The opening of political office for Taliban militants last month in Doha and US dropping of its preconditions for peace talks can be interpreted as fundamental change of its policy towards Taliban. Previously, severing ties with al-Qaeda network and halting violence were some nonnegotiable conditions of the United States to resume any peace talks. But the ongoing process shows that it has dropped its preconditions and actually is very disparate to strike a peace deal in order to ensure that Afghanistan will not be changed once again into a safe haven for the terrorist groups. Such a change I think is linked to concerns over the prospective of the country in absence of foreign security forces. Seemingly, the US is worried that after its military withdrawal, uncertainty and instability may once again become the only certain characteristics of the Afghan society.
So, the question is why after spending billions of dollars and huge military sacrifices the situation has remained so volatile that the future is entangled with numerous if’s and If not’s? Why after fighting constantly for past twelve years against insurgents still we and our allies are worried about the possible trigger of new round of insecurity and instability? Certainly the answers have a lot to do with mistakes committed by the international community.
One of the key mistakes that the International community, particularly, the US, made was huge investment on the wrong guys. Jihadi and Northern Alliance leaders got huge bulk of the US clandestine financial support. According to the chief of the first CIA team deployed in the country, Mr. Gary Schroen, during 40 days of their mission in Panjshir Valley, he distributed five million US dollar to anti-Taliban commanders. Soon after the entrance of first CIA team in the country, tens of Millions of dollars were poured into similar pockets aimed to strengthen them against Taliban without considering the ultimate consequences. Through such bribery, the US tried to make these figures as its stooge without considering that what would be their reaction once the stream of taxed dollars dries up?
No doubt, the US dollar was huge enough to tempt influential figures and make them to work closely with the United States and its allies. But the question is: could the financial support change the cult and values that the influential commanders and ethnic leaders believe on? Can the money create commitment for promulgation of something that you do not believe? Obviously, the answer is a certain No. the only thing that money can do is developing a short-term and volatile alliance that will end whenever it does not bear any benefit for one or both sides. In the case of Afghanistan, for instance, the alliance between US and its influential Afghan allies will end whenever it stops pouring cash into their pockets.
It can be claimed with certainty that majority of influential figures the US started working from the very first day of sending of the first CIA team, code named, Jawbreaker, do not believe in democracy and human rights. What have kept them beside the US is money not necessarily their commitment to democracy and liberty. I can tell you that presently visible part of Afghan government officials indeed have no believe in democracy and human rights. If today they reach to a conclusion that support of West and democracy has no benefits, they will just switch their side on spot. Thus, no matter how much the US and its allies try, these gentlemen will be with them till they receive cash or diplomatic support to remain in power. Expecting them to promote democracy and support the process of institutionalization of human rights actually looks too childish if not stupid.
If today 2014 looms as a nightmare is largely due to concern over commitment of Afghan leaders to democracy and human rights. If a free and fair election is ensured and the government remains committed to support and protect civilians’ rights, it was quite unreasonable to be worried about post 2014.
Presently, people are just looking to mouths of leaders and politicians, and these gentlemen try their best to keep people worried in order to remain or become part of the power. I have not heard that officials ensure that they will protect our achievements made during past twelve years and will not let them be spoiled. Instead, they moot issues that further sparks worry among civilians.
These all originate from the issue that I mentioned in the above paragraph; investment on wrong guys. They deem cooperation with the US for promoting of democracy and human rights as paying off their liability to USA not something necessary to bring peace and stability to the country. According to them, the US should be thankful to them for remaining silent against its military presence and promoting modern values. Strengthening of democratic institutions and supporting freedom and liberty are something that they tolerate not something they feel necessary to become an integral part of Afghan society.
Therefore, if the international community could manage part of the fund they poured into the country toward young and democratic layers of the society, we would not have had the problem what we are facing today. Instead, we might have had strong democratic institutions and foreign countries also were not worried what would happen after their military withdrawal, because the empowerment of those who believe in democracy would necessarily end up to stronger democratic government, making serious efforts to promulgation of democratic norms and values. Such process certainly paved the way for larger support of people from the government and proportionately stronger opposition to Taliban-led militants.
In brief, if the international community could at least lead part of their donation towards intellectuals who oppose radicalism, we would not have had representatives like Abdul Sattar Ghawasi to announce jihad against media or first Vice President to warn of going back to mountain. Instead we would have had a powerful democrat layer who would support democracy because they believe in, not because of receiving money by doing so.