Reaction Paper #8

1.      Rashid- Chapters 16-19

Chapter 16 discusses the war’s affect on the central Asian region in general. The USSR left a vacuum which resulted in huge wealth gaps. Kyrgyzstan became more politically totalitarian since 9/11. The dictator, Askar Akayev, justified it by saying it was necessary due to the increased threat of terrorism, but it’s impossible to ignore his personal economic and political power gain by playing the dictator card. In Turkmenistan a similar trend occurred. The president closed public facilities, restricted health care, and limited education and the media, all in the name of fighting extremism. It is worth questioning, however, that besides the likely corruption, these Islamic countries may have just been attempting to conform more to Taliban and Al Qaida views of Islam, government, and human rights in an effort to protect themselves. Instead of fighting the Taliban, they were really just reducing their probability of being a target. Uzbekistan starts out following a similar pattern, but to an even greater extent, due to an economic collapse soon after 9/11 and the added bonus of significantly increasing the pay of the police and military forces. The dictator, Karmov, is a skilled ruthless politician and quickly began playing the two powers USA and Russia off against each other. The practical result of which was the US was kicked out of Uzbekistan, making it more difficult to mount military operations in the region. The moral of this story is that Al Qaida and 9/11 increased political and economic repression of fellow Muslims, just as much as they hurt the west.

            In chapter 17, Rashid discusses the role of Pakistan in Al Qaida and the Taliban’s resurgence between 2005 and 2006. It became clear to US and NATO forces that both groups had effective control over the Pakistani military, the tribal areas, and some of the political parties. Al Qaida established their central command in Pakistan to plan attacks on US forces in Afghanistan. Taliban and Al Qaida fighters would simply cross the border, carry out their offensives, and return to safety in Pakistan where the US could not follow them. The resulting political pressure between NATO, Bush, and Musharraf over who was responsible for dealing with the groups and which country they were actually in since the border in that area is not well defined. Eventually NATO gained the upper hand politically and began to use NATO forces to take over parts of the Pakistani government, the afghan government and local areas. However, due to the NATO constitutions and the governments of member countries, many of these forces were very limited. Of the NATO members, only UK and Canadian forces in addition to the US forces really accomplished anything meaningful, despite the fact that they faced a stronger Taliban than expected. It turned out to be too little too late.

Chapter 18 talks about the crumbling of the Pakistani state, which really had been troubled for a long time, but especially began to fall apart under Musharraf. All liberal or moderate policies, though supported by the Supreme Court, could not be enforced unless Musharraf and the military did so, and the military and ISI were basically their own government. Whenever Musharraf finally got around to protecting his own people using the military, Al Qaida would retaliate violently. The political flip flopping on Musharraf’s part went from making deals with Jihadists to supporting the Americans throughout 2006 and 2007. He was literally incapable of choosing a side and sticking to it, showing he was not one to think for himself, and simply responded to pressure from either side. He even made a deal with Benazir Bhutto to share power, in an attempt to gain some legitimacy. He went back and forth between supporting democracy and suffrage to declaring martial law depending on what suited him at the time. Bhutto ended up being shot while campaigning against Musharraf, which resulted in her becoming something of a martyr for the Pakistani People’s Party and they swept the elections.  Back in Afghanistan, there was no success on the NATO side because their forces were limited and they had no strategy. The Taliban had no problem outlasting NATO.

Rashid’s conclusion in Chapter 19 discusses Pakistan after the elections in 2008, where there was established a coalition government led by the liberal and moderate parties, though this later broke down. Pakistan faces economic collapse, energy shortages, human rights crises and disintegrating relations with many nations thanks to Musharraf’s political failures. Gilani, the new president, launched a military offensive, but the military brokered a deal with the militants of their own accord without the consent of the government, proving that the military was too powerful. The peace treaty didn’t even stop attacks by Al Qaida anywhere else besides the tribal areas. By 2008 the Taliban was fairly strong again and was putting up a good guerilla fight against the US and NATO, who had the least success and highest casualty rate since 2001. The mounting cost due to the required troop surge by Obama by now had become ridiculously high. Which, combined with the US’s own economic collapse, caused quite a crisis for the US government. The lack of progress in Afghanistan meant the loss of foreign investors which paralyzed the already destroyed Afghanistan economy.

