As sought by President Ghani, UNSC must activate a non-interference mechanism for verification of frontier activities. Rawalpindi, on its part, must help fight the real enemy and not create a smokescreen of the IS
This month, the United National Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 2344 (2017) extended the mandate of United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan by another year, making it America’s longest war of choice. Ever since the US and the the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) drawdown at the end of 2014, and Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) took full charge of security, the Afghans appear to be under pressure. They called 2015 the year of setbacks and 2016 the worst year in terms of casualties and attrition.
Afghanistan’s National Security Advisor Mohammad Hanif Atmar, last month in New Delhi, said that ANSF, on an average was suffering 28 fatalities daily. In comparison, the counter-terror campaign in Jammu & Kashmir is a cakewalk. In 2007, Indian security forces lost 122 personnel, 12 in 2012 and last year, 95 combatants. The fall of Sangin, the lynchpin district in Helmand Province this month, shows how fluid the situation is. While US Special Inspector General for Reconstruction’s latest report indicates that 57.2 per cent of 407 district are under Afghan control or influence, Gen John Nicholson, Commander, Operation Resolute Force, says 70 per cent of Afghan population lives in areas under Government control.
During this year’s Raisina Dialogue, former Afghan Intelligence chief, Amrullah Saleh, described the security situation as militarily containable but in a bloody stalemate that required to be broken. He said that the new Taliban leadership was in lahore, not Quetta, presumably pushed into the hinterland fearing US drone strikes after the elimination of Afghan Taliban leader Akhtar Mansour last year inside Pakistan.
Atmar said Afghanistan and Pakistan had exchanged lists of 86 and 76 terrorists plus 32 training centres in Pakistan. Kabul wanted Islamabad to act against them and so will Kabul but with a third party verification mechanism. After initially pivoting towards Pakistan, Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani is a bitter critic of Pakistan, accusing it of waging an undeclared war by covertly supporting terrorist networks, including the Taliban.
At the Heart of Asia conference in New Delhi last year, he demanded an Asian or international regime acceptable to Pakistan to verify frontier activities, including terrorist operations. This is akin to asking for a UN-sponsored and monitored non-interference mechanism to name and shame intruding entities and countries.
The Kabul Government has taken off its gloves and publicly named Pakistan for cross-border terrorism. The latest attacks were made at UNHRC in Geneva followed by the Boao Forum in China. Already, Gen Nicholson, Sen John McCain and Defence Secretary James Mattis, have noted that as long as insurgents and senior leaders enjoy safe havens in Pakistan, they have no incentive to reconcile.
Atmar said that Pakistan “had lied to us about peace talks”. like others, he is waiting for the Trump Administration to announce its Afghanistan policy, which may contain a new military surge and a strategy to deal with terrorist sanctuaries in Pakistan, including the more liberal employment of lethal drones as part of coercive diplomacy to make Rawalpindi act against the Taliban-Haqqani network.
Meanwhile, Atmar, in a reply to a question at the Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses conference, said that US-trained Afghan Special Forces are one of the best in the world and “we will take the war to sanctuaries wherever they may be”. No Afghan leader has ever made such a bold public statement of intent. Kabul has obviously been inspired by the Indian Army’s surgical strikes in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir.
A recent Royal United Services Institute study by Theo Farrell and Michael Semple says that the Taliban movement (approximately 40,000 fighters) is in disarray with its leader Maulawi Haibatullah Akhundzada weak and ineffective and with several factions vying for power. The battlefield successes of 2016 have come at very high cost.
Disaffection about war, division over peace talks, and the independent operations of the Mansour faction in Helmand were complicating any cohesive response in war and peace strategies. Taliban spokesperson Zabiullah Mujahid has said no reconciliation till foreign troops leave Afghanistan as our fight is for independence which suggests no change from the old line “while the Americans may have the watches, the Taliban have the time”.
Dissent and discord among the Taliban have benefited the Islamic State (IS). Rawalpindi has consistently maintained it has only limited control, not influence over the Taliban. According to Afghan and US sources, IS presence has reportedly reduced from control of seven to 10 districts to two to three districts in Nangarhar with its fighting strength pegged at 1,500-3,000; another 200 IS in Kunar Province.
Atmar says the IS is a mutation and morphing of the Taliban, Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan, Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan and others — simply rebranding as no IS has come from Iraq or Syria. But the Hamid Karzai confidante Aimal Faizi says some may be escapees from there. The failure of the Quadrilateral Contact Group and other non-Government peace initiatives appears to have given birth to a new political grouping led by Russia and China which unsurprisingly includes Pakistan, had initially excluded Afghanistan and kept the US out but after the initial Moscow meeting now has Iran, Turkey and India also on board.
lifting of sanctions on the Taliban was ostensibly a key item of the agenda though the real purpose was doing a strategic somersault on the threat: Switching the centre of gravity from the Taliban to IS. A IS video sent to Beijing claimed Chinese Uighur Muslims would shed “blood like rivers” in Xinjiang. Similarly, Moscow fears that its three to 5,000 Muslims in Syria will return and set up base in Afghanistan affecting its back yard, Central Asia. Creating the bogey of IS is the new strategy. Russia and China, two countries, which have no troops on the ground and give little economic aid to Afghanistan, have begun calling the shots on who the real enemy is. Atmar says the idea, that the Taliban will fight IS, is baloney. But Moscow and Beijing with Rawalpindi’s goading are attempting to alter the agenda. The Afghans, Americans and Indians will oppose the idea of making foe into friend. Breaking the bloody stalemate in battle of attrition in which Kabul is daily losing 28 soldiers is necessary. A US and Nato military surge in Afghanistan, one hopes, will be the outcome of the Nato summit in May, which President Trump will attend.
Surgical strikes by Afghan Special Forces against terrorist sanctuaries across the Durand line will be the first step in dismantling safe havens. The UNSC must activate the non-interference mechanism sought by Ghani. Rawalpindi should help fight the real enemy rather than create the smokescreen of IS. The new Director General Inter-Services Intelligence, lt Gen Naveed Mukhtar’s US War College researched plan to accommodate moderate Taliban in Kabul Government is worth pursuing. He should get them to the talks table.
(The writer is a retired Major General of the Indian Army and strategic affairs expert)