Onderstaande analyse over de oorlog in Afghanistan en Irak, schreef ik voor Prof. Lindley-French, professor aan Oxford University, bijzonder hoogleraar strategische studies aan de Universiteit Leiden, lid van the Atlantic Council (een prestigieuze militaire denktank in Washington) en persoonlijk adviseur van onder meer de Britse premier David Cameron. De opdracht was anders dan anders: schrijf geen academische paper met referenties en een bibliografie, maar een strategische analyse op basis van je eigen kennis over defensie en veiligheid.

Het basisargument van mijn analyse is dat de VS en de internationale gemeenschap niet in Afghanistan en Irak hadden moeten aanvallen, maar de echte probleemstaten hadden moeten aanpakken; Pakistan en Iran. Afghanistan en Irak zijn slechts de takken, of de uitwassen van het ‘kwaad’; de stam bestaat uit Pakistan en Iran. Extremistische groepen in Pakistan en het radicale bewind van Iran profiteerden van de groeiende instabiliteit van hun buurlanden. De internationale gemeenschap zal snel moeten ingrijpen, want Afghanistan valt niet te redden zonder Pakistan aan te pakken, terwijl Iran zijn invloed steeds verder uitbreid – waardoor een grote confrontatie in het Midden-Oosten dreigt.

Introduction

On September 11 2001, on what seemed yet another blue Monday, the world was shocked by one of the most horrific events in history. The WTC towers collapsed after two passenger airplanes hit the Twin Towers. A third airplane smashed into the Pentagon, while a fourth crashed on a country field in Pennsylvania. These atrocious events led to approximately 3.000 dead, leaving 6.000 others injured.

When President Bush Jr. stood on the smouldering ashes of Ground Zero, the fire- and policemen shouted: ‘Get those bastards!’ It was for the whole world to see: the American public wanted a reaction, and it wanted a reaction fast. The perpetrators were easily found. Right after the attacks Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet reported that the hijackers were members of Al-Qaida. Its leader, the Saudi exile Osama Bin Laden, soon became the most wanted man on earth. While the Bush administration was looking for a way to retaliate, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz pushed forward a broader retaliation plan, including attacks against Bin Laden and Iraq. On September 15, President Bush Jr. made the decision to focus his first response on Al-Qaida in Afghanistan. Iraq would follow shortly.

Peace is still absent in today’s Afghanistan and Iraq – as is real democracy. American troops withdrew from Iraq in 2010, and are making preparations to leave Afghanistan. Meanwhile Iran and Islamic factions in Pakistan are thriving on the growing instability of their neighboring countries. As the United States (US), the United Kingdom (UK) and their allies start a last surge in hope of a final blow against marching Taliban fighters, hidden dangers emerge. Afghanistan and Iraq form only the branches of the real security threat in the Middle East and East Asia. The trunk constitutes of Iran and Pakistan; two countries in turmoil, growing Islamic extremism and aggressive foreign policies. These countries ask for a bigger axe to be cut down, yet the time of pruning shears has passed.

How we got this far: the war against Afghanistan and Iraq

On September 17 2001, an ultimatum was set for the Taliban regime to surrender Osama Bin Laden. It refused to do so. The US, the UK and their coalition forces started the war against Afghanistan and its Taliban regime in ‘Operation Enduring Freedom’ on October 7. The invasion got support from NATO and later the UN Security Council which established an International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).  But the war soon changed into a difficult counterinsurgency operation, which is still ongoing today

On March 20 2003, the Bush administration decided to invade Iraq in ‘Operation Iraqi Freedom’. The US and UK accused Saddam Hussein’s regime of having Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) which would threaten Western, and regional security. By replacing the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein, the Bush administration also hoped to set an example. Although Saddam’s regime was toppled rather easily, the war in Iraq soon changed into a political and strategic nightmare. After the Sunni Ba’ath regime was dissolved, the long oppressed Shia’s released their rage on the Sunni’s. Ethnic and religious cleansing occurred, destabilizing the entire country and costing the lives of thousands of Iraqi citizens. The number of deaths for the American and British mourned up to 4429 and 179 respectively.

Although the Taliban regime in Afghanistan was quickly overthrown by the US-led coalition forces, Taliban groups have soon started a successful counterinsurgency. As for today; Taliban fighters keep on crossing the border from Pakistan, where their numbers are sharply increasing. Latest reports on Afghanistan are contradictory; General Petraeus claims that the surge is finally beginning to pay off, while the Red Cross warns for deteriorating security in Afghanistan. Either way, it is difficult to see how long-lasting stability could be guaranteed with most international troops leaving in a year or two.

