Afghanistan: The Fall of the American Empire

Published in Sina
(China) on 11 September 2009
by Zhaogen Chu (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Guangyong Liang. Edited by Alex Brewer.
The eight-year-long Afghanistan anti-terrorism war has become the second longest overseas war next to the Vietnam War. During last year's presidential election, New York Times columnist Friedman wrote: “I would not vote for anybody who is under the mask of 9/11. We do not need another 9/11 president. We need a 9/12 president.” After eight years, more and more Americans have walked out of the shadow of the terrifying 9/11 events.

Under the pressure of the financial crisis, Obama's policies, such as the market rescue, have made the deficit go up continuously. The Afghanistan War, similar to the Iraq War, has become a bottomless pit that sucks in American political, economic and diplomatic resources. According to a series of public opinion polls, the number of Americans who are against the Afghanistan War is on the rise.

Before this, when Obama became president he thoroughly evaluated former President Bush's anti-terrorism strategies. He gave up the idea of a global “War on Terror.” Instead, he emphasized that “necessary military actions must be taken with limited power and in certain regions.” Obama reevaluated the anti-terrorism strategies of the U.S. in Afghanistan and Pakistan and decided to shift the overseas battle center away from Iraq to Afghanistan. The clear and focused purpose of Obama's new strategies toward Afghanistan is to destroy, breakup and smash Al-Qaeda to ensure the security of the U.S. and the international community.

Besides the huge increase of soldiers, the focal point of military actions will be shifted to the training and expansion of Afghanistan's army. During the military transition, Obama is to “utilize political, economic and societal power to eliminate the soil generated by terrorism” and to take effective actions to win the hearts of the so-called “moderates” in Afghanistan, who can bring military support to facilitate Afghanistan's peaceful process. He is also to solve these problems by strengthening the cooperation with the international community. More noticeable is that the U.S. treats the Afghanistan issue the same as border issues with Pakistan.

To carry out his ambitious new strategies, Obama has increased the number of U.S. soldiers in the country by 30,000, effectively doubling troops there. In addition, he provided $2.8 billion for the economic development and the provision of services that people depend on. Learning from the experience gained from the American troops in Iraq, tactics are being shifted from killing the Taliban military to protecting Afghanistan's civilians and making a great effort to keep in contact with tribal elders to improve the U.S.’s image and win morale.

However, it has been about half a year and the situation in Afghanistan has not changed a bit. The Taliban occupies over half of Afghanistan, having 54 percent of the country covered. Also the Taliban is active in 38 percent of the entire region. To ensure the process of the presidential election, the U.S. Marine Corps launched a “sharp sword attack” at the beginning of July and garrisoned the region where the Taliban are most active, thus signaling a change in the way the U.S. military handles executing similar tasks. But the Taliban made use of this “circuitous tactic” and attacked the eastern and northern parts of Afghanistan, causing damage to the troops of many countries.

The death toll of American troops in Afghanistan keeps breaking records; in July and August the totals were higher than any month of the previous eight years. Even the U.S. and the commander of NATO in Afghanistan Stanley McChrystal had to admit that the Taliban is in an advantageous position. In a evaluation report that he sent to the U.S. Department of Defense on Aug 31, he depicted the American troops as a bull and the Taliban as a bull-fighter, clearly admitting that the U.S.’s new strategies have not been effective yet and the U.S. must change it strategies with its alliances. Before this, on Aug 23, U.S. Admiral and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen stated that the situation in Afghanistan is very serious and is worsening. The insurgency plan of the Taliban has gradually become more perfect and complicated.

The current election makes the problem more aggravated. The Karzai administration is corrupt and ineffective. It is also filled with stratocracy and conflicts of interest. Even Karzai is made fun of by the media calling him the “mayor of Kabul.” In the eyes of Afghanistan's people, he has no legitimacy. But given the accusations between Karzai and his opponent Abdullah under the background of the revival of the Taliban and racial problems, it is seemingly hard to predict what will happen to Afghanistan's weak democracy. Whether this will further intensify Afghanistan's domestic situation is yet to be observed.

Under this situation, if Obama continues to expand military, political and economic investment, he will be doing so against public opinion. Within the Democratic Party the differences of opinions will exacerbate and the party will become more passive politically. If he follows public opinion and gives up on Afghanistan, this will allow Al-Qaeda to come back and the U.S. and the rest of the world will never have peace again. It has been pointed out that the failure of the American troops in Afghanistan will most likely be the American version of the Battle of Adrianople in the year of 378. This battle was the prelude to the invasion of the Germans and the collapse of Roman Empire and has resulted in the ill fortune of Western civilization for 1,100 years!


