Lesezeichen
‹ Alle Einträge

Afghanistan aufteilen?

 

Hassan Haidar von Al Hayat glaubt, die Amerikaner seien an dem Versuch, einen Zentralstaat in Afghanistan aufzubauen, verzweifelt und bereiteten insgeheim die Aufteilung des Landes in kleine Einheiten vor. Bei dem jetzt von Obama angekündigten Truppenaufbau gehe es nur um den Schutz der Wahlen, die im August stattfinden werden – und schließlich um den geordneten Rückzug: 

The Obama administration is convinced  that the attempts that have marked modern history for establishing a strong central state in Afghanistan with foreign support have all failed. The country fell each time in the trap of chaos, corruption, divisions, local wars, and tribal rivalries, thus affecting internal stability and threatening neighboring countries. The administration is also convinced that a „decentralized“ solution must lead this time to a system that meets the needs of the center and the peripheries alike. This would take place within a balance that preserves the rights of citizens and tribes, and their role in drafting decisions and sharing resources – especially that demographics in Afghanistan support this objective: the country consists of human settlements separated by empty regions. Such a trend also corresponds to Iran’s desire to see its allies, such as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Shia Hazaras, enjoy a special status within the Afghan structure.

For this reason, there is much talk these days about a potential dialogue with moderate Taliban leaders and a potential replication of the ‚awakening councils‘ experience in Iraq. Criticism against President Karzai abounds. He is accused of corruption; failure to have provided the necessary aid to the needy areas; nepotism (he appointed relatives as leaders of the areas and sole supervisors of money distribution). He is seen as having encouraged local inhabitants and figures to ask Taliban for help, because he did not offer any alternative. In fact, perhaps the coming weeks will reveal an American desire to change Karzai, who is also viewed as a ‚Bush legacy.‘

Hence, the new US strategy is based on avoiding the mistakes made by previous occupiers such as the British and the Soviets, who tried to build a central state which would subject the whole country to the capital and its army. This would ultimately lead to the collapse of the country if the capital collapses. Instead, the new strategy is based on ‚dividing‘ Afghanistan into a series of small independent areas that would rely for funding and armament on the Americans and their allies. Each would have leaders linked to specific interests and ready to fight for them, and hence it would be difficult for one single political or military force to subject them all to its authority.

Washington believes that finding a new reality would allow it a peaceful withdrawal from Afghanistan, while maintaining assistance and advisors for a specific period of time. Will it really succeed in this, or will the withdrawal decision lead to a collapse similar to that of previous experiences?