2.      “The War Briefing”

“The War Briefing” discusses the state of the war in Afghanistan in the fall of 2008 during the election. In 2008 the Taliban was resurging supported by bases in Pakistan. The most dangerous area is in the Korengal, mountain passes along the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan used for smuggling by terrorists. It is very rugged terrain and extremely dangerous. The situation in Afghanistan had been deteriorating since 2006 and the number of attacks on the US reached a high in 2008. After he was elected, Obama immediately planned to remove troops from Iraq and have a troop surge in Afghanistan, despite the talk of ending both wars. The soldiers in Afghanistan, especially in Korengal, were very poorly protected for doing such dangerous work. There was a much higher death rate than necessary.

The Taliban was growing because of propaganda, and the failure of the Kabul government to have any control over surrounding and remote territories. The fear of Taliban takeover is truly dangerous, and could make the already feeble economy collapse completely. One of the main causes of these problems is that, back in 2001, there was never enough military to completely defeat the Taliban at the time, Instead the US military and CIA just pushed them aside into Pakistan where they found more people and funds from the drug trade and adopted ideology from Al Qaida. The US made a fundamental mistake when it attempted to wage a war, reconstruct a country, and run a government all at the same time, especially with limited resources. The US has yet to replace the Taliban with any real authority or justice system, so a power vacuum will be created if the US ever leaves. The main current problem (as of 2008) is that there aren’t enough troops to go around. This forces the US military to use more air strikes and drone strikes which unfortunately have a much higher civilian death rate and destroy more property than troops on the ground. The locals don’t like this obviously so this forces many of them to the Taliban’s side. This growing alliance between the locals and the Taliban is breakable though. It is estimated that only 1-2% would never negotiate with the military. The vast majority of them only want things in return.

            In Pakistan, the Taliban and Are Qaida are and will remain safe. No national government had every controlled or occupied the tribal areas in Pakistan even all the way back to the British in the 1800s and before. Their alliance with the ISI strengthens them. The ISI worry that without the Taliban, Afghanistan will fall under India’s influence, which is not helped by the fact that Karzai is very openly pro-India. The ISI practically openly claims support for Al Qaida, almost as an insurance policy, because the Pakistani army would be no match for them and the Taliban. Instead they make deals and alliances to protect themselves. Each time a deal is made it becomes much worse for the US army in the field, who isn’t allowed to cross into Pakistan. When drones kill one Taliban leader, a new one simply rises up into his place. Furthermore, Al Qaida and the Taliban are no longer sticking to just the tribal areas. They are slowly pushing out, beginning to infiltrate other parts of Pakistan which is in grave danger of becoming a failed state with a good deal of nuclear weapons. Pakistan collapsing would be the worst possible thing for the region. Bhutto’s assassination is a great example of how the liberal and moderate Pakistani stability is being defeated. Now Musharraf is gone, and Bhutto’s husband is in power, but it still a weak government. If America pushes too hard it could lose Pakistan completely.

3.       “Wiki Secrets”

Wiki Secrets is the story of Bradley Manning and Julian Assange. Bradley Manning was an intelligence analyst for the army in Iraq, who had high security clearance and a lot of disillusionment with the Army and the government. Julian Assange was the founder of WikiLeaks, the whistle blowing website that publishes top secret information when their anonymous sources send it to them with the goal of transparency in the government.

            Bradley Manning was a product of the information, like everyone born between 1985 onward, he was used to and okay with sharing personal information with the general public via Facebook, twitter, blogging, and chatting. Like all members of this generation, they had grown up hating secrets. Bradley was very smart and proud of being entrusted with such information, but he was also gay in the military, at the height of the Don’t Ask Don’t Tell Policy. The military, unlike Bradley’s generation, is very fond of secrets, especially personal ones about sexual orientation. It is very likely that DADT plays a large role in this story. Though Bradley never had the right mentality for subordination or obedience, he was sent to Iraq anyway, despite his history of acting out and depression. He was given access to the largest secure area in Iraq and was able to download thousands and thousands of files without anyone noticing (which says a great deal about cyber security in the US military).