  历时近8年阿富汗反恐战争已成为美国近现代史上仅次于越南战争的第二漫长的海外战争。早在去年大选时,《纽约时报》专栏作家弗里德曼就如此写到:“我将绝对不会为任何一个打着‘9·11’幌子进行竞选的人投票。我们不再需要另一位‘9·11’总统了。我们需要一个‘9·12’总统。”整整8年过去了,越来越多的美国人已从惊恐的“9·11”事件阴影中逐渐走出。

  在金融危机的打击下,奥巴马的救市等一系列政策让美国财政赤字不断攀升,而阿富汗反恐战争与美国的伊拉克战争一样,成为消耗美国政治、经济、外交资源的无底洞。据近期一系列民调显示,反对阿富汗战争的美国人比例日益增多。

  在此之前,奥巴马今年1月出任美国总统后对前任小布什的国际反恐战略进行全面反思,放弃“全球反恐战争”提法,而是在特定的地区,以有限的力量,进行“必要”的军事行动。奥巴马重新评估了美国在阿富汗和巴基斯坦的“反恐”战略,并决定将海外战场重心由伊拉克转向阿富汗。奥巴马对阿新战略“明确和集中的”目的是“破坏、瓦解和击溃”那里的“基地”组织,以确保美国和国际社会安全。除了向阿富汗增加较大规模的援兵,军事行动重点转向训练阿安全部队和扩充阿军队;在军事清剿的同时,“综合运用政治、经济和社会力量消除恐怖主义产生的土壤”以及采取有效措施争取阿富汗国内所谓“温和派”武装的支持以促进阿富汗和平进程等,并通过加强与国际社会合作解决这些问题。更值得注意的是,美国首次将阿富汗与其邻国——巴基斯坦边境视为同一问题。

  为实施其雄心勃勃的新战略,奥巴马已增派3万美军,使驻阿美军人数几乎翻一番,并向阿富汗提供28亿美元来发展经济和“提供人民赖以生存的服务”。借鉴驻伊拉克美军后期的经验,战术上从杀伤塔利班武装转变为保护阿富汗平民安全,努力密切与部落长老的联系,改善形象,争取民心。但时过半年,阿富汗局势仍未好转。塔利班已占据阿富汗半壁江山,在54%的国土有永久性存在,另在38%的地区活动频繁。为保障阿总统选举的顺利举行,美国海军陆战队7月初在阿南部发动了“利剑攻势”,并一改往日执行任务后撤回营地的做法,长期驻守在塔利班活动地区。但塔利班武装采用“迂回战术”,在阿东部和北部连续发动袭击,给驻阿多国部队造成重大损失。驻阿美军7月、8月阵亡人数接连刷新阿富汗战争近8年来美军单月死亡人数纪录。连美国和北约驻阿富汗最高指挥官麦克里斯特尔Stanley McChrystal 将军本人都承认塔利班目前“占了上风”。他8月31日向美国国防部递交的阿富汗战争评估报告中形容美军就像一头牛,而塔利班则像斗牛士,明确承认美国新战略未能发挥效力,美国和盟国必须改变策略。此前,美国参谋长联席会议主席迈克·默伦Mike Mullen 在8月23日也表示,“阿富汗的情况很严重,而且每况愈下。塔利班的叛乱计划已日渐完善,并愈加复杂。”

  此次阿富汗大选更加剧了问题的严重性。卡尔扎伊政府腐败成风,毫无效率。军阀政治、派系倾轧大行其道。卡尔扎伊甚至被媒体戏称为“喀布尔市长”。在阿富汗民众眼中,它毫无合法性。而卡尔扎伊和他的主要竞争者阿卜杜拉间的相互指控,在塔利班死灰复燃和种族问题的背景下,阿富汗脆弱的民主似乎更加难以预测,是否会进一步激化阿国内局势仍有待观察。

  在这种情况下,如果奥巴马继续加大军事、政治和经济等战争资源投入,势必与民意背道而驰,民主党内部出现严重分歧难以避免,政治上将出现更大的被动。如果顺从民意逐渐放弃阿富汗,则会造成“基地”组织卷土重来,美国与世界亦将永无宁日。甚至有人指出,美军在阿富汗的失败,很可能将是美国版的 378年阿德里安堡之战,经此一役成为日耳曼人大举侵犯罗马的开端和罗马帝国覆灭的前奏,而西方文明随后在大约1100年的时间里都由此走上了背运!
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Topics

Poland: Meloni in the White House. Has Trump Forgotten Poland?*

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Japan: US Administration Losing Credibility 3 Months into Policy of Threats

Mauritius: Could Trump Be Leading the World into Recession?

India: World in Flux: India Must See Bigger Trade Picture

Palestine: US vs. Ansarallah: Will Trump Launch a Ground War in Yemen for Israel?

Ukraine: Trump Faces Uneasy Choices on Russia’s War as His ‘Compromise Strategy’ Is Failing

Related Articles

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Cuba: Trump, Panama and the Canal

China: White House Peddling Snake Oil as Medicine

China: Prime Take: How Do Americans View US Tariff Hikes?