President Barack Obama recently said that by the end of nextyear the war in Afghanistan “will come to a responsible end.” A responsibleapproach must recognize the dynamics on the ground. Violence and predation inthe country are deeply rooted. Even in the winter fighting “lull,” there are anaverage of 50 insurgent attacks a day across the country.
What is urgently required is a realistic assessment by theUnited States and its allies about the challenges ahead, a more politicalapproach, and a commitment to remain engaged in Afghanistan well beyond 2014.This will not be easy. Disillusionment about Afghanistan in Washington andother capitals is growing. The vast military and civilian enterprise – theUnited States alone has spent $83 billion in assistance since 2001 – has beenshaped more by Western security imperatives than by an understanding of thecountry’s complex social fabric, political economy, or, for that matter, itspeoples’ priorities.
The impact of civilian aid has been mixed. Significantprogress has been made in areas such as infrastructure, girls’ education andhealth, but funds have also contributed to cronyism, corruption and insecurity.Accelerated drawdown of international forces is ratcheting up anxiety bothinside the country and in the region. Meanwhile, the Taliban remain strong;warlords are reported to be rearming; and many Afghans that can are leaving orgetting their money out. More than 32,000 Afghans made asylum applications in2012 – more than any other nationality worldwide. Relapse into civil war wouldbe disastrous – for the long suffering population and for the wider region.
The early 1990s provides a terrible precedent. Once theRussians withdrew their backing for Najibullah in 1992, his regime collapsedand the country descended into violent upheaval, causing thousands of deathsand disappearances. A responsible international approach now is the bestdefense against a repeat of history. What is required above all is amultilayered political strategy that reduces uncertainty and fosters stability.
Only Afghans can reconcile their differences. But theinternational community can play a critical role in creating the conditions inwhich this can happen. It should be rooted in ground realities and Afghaninterests. It must ensure that international policies do not unwittinglyintensify local or national power struggles or undermine stability. Insecurityand uncertainty are pervasive, rooted in lawlessness, abuse of power, and lackof economic opportunities for men and women. This is compounded by doubts amongAfghans about the depth and durability of the West’s commitment to Afghanistan.
The international approach must seek to reinforce securityin its broader sense, over the long term. A US-Afghanistan security agreementwould send an important signal to Afghans and to regional players that thistime – unlike the 1990s – the West will not turn its back on Afghanistan. Aidmust be used shrewdly to create jobs, especially for young people, and promotesustainable livelihoods. It must strengthen, not undercut, accountability inthe government and its police and security forces.
A reduction in civilian aid is inevitable, and there is astrong case that more can be done with less. But large scale, uncoordinatedcuts would be damaging, and reinforce unpredictability. A stable politicaltransition requires presidential elections in 2014 that are seen by Afghans aslegitimate. Electoral complications abound: The lessons from the flawed 2009elections must be taken on board, including by the international community.
Ultimately, there is a need for a more inclusive, functionaland responsive political system that empowers citizens and entrenches checksand balances at the national level. Above all, political transition requires amore systematic and broad-based reconciliation process. Efforts remain fragileand inchoate. But Pakistan says it will support the process, the United Stateshas backed the establishment of a Taliban office in Doha, and the Taliban saythey are open to dialogue.
It is no mystery what needs to happen next: structured talksabout core issues between all the parties to the conflict. Given the mistrustbetween the parties and complexity of the issues, it will require mediation.And the process must be as wide as it is deep: In due course that dialogue mustbe expanded to include all Afghanistan’s social and political groups, as wellas its neighbors.
The United States and its allies can use their influence tohelp chart a way ahead and correct the corrosive sense of uncertainty. Drawdownmust not mean write-off. There are no shortages of potential pitfalls, butprogress is possible. It will require political acuity, honesty about thechallenges ahead, and a shared determination to address them.
Michael Keating is a senior consulting fellow at ChathamHouse, and former UN deputy special representative for Afghanistan in 2011-12.Matt Waldman is a fellow at Harvard University's Belfer Center for Science andInternational Affairs