No one can really prove how the information found its way to wikileaks. The site goes through a lot to protect its sources, even from wikileaks staff. The only difference here is that it looks as though Julian Assange may have solicited some of the material after being directly in contact with manning, which is illegal and considered espionage. Getting caught was really Bradley’s own fault though. He confessed everything via chat to a hacker that he had never actually met before. The Hacker turned him in. If the information made it to Wiki leaks the normal way, Julian Assange cannot be blamed, but evidence points to the fact that Assange and Manning were communicating by other means.

So the question is: Is Bradley manning good or bad. Was he a whistle blower or a traitor? The leaked documents had a great deal of impact around the world, and at least partially fueled the Arab spring of this past year. It definitely at least proves that one (or two) people can change the world.

4.      “Ahmed Rashid and Dexter Filkins on Charlie Rose”

Ahmed Rashid and Dexter Filkins both appeared on Charlie Rose this past summer. They described how Afghanistan is still deteriorating despite the troop surge as of august 2011.  The Taliban is escalating, but are supposedly in talks with the US. The problem is some Taliban are willing to negotiate but others aren’t: the ones with closer ties to Al Qaida. The US isn’t giving much ground though. The historical point of view that “We don’t negotiate with terrorists” applies, but this may result in the US digging themselves into quite a diplomatic hole. Slowly, though, they are starting to separate the Taliban from Al Qaida though, which is key. The more military action there is the more it undermines negotiations. The problem is there will always be more Taliban soldiers but the surge troops are ending their tours of duty. The insurgents could theoretically just bide their time and run the clock out until the US is exhausted from war. When Americans leave, the Taliban will return to how they were before we came, or even worse. The US hasn’t built anything constructive governmentally or infrastructure-wise so nothing will last—we are destined to have the same fate as the soviets unless something changes.

The Taliban are killing the government officials, taking a toll on the government. There is no strong government to transition to so there will be a power vacuum. The government as it is remains pretty unpopular due to corruption, and it causes people to support the Taliban. The Taliban may rule by fear- but at least they don’t demolish villages. The policy used by the Afghanistan government comes out of the CIA and The Pentagon, not the white house or state department which does not set a good precedent for peace. There is an age gap developing in the Taliban in recent years. The older ones may have changed a bit and are no longer burning down schools. They seem willing to negotiate. The new younger Taliban have close ties with Al Qaida and are more ideologically militant and not at all willing to negotiate anything.  

In Pakistan, after Osama Bin Laden was killed the military was embarrassed and demoralized which is dangerous because they were really the only functioning part of the state. The Pakistani military controls over 120 nuclear warheads, so if the government collapses nukes are a problem. Another attack in India supported by ISI would be even worse, because India would most definitely invade Pakistan- which could very probably result in nuclear war. Pakistan’ relations with US are fairly bad at the moment, and they were made worse by the killing of Bin Laden. The military is also over extended, the economy is in trouble, and ethnic issues are still causing tension. Pakistan needs better US relations to save itself, but US isn’t doing much on that front. The State department needs to reform a bond with Pakistan for the stability of the region, though it’s easy to see why they wouldn’t want to because Pakistan has been double dealing them the whole time.

5.      “The Triple Agent”

The Triple Agent was a short video describing the Al Qaida triple agent who managed to infiltrate the CIA then use a suicide bomb to kill several CIA officers. The man was a Jordanian doctor, who was a grown man with children: not the typical profile of ideologically warped 20 year olds who feel disillusioned with the world. It was the biggest CIA incident since the cold war. He became an informant for the CIA, but he supported about Al Qaida and even blogged about his support for Al Qaida under an assumed name. No American had ever actually met him, so he should have been considered at least a nominal threat. Nevertheless, the CIA neglected its typical safety protocol in these situations and they paid the price.

