The Taliban is Pakistan's tool. Long term success in that country depends on help from India and Russia. We have been supporting Pakistan when we should have been supporting India. The Afgans have no love for Pakistan.
Obama's hurry to leave Afghanistan precludes strategic imagination
By Thomas P.M. Barnett
OP-ED: Why the U.S. must talk to the Taliban, By Ahmed Rashid, Washington Post, March 18, 2010 Link
Nice piece by Rashid, that underlies the regional concerns over the situation that Team Obama seems to be shaping up as their leave-behind -- namely, the same old, same old of Pakistan domination from the South via the Taliban. Key para:
India, Iran and Russia have long been averse to any dialogue with the Taliban that could give Pakistan greater leverage in the region or with Washington. All see the various extremist groups based in Pakistan as threats to their security. India is working to rebuild the regional alliance that opposed the Taliban and Pakistan in the 1990s. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin visited India last Thursday, partly to discuss a common strategy on a post-U.S. Afghanistan. Senior Indian officials have met with Karzai in Kabul and are due in Iran later this month.
The possibility worth noting? Another Mumbai-like attack that puts India and Pakistan on a war-footing with each other. The reason why Rashid says talk now is that the regional players are all seeking to influence the outcome--outside of any U.S. effort, and so most of the die will already be cast if we don't seek out the Taliban dialogue soon. I must admit, the whole approach of the Obama administration disappoints. No strategic imagination here whatsoever, and Holbrooke seems marginal--as does Clinton. We seek merely to fix the situation up in the South just enough to leave, meaning we end up relying on Pakistan to the dissatisfaction of everybody in the region--except for Pakistan. I still hold out some hope for a more regionalized approach, but I'm seeing and hearing nothing to that effect. |
