Farewell to a Crisis Zone

In Pakistan, 5 million people are trying to escape monsoon flooding, while in Kabul, the Taliban launched a 20-hour attack on the diplomatic quarter. These two events are connected, even if their relevance to each other isn’t apparent at first glance. Not only has the West conjoined both countries as AfPak (the Afghanistan-Pakistan theater of operations) into one crisis region, but of more immediate importance is the connection of forgetfulness.

This is apparent from the interpretation and relative weighting of the two events. The flooding hardly makes it onto the front pages anymore, even though it is not only a humanitarian catastrophe but a political one as well. Such a fragile nation is again being put to the test. The last flood took place less than a year ago. That time, 20 million people were driven from their homes, and the newspapers were full of their stories.

An alarming question keeps coming up: If we — read, the West — don’t help, then the Taliban will. And it follows naturally that the Taliban will gain more sympathizers. The nation will continue its slide into the depths. That’s twisted logic, because it assumes that anyone who accepts help from the Taliban automatically also supports its political goals.

As strange as the “Talibanization” argument seemed, it was nevertheless useful: The flood is now unquestionably seen as a political challenge. If it is, that debate is taking place in some remote corner of the public square. Flooding in Pakistan? Sorry, we have other things to worry about.

The attack in Kabul generated a lot of media attention, but the reactions to it are amazing. The Taliban attacks security forces in the heart of Kabul for 20 hours, firing at the U.S. Embassy and NATO headquarters, and what do we hear in response from NATO? That the attacks are “an annoyance” but no threat to security. Everything’s under control! That has to be a deliberate suppression of the facts. There hasn’t been a similar attack in Kabul since the ’80s, when the civil war there was raging. NATO’s reaction reveals just one thing: NATO wants out of Afghanistan.

The withdrawal of NATO troops is appropriate and also inescapable. But that doesn’t mean the region has to be abandoned. The West still has strategic interests there. With the creation of AfPak, President Obama has made the entire region the center of Western foreign and security policy, but what is now taking place is the mental uncoupling of the West from the crisis area. Ten years after 9/11, they’re saying the nightmare is over; we’re turning the page on this. AfPak? Who knows what that’s supposed to mean? The nightmare isn’t over; it’s actually reaching a new high point — in Afghanistan and Pakistan.