Friends, as we move toward a "surge" in Afghanistan
it is important that we not have a "'do-over'" of the mistakes
of Iraq.
Russia stops US on road to Afghanistan
By M K Bhadrakumar
Jan 27, 2009
http://www.atimes.com
Precise,
quick, deadly - the skills of a soldier are modest. But then, US Central
Command chief General David Petraeus is more than a soldier. The world is
getting used to him as somewhere more than halfway down the road to becoming a
statesman. Sure, there may be warfare's seduction over him still, but he is expected
to be aware of the political realities of the two wars he conducts, in Iraq and
Afghanistan.
That
is why he tripped last Tuesday when he said while on a visit to Pakistan that
the American military had secured agreements to move supplies to Afghanistan
from the north, easing the heavy reliance on the transit route through
Pakistan. "There have been agreements reached, and there are transit lines
now and transit agreements for commercial goods and services in particular that
include several countries in the Central Asian states and Russia,"
Petraeus said.
He
was needlessly precise - like a soldier. Maybe he needed to impress on the
tough Pakistani generals that they wouldn't hold the US forces in Afghanistan
by their jugular veins for long. Or, he felt simply exasperated about the
doublespeak of Janus-faced southwest Asian generals.
The
shocking intelligence assessment shared by Moscow reveals that almost half of
the US supplies passing through Pakistan is pilfered by motley groups of
Taliban militants, petty traders and plain thieves. The US Army is getting
burgled in broad daylight and can't do much about it. Almost 80% of all
supplies for Afghanistan pass through Pakistan. The Peshawar bazaar is doing a
roaring business hawking stolen US military ware, as in the 1980s during the
Afghan jihad against the Soviet Union. This volume of business will register a
quantum jump following the doubling of the US troop level in Afghanistan to
60,000. Wars are essentially tragedies, but can be comical, too.
Moscow
disclaims transit route
At
any rate, within a day of Petraeus' remark, Moscow corrected him. Deputy
Foreign Minister Alexei Maslov told Itar-Tass, “No official documents were
submitted to Russia's permanent mission in NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization]
certifying that Russia had authorized the United States and NATO to transport
military supplies across the country."
A
day later, Russia's ambassador to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, added from Brussels,
"We know nothing of Russia's alleged agreement of military transit of
Americans or NATO at large. There had been suggestions of the sort, but they
were not formalized." And, with a touch of irony, Rogozin insisted Russia
wanted the military alliance to succeed in Afghanistan.
"I
can responsibly say that in the event of NATO's defeat in Afghanistan,
fundamentalists who are inspired by this victory will set their eyes on the
north. First they will hit Tajikistan, then they will try to break into
Uzbekistan ... If things turn out badly, in about 10 years, our boys will have
to fight well-armed and well-organized Islamists somewhere in Kazakhstan,"
the popular Moscow-politician turned diplomat added.
Russian
experts have let it be known that Moscow views with disquiet the US's recent
overtures to Central Asian countries regarding bilateral transit treaties with
them which exclude Russia. Agreements have been reached with Georgia,
Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. Moscow feels the US is pressing ahead with a new
Caspian transit route which involves the dispatch of shipments via Georgia to
Azerbaijan and thereon to the Kazakh harbor of Aktau and across the Uzbek
territory to Amu Darya and northern Afghanistan.
Russian
experts estimate that the proposed Caspian transit route could eventually
become an energy transportation route in reverse direction, which would mean a
strategic setback for Russia in the decade-long struggle for the region's
hydrocarbon reserves.
Russia
presses for role in Kabul
Indeed,
Uzbekistan is the key Central Asian country in the great game over the northern
transit route to Afghanistan. Thus, during Russian President Dmitry Medvedev's
visit to Tashkent last week, Afghanistan figured as a key topic. Medvedev
characterized Russian-Uzbek relations as a "strategic partnership and
alliance" and said that on matters relating to Afghanistan, Moscow's
cooperation with Tashkent assumed an "exceptional importance".
He
said he and Uzbek President Islam Karimov agreed that there could be no
"unilateral solution" to the Afghan problem and "nothing can be
resolved without taking into account the collective opinion of states which
have an interest in the resolution of the situation".
Most
significantly, Medvedev underlined Russia had no objections about US President
Barack Obama's idea of linking the Afghanistan and Pakistan problems, but for
an entirely different reason, as "it is not possible to examine the
establishment and development of a modern political system in Afghanistan in
isolation from the context of normalizing relations between Afghanistan and
Pakistan in their border regions, setting up the appropriate international
mechanisms and so on".
Moscow
rarely touches on the sensitive Durand Line question, that is, the
controversial line that separates Afghanistan and Pakistan. Medvedev
underscored that Russia remained an interested party, as there was a "need
to ensure that these issues are resolved on a collective basis".
Second,
Medvedev made it clear Moscow would resist US attempts to expand its military
and political presence in the Central Asian and Caspian regions. He asserted,
"This is a key region, a region in which diverse processes are taking
place and in which Russia has crucially important work to do to coordinate our
positions with our colleagues and help to find common solutions to the most
complex problems."
Plainly
put, Moscow will not allow a replay of the US's tactic after September 11,
2002, when it sought a military presence in Central Asia as a temporary measure
and then coolly proceeded to put it on a long-term footing.
