Ideology and Mythology in Afghainstan

Confronting Radicial Islam

For many years I have been puzzled by the response I would get from Muslims to the question, "why don't you do more to confront the irrationality of extreme Muslims?". The question wasn't flippant but having lived in Malaysia, Indonesia and employing 100 Muslims in Thailand,
it would come up in natural conversations. My brother in law is an articulate Muslim that had a long career working for the US Embassy and I would ask him as well. Living in Islamic countries you aren't struck by how religious Muslims are but how secular most of them are. Pretty similar to Christians in the US. Most participate in their religion to be involved in their communities and help structure a better family life, they are not seeking a monolithic theology to impose on the rest of the world.

The most common response would be a shrug of the shoulders and something to the effect "What is the point of talking to these people? Facts and reason have no currency with them. They believe what they believe, better to argue with a rock."

On the road I don't have much time for cable or DU and when you post at DU you really need to follow the context because there is so much fast moving information and rapidly changing context.

Ellsberg and Wikileaks

Clicking through the channels I saw Daniel Ellsberg commenting on the Wikileaks. Iconic almost mythological figure of the left and for those of us that opposed the Vietnam War.

Ellsberg said "The leaked information will, I believe, show that like Vietnam the insurgency is getting stronger even as we apply more military pressure to eliminate it".

This is the mythology of the Tet Offensive. We were sure that it was true and it was the 'tip of the spear' in opposing the strategy of sending five hundred thousand soldiers in theater.

The premise that the Viet Cong grew stronger and that the Tet Offensive was a great Viet Cong victory has, however, been proven to be completely wrong. It was admitted by General Giap in his book after the war. I met both Viet Cong and North Vietnamese leaders who gave me the personal details of what was becoming publicly understood among those that followed SE Asia; The Tet Offensive was not only a disaster for the Viet Cong but probably was planned that way by the North Vietnamese. Gen. Giap spent a year planning the offensive only to leave the country and spend the time in Eastern Europe for 'medical reasons'. After the war the North Vietnamese went out of their way to restrict the Viet Cong to a couple of high profile symbolic positions and gutting the remainder. You would have a better chance of reuniting the VC cabinet in France than you would in Vietnam. A longer completely fact bassed discussion of the subject can be found here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8623721

Ellsberg is also on very shaky ground saying that the Taliban is resurging. Yes it is said on the TV every day, but then so is the 'fact' that the Tet Offensive was a great VC victory.

First the analogy with Vietnam is highly problematic. Vietnam was essentially a united ethnic and historical national movemment that had been in the works for hundreds of years against the Chinese, a few decades against the French and a few years against the Americans. The Vietnamese had two super powers supplying them and had half of the country 'liberated' along with parts of S Vietnam and access to staging areas in Cambodia. The Taliban had the support of the ISA in Pakistan but after the assasination of Bhutto and the terror attacks in Mubai that has all changed.

Because it is underground it is difficult to gauge how strong an insurgency is. What is in the media is the lethal capability of the insurgency but that is not an indicator of how strong the insurgency is, it is simply an indicator of how lethal it is. A better comparison would be that of the Sri Lankan insurgency by the Tamil Tigers. Just a few years ago the LTTE controlled 15,000 square kilometers of 'liberated' territory. The LTTE came close to winning a negotiated settlement in 2006. Last year the LTTE were complete defeated.

Afghanistan is more tribal, and has more remote areas. It will take a long time to gain support in the Pashtun areas (but a lot quicker if the Pashtuns in Pakistan are included, but there is no evidence that the Taliban could ever take. ver vast areas of non Pashtun tribes. Indeed at their height of power the Taliban was unable to gain control over much of the country. The Taliban has no 'liberated' territory today. Most of its victims are now civilians, An increase in lethal actions may well be an expression of desperation of an insurgency.


Ideoology's Mythology


It is impossible to continue to re argue every point in an ideology all of the time. So a shorthand is accepted. Somethings become iconic and accepted. The War in Iraq was a war of aggression and illegal. Now the shorthand has extended this to Afghanistan. Even though the facts are completely different the ideology extends the mythology. Who is going to argue with Daniel Ellsberg? The man risked jail and government persecution. He could have been 'eliminated'.