As for Iraq, no WMDs have been found, let’s stand evidence that Saddam Hussein supported Al-Qaida. The country is still very unstable and suicide bombings remain a frequent phenomenon in urban areas. The US presence in Iraq led to massive outrage under Muslims worldwide and attracted radical extremists in search for jihad, making it a breeding ground for terrorists. The Kurdish part of Iraq is calling for independence, which is not only unacceptable for the country’s Sunni and Shia population, but also for Turkey and other neighboring countries including Syria and Iran. The Kurdish question might proof to be one of the most delicate issues in the region and could easily disrupt already tense relations.

Why Pakistan is the real deal

If not already a failed state, Pakistan is at least turning into a failing one. The central government in Islamabad has lost much of its control on the Federal Administered Tribal Areas and the Swat valley. The Pakistani army has cleared militants with large-scale offensives, yet Taliban fighters are resurging time and time again. After the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in 2007, heavy bomb blasts in Pakistan’s cities, recurrent streams of Taliban fighters from Pakistan, and the emergence of Al-Qaida training camps in Waziristan, Pakistan got renewed attention of the international community which is now pressing for stronger countermeasures.

Yet the Pakistani government is already too weakened by internal strife and corruption to act effectively against rising insurgents. High military officials and civil servants are not only accused of being bribed by Taliban fighters and terrorist groups, but also of actively supporting insurgents. Terrorist experts have observed that Islamic extremists from all over the world are travelling to Pakistan in search for training or a safe haven. Allegedly, Bin Laden and other Al-Qaida officials would hole up in Pakistan’s border regions.

The CIA has been involved in Pakistani military operations as has US-trained Afghan militias. Small raids by US soldiers have led to massive outrage by Pakistanis. Nevertheless the Obama administration is aiming at harder actions against Pakistan. Recent New York Times headlines like ‘U.S. Will Widen War on Militants Inside Pakistan’ and ‘Pentagon Planning More Attacks With Drones and Commandos’ are abundantly clear.

It might all be a little too late. By choosing to fight Afghanistan, the coalition forces ignored the security threat of Pakistan. Insurgent groups continue to run up against Islamabad, which is the heart of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal. The War in Afghanistan fired up regional extremism and strengthened insurgent groups in and outside Pakistan. Pakistan has long been the patron of the Afghan Taliban regime. An attack against Pakistan would therefore have easily crippled the Taliban in Kabul. The US should have bombed the Al-Qaida training camps in Afghanistan and focused on Pakistan instead – yet it chose to act in a primary response of blind rage.

Iran and the Shia revival

Iran has been a problematic case to the West, ever since the Islamic Revolution. Being a Shia-Muslim Farsi-speaking country surrounded by Sunni-Arab neighbors, puts Iran in a unique yet tricky position. The Ayatollah-regime, facing many domestic problems from the onset, has used foreign policy as a tool to divert attention of its restless young population. The bloody Iran-Iraq war has been celebrated as if patriotism offers a one-way ticket to paradise. Iran was unable to win from its smaller but military well-equipped neighbor. Hence, Iraq was the only country to contain Iran. When Saddam Hussein’s regime fell, Iran made the most of its chances.

Iran was already supporting radical Shia groups all over the Middle-East, primarily Hezbollah. Now that the large Shia-population of Iraq was no longer oppressed by the Sunni’s, Iran started to support these Shia factions as well. Iranian weapons have been found in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. Iran’s language changed; Ahmadinejad’s regime set itself up as the arch-enemy of Israel and the adversary of the West. This led to a popularity-rise of Iran among angry and frustrated youngsters in the Middle-East.

Iran’s alleged nuclear program, which according to Teheran is only of civilian use, while Israel and the US claim that Iran is developing nuclear weapons, is another reason of concern. Due to new Wikileaks information, we now know that not only Israel but also Arab countries have requested for a military response against Iran. Yet, fighting two ground wars have seriously overstretched US forces, which makes it impossible for the US to start yet another operation. Iran knows that and is picking the fruits.

Conclusion

Although there was some ground to start the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, the US and its allies have underestimated the strategic consequences. Not only did Afghanistan and Iraq turn into headache dossiers, they also led Iran and Islamic factions in Pakistan to gather momentum. The International Community will not accept another war, but it will have to react to this increasing security threat in one way of another. It chose to fight middle-rank countries instead of the large problematic cases. Yet by pruning branches, the trunk grows.