Iraq and Afghanistan

Wouldn’t it be nice to have an old-fashioned war where we could judge success or lack of success by the movement of front lines? Iraq and Afghanistan, indeed the whole so-called “War on Terrorism”, confuses everyone, even those who do not have a pre-determined wish to see events turn out poorly or well.

President Bush tells the United Nations that we are building democracy in Iraq, never mind a few stumbles along the way. Prime Minister Allawi assures us that what we are seeing in Iraq is the last gasp of the insurgents, made desperate by their inability to derail progress toward democracy. Meantime the killing goes on in Iraq. I am particularly discouraged by the thought that for many Iraqis the issue is not so much deciding on which side would be best for the country but rather the inescapable rules of revenge. With every person killed in Iraq, no matter whether we were the direct killers or not, there is likely to be group of persons united by family or other ties that feel that they are duty bound to exact revenge on the Americans (or other foreigners, they are not always that discriminating). I am not sure we can get over this hurdle. Yet Allawi’s words also remind me of the Tet Offensive in Vietnam. Many observers saw that as a defeat for the communists (their losses were tremendous, they failed to hold any cities — they never had any Fallujas). Yet it was at this point that many Americans decided they had had enough. There may or may not be any moral in this.

Afghanistan looks a little better. Today’s NYT Op-Ed page had two pieces. One said that bad planning and unwillingness to put adequate forces and resources into the country has resulted in a smoldering disaster. The presidential election in going ahead in spite of a lack of control over much of the country. The economy has come to depend largely on the opium crop. Yet even this critic sees some positive gains, particularly in the education of girls and the number registering to vote. The other piece paints a much more optimistic view of what is happening, what we have come to know as a Bush-eye view. I believe that one of the best parts of the Afghan situation, one that ironically may be due to the fact we have not invested very much in the effort, is that Hamid Karzai and the Kabul government is taken much more seriously than Allawi’s government in Iraq. Hatred of the foreigner does not seem to be the most salient fact in the violence in much of the country. This is due, in another part, to the fact that the structure of the country was not torn apart by an invasion as it was in Iraq. The old ethnic and tribal groups, often led by what we call “warlords” were never driven out. They either never left or easily returned (as did Karzai). In fact, some of their units played a major role in bringing down the Taliban. The Karzai government also benefits from its authentication by the Grand Assembly or loya jirga that was carefully planned out of the country and then convened with comprehensive participation within the country. Along with the involvement of the former King, this gave Karzai a credibility that similar efforts carried through in the more hostile redoubts of Baghdad simply did not obtain. Would that it would have been possible to approach Iraq in the same fashion.