Afghanistan – great game goes intense

Indiandefencereview Logo
By Lt Gen Prakash Katoch Published on April 28, 2017 1:01 am
Afghanistan
Afghanistan – great game goes intense - © Indian Defence Review
(Photo Courtesy: www.patrickandrade.com)

During the recent visit of US Defence Secretary Jim Mattis to Afghanistan, General John Nicholson told reporters in Kabul that he is “not refuting” reports that Russia is providing weapons to the Taliban. In fact, as reported in British media, he elaborated by saying he would not dispute claims made to media by an anonymous senior US military official in Kabul earlier that day that Russia had stepped up its assistance to insurgents over the last 18 months, providing machine guns and other medium weight weaponry to fighters in Helmand, Kandahar and Uruzgan.

...Afghanistan needs less foreign interference but that will likely remain a pipe dream as Afghanistan appears inexorably sucked into the great game.

Compare this to what Chris Sands wrote in Global Post on 23 February 2013, wherein she said, “The nightmare scenario of NATO leaving Afghanistan to face a new period of ethnic violence and civil conflict has already become a reality in the southern province of Uruzgan. There a militia commanded by a man named Abdul Hakim Shujaee is accused of deliberately destroying houses, raping women and murdering dozens of civilians. The government has ordered his arrest, but he remains free……Haji Obaidullah Barakzai, a member of parliament for Uruzgan, claimed Shujaee has been operating with backing from American Special Forces for about three years. In previous statements to the media, the US has denied this claim”.

The underlying fact in hybrid warfare is that in the aggressor is ambiguous and there are no rules, no regulations. So while the present US claim by an anonymous senior US military official in Kabul of Russia arming Taliban may be right, it would be easily the handiwork of others including China and Pakistan.

Many a times opinions have been expressed that Afghanistan needs less foreign interference but that will likely remain a pipe dream as Afghanistan appears inexorably sucked into the great game. Behind the façade of various dialogues whether to bring the Taliban into the reconciliation process, is the $1 trillion plus of gas and mineral reserves of Afghanistan, and its strategic location as the gateway to Central Asia and oil rich Iran. If economic development of Afghanistan was really at the heart of big powers, then the jacks on Pakistan would have been put on Pakistan years back to usher stability in the region and open the south-south corridor linking Eurasia with South East Asia through South Asia. But after Iraq and Syria, there appears to be fresh impetus to instability in the region centred on Afghanistan.

See also  Coastal and maritime security: two sides of the same coin

The irony of the ANA is that while they have very much wanted a soldier’s tenure to be of 10 years, it has not been possible to increase it beyond three years because of lack of finances.

With Taliban’s spring offensive on the springboard, the ghastly terror attack in the compound of the 209th Corps of the Afghan National Army (ANA) in northern Balkh Province on April 21 killing some 150 including a top military commander, and wounding scores leading to the resignations of Defence Minister Abdullah Habibi and Army Chief of Staff Qadam Shah Shahim, the portents are indeed very ominous.

As per reports, gunmen and suicide bombers wearing army uniforms executed the above terror attack, which is not the first time this modus operandi has been used. The Taliban claimed responsibility. 10 terrorists were reportedly killed and one apprehended.

As per reports the terrorists entered the compound with two machine guns mounted on jeeps and drove through the military checkpoints without being checked; obviously the security was totally lax without any system in place for identity checks. Once inside the compound, terrorists opened up with both machine guns, targeting soldiers leaving after Friday prayers from the mosque and others inside the dining hall of the nearby canteen. The attack no doubt was audacious but hardly difficult with four of the attackers having served as soldiers in the past for long periods, with knowledge of the complete base. More significantly, they would have themselves experienced how lax the security generally is.

The irony of the ANA is that while they have very much wanted a soldier’s tenure to be of 10 years, it has not been possible to increase it beyond three years because of lack of finances. Though soldiers can volunteer for second tenure, specialization naturally takes a hit with 20-25 percent of turnover every year. Moreover, in his last year of service, the soldier is unsure of his future. This leads to desertions, sometimes with weapons, and some join the Taliban. In addition, Pakistan has pumped in soldiers from its Mujahid battalions into Afghanistan to covertly assist the Taliban. So planning military type raids is hardly a problem.

UNAMA reports have categorically stated majority of casualties in Afghanistan have been caused by the Taliban and groups like LeT, JeM, Haqqani Network, Hezb-e-Islami, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Islamic Jihad Union, ISIS etc.

The timing of the above terrorist attack is significant coming just eight days after US struck suspected ISIS / ISK locations on April 12 in Achin district in Nangarhar province of Afghanistan with its GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) called the “mother of all bombs”. So if the MOAB strike was a show of force by the US just preceding the visit of US NSA General Mc Master, were the Taliban cocking a snoot at the US through this terrorist attack?