6.       “John Meacham on Memorial Day”

John Meacham offers an opinion piece about memorial day, arguing that the American Public are completely detached from war, despite the fact that more people think war is sometimes necessary. Today less than 0.5% of Americans are active duty officers. Americans are very disconnected from the military because they don’t know anyone who is a soldier. Modern America has no concept of what it actually means to fight a war, so we don’t pay attention to it and don’t care. It is a completely different mentality than the Total War concept of WWII or even the heavy protesting of the draft during the Vietnam War. Today war is just like a video game with excellent graphics. Meacham argues that if we want to be successful we need to relearn what war really means and how to fight it from the home front.

7.      7. New Yorker Article

The New Yorker article we read argues that the US was so shocked by 9/11 that America never formed into the industrial state needed to retaliate and defeat the enemy. It just became static, which is no way for an economy to behave during war time. The article gives examples of how US soldiers are not properly protected and how there are not enough troops. The stagnant economy between 2001 and 2008 when it collapsed had no distinct increase of production even in the military sector, while soldiers were still being poorly protected with substandard equipment in the field.  There were simply no investors to fund mass production of new military equipment because 9/11 shocked and froze the US whose citizens would otherwise have seen a great business opportunity.

8.       “The Interrogator/The Agent” – (Together since they are about the same thing)

Both stories begin with the suicide bombing of the USS Cole, which was supposed to be indestructible. The operation was carried out by Al Qaida in 2000 in Yemen. It was only the second attack by Al Qaida on Americans after the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. At the time, only 8 FBI agents in America spoke Arabic. Ali Soufan, an FBI agent in New York and a protégé of John O’Neill, was the only Arabic Speaker in the city. He was sent to Yemen to head the investigation of the USS Cole bombing. He, like O’Neill, understood the threat Al Qaida posed to America though very few others shared their belief.

            It is clear in both the article and the documentary that Soufan really understood Arabic and Muslim culture, coming from the inside. He was the most successful in handling interrogations and negotiations because he had a complete understanding not just about the facts of the culture but also the history and reasoning behind them that other Americans have never  been able to fully grasp. Soufan grew up in Jordan as a Muslim, and moved to Pennsylvania at 16. The USS Cole investigation lead to the potential for the discovery of the 9/11 plot, but no American agency was able to prevent it because of “The Wall”. No one in the government ever wanted to share their intelligence, for multiple reasons the strongest of which was of course political power. All it takes are a few people who care only about the politics to slow down the whole operation. This is why transparency is so important. Literally, the CIA sharing a picture with the FBI could have prevented 9/11, the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars and the economic collapse. The world would be very different today. Soufan learned how to break down walls between him and the terrorists he interrogated with respect and education on both sides. Why can’t the government learn the same lesson?

Interrogation is about building chemistry and trust. Soufan was also a leading interrogator at Guantanamo. He was more effective than the DOD or CIA who were using torture methods. Thus, he is very opposed to torture methods, thought it’s important that he opposes them because they don’t work. He says if they did work and saved lots of lives, he might support them.

9.      Class discussions

I know I haven’t done these in awhile, because usually when we discuss relevant things, the substance of the discussion is contained in the other sections of my paper, but this class we had a lively discussion of the reasons why the US is failing in Afghanistan and what should be done about it. Several people put forward good arguments that the rotating soldiers are preventing the growth of good relations with the locals as a main cause of American failure in rebuilding. Also it was noted that the government in place is basically useless and actually does more harm than good by violating rights of their own citizens forcing them to support the Taliban. We all agreed that the war was headed in a very bad direction but there was no consensus in how to proceed from here. Many advocated just pulling out immediately to cut American losses but this would majorly destabilize the region because a new civil war would likely immediately spring up. The main concern is Pakistan, who really can’t be trusted with their nuclear weapons. They are the real wild cards here. A few advocated invading Pakistan, but another invasion with the goal of removing a hostile government and nation building will get minimal support from the US. I think the best we can do is bolster relations with Pakistan as best as possible. Peace between Pakistan and India would do a great deal of good in the region, and also help greatly in stabilizing the Afghanistan issue if Pakistan is not preoccupied with conspiracy theories about India wanting to take them over from both sides. Also, it is important to note that Iran cannot be discounted from this discussion because of their ties to Pakistan, offending both Pakistan and Iran (two unstable nations with nuclear weapons) is in no one’s best interest.