put his
signature on
the dotted line before
May and Karzai knows his political future depends
on his performance.
In an extraordinary
commentary last week, the influential French
troubleshooter Bernard Henri-Levy threatened that
the international community should never have
"blindly depended upon the corrupt government of
Hamid Karzai".
Echoing the views of many
US commanders, he lambasted the planned 2014
pullout date as "an admission of failure and
impotence", but said that prolonging the military
presence beyond 2014 is also difficult
"considering the human cost". So, the only course
available is to "go and stay" - ie,withdraw combat
troops "but leave the military bases and
instructors".
Levy has the answer: "Admit
that Afghanistan cannot be reduced ... to a
desperate confrontation between the Taliban
killers and the corrupt members of Karzai's regime
... In Kabul ... there are, then, the heirs of
[late Northern Alliance commander Ahmad Shah]
Massoud. And perhaps before we pull up the ladder,
it would be advisable to try to turn to them, in
an ultimate attempt, a last-chance operation."
Karzai is once again being threatened that
his potential successor is all dressed up and
waiting in the green room. The point is, through
all the watershed events of the past six to eight
weeks - US troops urinating on Taliban corpses,
burning the Koran or massacring civilians - the
constant has been the signing of a strategic pact
with Kabul that ensures long-term military
presence.
The US President Barack Obama
repeated last Tuesday during his joint press
conference with the visiting British Prime
Minister David Cameron that Karzai has been left
in no doubt. But post-Panjwayi, this can no longer
be reduced to a battle of wits between Obama and
Karzai alone.
Moscow enters. In the course
of an exclusive 30-minute interview telecast over
an Afghan channel last night, Foreign Minister
Sergey Lavrov repeated not fewer than four times
that Russia expects a "neutral" Afghanistan - code
word for the vacation of foreign military
presence.
Russian policy is moving on two
tracks. One, Moscow hopes to work closely with
Karzai. "Unlike some others [read Washington], we
do not dictate to the [Kabul] government how it
should build the process of national
reconciliation. We know that a part of Pashtuns,
there are Uzbeks, Tajiks, Hazaras. [sic] They all
must find their way in the political system so
they all feel being part of the process, not
isolated. This is the general principle; how to
apply them in practice, it's not for us to tell
the Afghan authorities."
On the other
hand, Lavrov questioned how the Obama
administration or the North Atlantic Treaty
Organizatoin (NATO) could unilaterally decide on
matters such as "transition" or ending the "combat
mission". He demanded that the International
Security Assistance Force (ISAF) should first
confirm to the United Nations Security Council
that its mandate has been fulfilled before jumping
the gun and proposing the withdrawal of the NATO
and US contingents.
Lavrov pointed out
that there is a fundamental contradiction in the
US stance. On the one hand, Washington is assuming
that the ISAF mandate has been fulfilled and is
withdrawing the troops from Afghanistan, while on
the other hand it is discussing with Kabul "very
purposefully the establishment of four or five
military bases for the post-2014 period". In
forceful language, he drew Moscow's bottom line:
"I don't think why this should be
done this way because if you need the military
presence, then you continue to implement the
mandate of the Security Council. If you don't
want to implement the mandate of the Security
Council or you believe that you have implemented
the mandate already, but still want to establish
and keep the military bases, I don't think it is
logical. I also believe that Afghan territory
should not be used to create some military
sites, which would cause concern by third
parties.
"I don't think it is logical
that by 2014 the job would be over but we will
stay for a much longer period inside military
bases. I don't understand the purpose of the
military bases, and, besides, the United States
is talking to Central Asian countries asking for
long-term military presence. WE want to
understand the reason for it and why this is
needed. We don't think it would be helpful for
the stability of the region."
Lavrov
then asserted that Moscow is a stakeholder:
One, terrorism hasn't abated in Afghanistan;
Two, terrorists are being "pushed" into the
northern regions from where they are infiltrating
into the "Central Asian neighbors of the Russian
Federation and they don't add stability in this
region";
Three, the ISAF is using the so-called
Northern Distribution Network and "we [Russia]
believe this is our contribution to fulfill the
mandate which the international forces received
from the Security Council", and,therefore, "we
have the right to demand" that the mandate should
be implemented before the ISAF deems its"combat
mission" over.
In essence, Moscow served
notice that Obama administration can no longer
dictate the trajectory of this war. Lavrov's
interview was carefully timed, since the ISAF's
mandate will be reviewed this week in the Security
Council.
Moscow is adding Afghanistan to
the litany of issues on which will take a
"muscular" approach - alongside the planned US
missile defence system, Syria and Iran. Last week,
Moscow disclosed that it might offer a military
base in Ulyanovsk on the Volga for NATO as
transportation hub for ferrying supplies for the
war.
The characteristic Russian offer puts
the Pentagon and NATO in a dilemma. From a
logistical point of view, it is a vital lifeline,
but from the geopolitical point of view,
Washington may think twice. The alternative is to
go back to Pakistan and get the two transit routes
reopened. The chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of
Staff Martin Dempsey has done just that.
Dempsey told the Charlie Rose Show
that Washington is communicating "directly" and
"privately" with Rawalpindi and "I'm personally
optimistic that we can reset the relationship in a
way that meets both of our needs." He mentioned
Pakistani army chief Ashfaq Kayani as someone with
whom he has had the "most, candid, frank
conversations" - and "he will do what he can".
Dempsey even played the "India card",
underscoring that the main challenge for the US
was to get the Pakistani military to shift from
its rooted belief that "India poses their greatest
existential threat". (He didn't disclose how
Washington proposes to assuage the Pakistani
fears.)
Quite obviously, several templates
are overlapping this week. Russia intends to throw
down the gauntlet on Washington's Afghan strategy
when the renewal of ISAF's mandate comes up before
the Security Council this week. The US, in
turn,anxiously awaits a positive outcome of the
parliamentary processes in Islamabad that may lead
to a resumption of the two countries' partnership.
Meanwhile, a third vector is hanging in
the air - Afghan anger over the Panjwayi killings.
The best hope is that Afghans accept the Sergeant
Bales version. But Bales himself is locked up in
solitary confinement in Kansas at Fort
Leavenworth, where by a curious twist of irony,
Dempsey and Kayani were once classmates at the
School of Advanced Military Studies - studying
Theatre Operations.
Ambassador M K
Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the
Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included
the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany,
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and
Turkey.
(Copyright 2012 Asia Times
Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
