Ambitions for Afghanistan down to earth
US president Barack Obama has come down to earth in terms of America's ambitions for Afghanistan. Taliban is no longer a synonym for Al Qaeda but a broad term designating all kinds of insurgent groups not all of which commit acts of terrorism. At the same time Obama has opened up the Afghanistan policy to include Pakistan, which is quickly unravelling as Monday's attack on a police school in Lahore demonstrated. In both countries, the Taliban and Al Qaeda are digging in more and more.
On the eve of Tuesday's 'big tent meeting' in The Hague, Obama seems to have buried the idealism of his predecessor George W. Bush, who wanted to build a model democracy from scratch in Afghanistan. The new policy focuses on preventing truly terrorist organisations from getting a foothold in Central-Asia. For them, the seven-year-old military operation in Afghanistan is the gift that keeps on giving.
Therefore, Obama's new and "all-encompassing" strategy relies not on bullets alone but also on "agricultural experts, doctors and engineers". Beside the 17,000 extra troops Obama has earmarked for Afghanistan, there are also 4,000 instructors for the Afghan army and police. It all sounds a bit like the "three d's" - defence, diplomacy and development - that the Netherlands has embraced with such enthusiasm.
The change of direction doesn't come as a surprise. Already during his election campaign Obama promised to take the political and military fight against terrorism back to its origins: not in Iraq but in 'AfPak', as the region is now called in diplomatic circles. But success is far from certain. The disintegration process may be too far along. There are indications that Pakistan's secret service, ISI, which during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan (1979-1989) acted as the go-between between the anti-communist mujaheddin and their American sponsors, is still giving active support to Taliban groups.
It is just one indication that the US, if it wants to succeed in Afghanistan, needs to look not just towards its allies in Isaf, the Netherlands among them, but also to less friendly partners. Iran, which has been invited to The Hague and will certainly drive a tough bargain, plays a crucial role. No sustainable solution can be imagine without India, one of Afghanistan's biggest donors and the sworn enemy of Pakistan. The same goes for China and Russia. Stability or instability in the region have always been closely linked to the geopolitical appetites of the neighbouring countries. As two experts said in The New York Times last week: "Afghanistan may be a hard country to occupy (...) but it is an easy one to destabilise."
Without the complete cooperation of Afghanistan's neighbours America's strategy may prove to be not as "all-encompassing" as Obama wants us to believe, and as a result it may prove less successful.