Karzai
reaches out to Moscow
Interestingly,
Medvedev's remarks coincide with reports that Washington is cutting Afghan
President Hamid Karzai adrift and is planning to install a new "dream
team" in Kabul.
Medvedev
had written to Karzai offering military aid. Karzai apparently accepted the
Russian offer, ignoring the US objection that in terms of secret US-Afghan
agreements, Kabul needed Washington's prior consent for such dealings with
third countries.
A
statement from the Kremlin last Monday said Russia was "ready to provide
broad assistance for an independent and democratic country [Afghanistan] that
lives in a peaceful atmosphere with its neighbors. Cooperation in the defense
sector ... will be effective for establishing peace in the region". It
makes sense for Kabul to make military procurements from Russia since the
Afghan armed forces use Soviet weaponry. But Washington doesn't want a Russian
"presence" in Kabul.
Quite
obviously, Moscow and Kabul have challenged the US's secret veto power over
Afghanistan's external relations. Last Friday, Russian and Afghan diplomats met
in Moscow and "pledged to continue developing Russian-Afghan cooperation
in politics, trade and economics as well as in the humanitarian sphere".
Significantly, they also "noted the importance of the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization [SCO]" that is dominated by Russia and China.
SCO
seeks Afghan role
Washington
cannot openly censure Karzai from edging close to Russia (and China) since
Afghanistan is notionally a sovereign country. Meanwhile, Moscow is intervening
in Kabul's assertion of independence. Moscow has stepped up its efforts to hold
an international conference on Afghanistan under the aegis of the SCO. The US
doesn't want Karzai to legitimize a SCO role in the Afghan problem. Now a
flashpoint arises.
A
meeting of deputy foreign ministers from the SCO member countries (China,
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) met in Moscow on
January 14. The Russian Foreign Ministry subsequently announced that a
conference would take place in late March. The Russian initiative received a
big boost with Iran and India's decision to participate in the conference.
New
Delhi has welcomed an enhanced role for itself as a SCO observer and seeks
"greater participation" in the organization's activities. In
particular, New Delhi has "expressed interest in participating in the
activities" of the SCO contact group on Afghanistan.
The
big question is whether Karzai will seize these regional trends and respond to
the SCO overture, which will enable Kabul to get out of Washington's
stranglehold? To be sure, Washington is racing against time in bringing about a
"regime change" in Kabul.
The
point is, more and more countries in the region are finding it difficult to
accept the US monopoly on conflict-resolution in Afghanistan. Washington will
be hard-pressed to dissociate from the forthcoming SCO conference in March and,
ideally, would have wished that Karzai also stayed away, despite it being a
full-fledged regional initiative that includes all of Afghanistan's neighbors.
The
SCO is sure to list Afghanistan as a major agenda item at its annual summit
meeting scheduled to be held in August in Yekaterinburg, Russia. It seems
Washington cannot stop the SCO in its tracks at this stage, except by genuinely
broad-basing the search for an Afghan settlement and allowing regional powers
with legitimate interests to fully participate.
The
current US thinking, on the other hand, is to strike "grand bargains"
with regional powers bilaterally and to keep them apart from collectively
coordinating with each other on the basis of shared concerns. But the regional
powers see through the US game plan for what it is - a smart move of divide-and-rule.
Moscow
spurns selective engagement
No
doubt, these diplomatic maneuverings also reveal the trust deficit in
Russian-American relations. Moscow voices optimism that Obama will
constructively address the problems that have accumulated in the US-Russia
relationship. But Russia figured neither in Obama's inaugural address nor in
the foreign policy document spelling out his agenda.
Last
Tuesday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov summed up Moscow's minimal
expectations: "I hope the controversial problems in our relations, such as
missile defense, the expediency of NATO expansion ... will be resolved on the
basis of pragmatism, without the ideological assessment the outgoing
administration had ... We have noticed that ... Obama was willing to take a
break on the issue of missile defense ... and to evaluate its effectiveness and
cost efficiency."
But
Russia is not among the new US administration's priorities. Besides, as the
influential newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta noted last week, "A considerable
number of [US] congressmen from both parties believe Russia needs a good
talking-to." The current Russian priority will be to organize an early
meeting between Lavrov and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and until such a
meeting takes place, matters are on hold - including the vexed issue of the
transit route for Afghanistan.
Thus,
while talking to the media in Tashkent, Medvedev agreed in principle to grant
permission to the US to use a transit route to Afghanistan via Russian
territory, but at once qualified it saying, "This cooperation should be
full-fledged and on an equal basis." He reminded Obama that the
"surge" strategy in Afghanistan might not work. "We hope the new
administration will be more successful than its predecessor on the issues
surrounding Afghanistan," Medvedev said.
Evidently,
Petraeus overlooked that the US's needless obduracy to keep the Hindu Kush as
its exclusive geopolitical turf right in the middle of Asia has become a
contentious issue. No matter the fine rhetoric, the Obama administration will
find it difficult to sustain the myth that the Afghan war is all about fighting
al-Qaeda and the Taliban to the finish.
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
2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us
about sales, syndication and republishing.)
|