There becomes a religious element to ideology that certain cannons are sacred. Here are some:


The US was defeated militarily in Vietnam (The US military left Vietnam in 1972. The North Vietnamese "Ho Chi Minh" Campaign started in 1975.)
The Tet Offensive was a great VC victory (It resulted in wiping out the military wing of the VC)
Insurgencies almost always win (80% of all insurgencies fail)
You can only end an insurgency with negotiations. (Some - like Thailand - are settled without combat and all negotiation, others like Malaysia, Indonesia and Sri Lanka are settled only by military means. The best prospect for a negotiated settlement with the outer allies of the Taliban is that they see a viable Afghan government. Insurgesnts really are not that excited about spending a generation fighting if there is a way out.)
The US occupation of Iraq was determined by oil interests - (auctions of oil contracts by the Iraqi government went to non US companies)
The US is interested in Afghanistan because of a secret pipeline (This is one of the most nasty lies as you can go to the ADP website and find complete details of the Turkmenistan-Afghan-Pakistan pipeline in less than a minute. The purpose of the pipeline is to bring gas and petroleum from Turkmenistan to Afghanistan, and possibly Pakistan. It is a long planned development to help bring energy to the people of Afghanistan and northern Pakistan, nothing sinister. http://www.adb.org/Documents/TARs/REG/tar_stu_36488.pdf


The Lessons of the Wikileaks


So far the leaks have provided source material have basically confirmed what we have known, under the Bush administration the strategy and tactics involved generated large numbers of civilian casualties and the Pakistan ISA was involved in supporting the Taliban. Those realities have changed considerably. The largest source of civilian casualties now is the result of Taliban suicide bombers and IEDs.

The Pentagon Papers revealed that the government was systematically lying about the events in Vietnam. Nothing in these leaks have indicated that. Wikileak cofounder offers some words of caution about the leaks because the materia is classified, not confirmed. Many first hand reports that are in the reports will prove to be incorrect rumors or information.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/26/video-wikileaks-co-founder-skeptical/?iref=allsearch


The media wants a binary equation in Afghanistan


They continue to ask "can we win in Afghanistan?" It is an oddly childish question.

The question is "Can we assist the Afghan people achieve a government that will allow for Afghan self determination. The Taliban should be welcomed as a political party but they will not accept because they know that they can only achieve power through coercion and not persuasion.

If we can give the Afghans some time to build workable national Afghan institutions that provides for them to control the future of their country without outside interference then our objectives will have been met.



Discussing Afghanistan

There is reason to be concerned about our involvement in Afghanistan. There should be pressure to hand over as much of the security to the Afghan govenment as quickly as possible. There should be more emphasis on provincial development and poppy replacement and not eradicaiton, but these kinds of discussions are impossible in GD because it has taken on a orthodoxy that defies logical engagement. Which brings us back to our Muslim friends and why they feel it is so hopeless to try and engage in rational factual discussion with people who have already determined what the correct answer is. Facts are irrlevent. The War in Iraq is the same as the war in Afghanistan. The insurgency in Afghanistan is the same as the insurgency in Vietnam. The Tet Offensive was a great victroy for the Viet Cong.

The President inherited some of the gravest challenges the nation has faced in the last 30 years. His approach in Afghanistan has avoided getting side tracked in the mythology of the conflict and centers on engaging the reality.

:hi:

analysis in this very complicated crisis we have.

This is what the President said about the leaks recently when he met with Congressional leadership.

"I also urged the House leaders to pass the necessary funding to support our efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan. I know much has been written about this in recent days as a result of the substantial leak of documents from Afghanistan covering a period from 2004 to 2009.

"While I'm concerned about the disclosure of sensitive information from the battlefield that could potentially jeopardize individuals or operations, the fact is these documents don't reveal any issues that haven't already informed our public debate on Afghanistan; indeed, they point to the same challenges that led me to conduct an extensive review of our policy last fall.

"So let me underscore what I've said many times: For seven years, we failed to implement a strategy adequate to the challenge in this region, the region from which the 9/11 attacks were waged and other attacks against the United States and our friends and allies have been planned.

"That's why we've substantially increased our commitment there, insisted upon greater accountability from our partners in Afghanistan and Pakistan, developed a new strategy that can work, and put in place a team, including one of our finest generals, to execute that plan. Now we have to see that strategy through."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2010_07/024924.php#1804646

or "lying by omission".

WikiLeaks addresses that latter case.

By omitting any factual information, arresting, killing, censoring or banning reporters, and spreading propaganda, the M/I Complex prevents any rational and effective debate on the war, beyond the knee-jerk positions of "Fight" and "Peace".