See also  OROP – another wild goose chase?

In December 2016, General John W Nicholson, top US Commander in Afghanistan had gone on record to say that “Islamic State sanctuary that once was nine districts in Afghanistan has been shrunk down to three”. But in the same month (December 2016) Russia, China and Pakistan during a meeting in Moscow (without inviting Afghanistan to participate) warned that the influence of Islamic State (IS) was growing in Afghanistan and that the security situation there was deteriorating. How do you reconcile these two?

At the Moscow meeting, Russia, China and Pakistan mutually agreed to remove certain Taliban leaders from the sanctions list – an arbitrary move without consulting Afghanistan, even as President Ashraf Ghani had already asked the United Nations to add the Taliban’s new leader to its sanctions list.

UNAMA reports have categorically stated majority of casualties in Afghanistan have been caused by the Taliban and groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT), Jaish-i-Mohammed (JeM), Haqqani Network, Hezb-e-Islami, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, Islamic Jihad Union, ISIS etc. US intelligence also reveals that IS in Afghanistan is “amalgamation of primarily disaffected and rebranded former Afghan Taliban and Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) members”. Apparently, they were cobbled together in Peshawar region under tutelage of Pakistan’s ISI and have been pushed west into Nangarhar region of Afghanistan.

Support and reinforcing of Taliban and growth of IS in Afghanistan will in all probability continue with US, Russia, China, Pakistan and Iran all furthering their own national interests.

Also, Voice of America reported last year that Afghanistan officially told Pakistan Hafiz Saeed, former LeT chief is directing IS operations in Afghanistan. So the so called IS in Afghanistan is obviously mixed with LeT and other Pakistani proxies like JeM etc. If the number of IS are going up, it is happening via Pakistan, and these would include ISIS cadres relocating from Iraq-Syria on account of US-led actions. Obviously there would be certain amount of strategic maneuvering, considering the public statement on July 27, 2016, by James B Comey, then US Director FBI, saying, “Eventual victory against the Islamic State could well lead to an uptick of terrorist attacks in the West, not a reduction in them ….. hundreds of really dangerous people, and they are going to flow primarily to Western Europe, but some could well end up in the United States”. Who would want this mass back in the west already struggling with the refugee issue?

See also  AgustaWestland and the European Defence Agency Launch Synthetic Helicopter Tactics Course

Support and reinforcing of Taliban and growth of IS in Afghanistan will in all probability continue with US, Russia, China, Pakistan and Iran all furthering their own national interests. Air power anyway has its limitations in this type of warfare. Whatever the claims of the GBU-43/B MOAB strike on April 13, the tactical effect would be limited. MOAB type of bombs have no penetration power and are most effective against open targets in closed environment like a canyon. That is the reason why the US did not use such bombs while hunting Osama bin-Laden in the Tora Bora caves. Incidentally, the BLU-82, nicknamed ‘Daisy Cutter’ was also designed on the same principle as the GBU-43/B MOAB but was quite ineffective against tunnels of the Vietnam Liberation Army, which can be observed visiting the Suchi Tunnels 60 kms from Ho Chi Minh city.

In February 2017, in a joint report compiled by scholars and experts from Asian Studies Centre, The Heritage Foundation; Georgetown University; National Defence University, New America; Hudson Institute; Brookings Institution; Centre for Strategic and International Studies and the Middle East Institute advised the Trump administration to “state up front that it intends to review the intelligence on Pakistani involvement in supporting terror much more critically than its predecessors.”

All indications point to the Great Game hotting up in Afghanistan. It is ironic that the Afghans are caught up in the grind.

Significantly, the report stated, “The US must stop chasing the mirage of securing change in Pakistan’s strategic direction by giving it additional aid or military equipment. It must be acknowledged that Pakistan is unlikely to change its current policies through inducements alone.” But the Trump administration has actually ‘increased’ the financial support to Pakistan in the civil sector, military aid as well in terms of Coalition Support Funds (CSF).

In terms of CSF, US has already released $550 million to Pakistan within 2017 with another $400 million in waiting subject to action against Haqqanis. A host of Pakistani proxies are operating inside Afghanistan; the US never goes beyond telling Pakistan to curb the Haqqanis, something it has been repeating past decade and a half. General McMaster’s advice to Pakistan to use diplomacy, not proxies was hardly more than a friendly hug.

All indications point to the Great Game hotting up in Afghanistan. It is ironic that the Afghans are caught up in the grind.

No comment on «Afghanistan – great game goes intense»

Leave a comment

* Required fields