Afghanistan and Pakistan are sinking deeper into disarray, and the US bears a significant share of the blame. As long as this long-troubled region remains mired in turmoil, Islamist terrorism is likely to continue to thrive, with grave implications for international security.
Begin with Afghanistan. In the nearly 22 months since the US abandoned the country to the Pakistan-backed Taliban militia, a terrorist super-state has emerged. Beyond committing atrocities against Afghans and reimposing medieval practices, including reducing Afghan women’s status to that of chattels, the Taliban has sustained cozy ties with al-Qaeda and several other terror groups.
As a leaked Pentagon assessment reports, Afghanistan has become a safe haven and staging ground for al-Qaeda and Islamic State terrorists planning attacks on targets in Asia, Europe and the US.
This should come as no surprise. The Taliban regime’s Cabinet includes a veritable list of international terrorists and narcotics traffickers, and it was in Kabul last year that a US drone strike killed al-Qaeda leader and UN-designated global terrorist Ayman al-Zawahiri.
While the Islamic State might be seeking to expand its international operations from Afghanistan, it is al-Qaeda’s alliance with the Taliban that poses the greater long-term international threat.
When the US withdrew suddenly from the country, it not only abandoned its allies there, but also left behind billions of US dollars’ worth of sophisticated US military equipment, in addition to several military bases, including the strategically valuable Bagram Airfield. The Taliban is the world’s only terrorist organization with an air force, however rudimentary.
In a 12-page document issued last month, US President Joe Biden’s administration sought to shift the blame for the Afghan fiasco onto former US president Donald Trump, saying that Biden’s “choices for how to execute a withdrawal from Afghanistan were severely constrained by conditions created by his predecessor.”
However, while the Trump administration undoubtedly cut a terrible deal with the Taliban, it was Biden who — overruling his top military generals — made the choices that triggered Afghanistan’s descent into chaos and facilitated the Taliban’s swift return to power.
US policy toward Pakistan has been deeply misguided. It is thanks to a longstanding partnership with the US that Pakistan’s military and its rogue Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency have used terrorism as an instrument of state policy against neighboring countries.
The Trump administration seemed to recognize this, and pledged to keep Pakistan at arm’s length until it ended its unholy alliance with terrorist organizations.
However, the Biden administration has reversed this policy. Although Pakistan played an integral role in enabling the Taliban — which the ISI helped create in the early 1990s — to defeat the US in Afghanistan, the Biden administration helped the Pakistani government stave off a debt default last year.
Soon after, the US unveiled a US$450 million deal to modernize Pakistan’s US-supplied F-16s — which it values as delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons. The US helped Pakistan get off the “gray list” maintained by the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force, the intergovernmental agency combating terrorist financing.
Pakistan faces profound political instability, rooted in a skewed civil-military relationship. Pakistan’s military has long been untouchable. It has ruled directly for 33 years. When not technically in power, it has insisted on a pliant civilian administration that defers to the generals’ de facto leadership.
Pakistan’s military, and its intelligence and nuclear establishment, have never answered to the civilian government. On the contrary, since 2017, two Pakistani prime ministers have been ousted after falling out of favor with the military.
However, supporters of former Pakistani prime minister Imran Khan are mounting the first direct challenge to the military’s authority since Pakistan’s founding 75 years ago. Following Khan’s arrest on corruption charges earlier this month, mass protests erupted across Pakistan. Demonstrators stormed military properties, including the army headquarters and a major ISI facility, and set ablaze a top army commander’s home.
As the political crisis unfolds, Pakistan continues to teeter on the brink of default. It is being kept afloat by short-term loans from allies, until it can convince the IMF to restart a suspended bailout program. This gives the international community leverage to force change in the country.
Domestic developments, especially the unprecedented anti-military protests, have the greatest potential to force a rebalancing of civilian-military relations.
However, the military is unlikely to go down without a fight: The creeping shadow of military rule has already led to mass arrests, with Pakistani Chief of Army Staff Asim Munir announcing trials under military law of civilians charged in the recent violence.
The military could declare a state of emergency, to give itself carte blanche to stifle dissent, or it could stage another coup. The conflict could also erupt into civil war — ideal conditions for international terrorist forces to thrive.
Pakistan remains a hub of terrorism and is contributing significantly to Afghanistan’s destabilization. Unless the nexus between Pakistan’s military and terrorist groups is severed, the situation in Afghanistan would not improve, and the battle against international terrorism would not be won.
Brahma Chellaney is a professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and a fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals
RSS