Taliban return to Afghanistan as a political force. That
is surprising, but it is a natural result of ten years of operation
"Enduring Freedom" in which the U.S. fought in Afghanistan against
international terrorism.Return to the "Taliban"Taliban quietly preparing to legalization. Recent years in Afghanistan are under the sign of attempts to establish a dialogue with the ultraconservative Islamic movement. Russia
considers it an extremist, but the official Kabul and Washington, it
seems, finally convinced, that without taking into account the interests
of this power in the political future of Afghanistan in its current
form does not.Well
aware of this and make their own conclusions from this most radical of
the Taliban, are configured to fight the infidels until the end. The
recent death of former Afghan President Burhanuddin Rabbani, a suicide
bomber exploded just in the conduct confidential discussions with
representatives of the "Taliban" - to the best illustration.In general, the figures in the murders, which stabilize the situation in Afghanistan is nothing new. Suffice
it to recall that on 9 September 2001, about 10 years ago, was blown up
by anti-Taliban resistance leader unquestioned Akhmadsho Masood.
The story of Afghanistan really returning slowly to ten years ago, in September 2001 - first. The Taliban once again perceived as a regional political force with which the international coalition believes it possible to negotiate the future of Afghanistan.Excesses of the pastAfter all, the move to a military operation against the Taliban was made by the Americans not immediately. Back in late September 2001, President Bush met with members of Congress pointed out that the removal of "Taliban" from power in Kabul is not indispensable to the global counter-terrorism operations.At that time, Washington seems to be more clearly distinguished between the Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar (bad type, but with whom you can somehow deal), and covered them over Osama bin Laden (guaranteed released outside of any political communication).Apparently, the U.S. government has fueled some hope that there will agree with the regime of "Taliban" and, thereby, to somehow fit in the new context of combating terrorism in Central Asia, neighboring Pakistan.The same Pakistan that all the 1990s holil, nurtured and supported the Taliban in their struggle for power in Afghanistan. Seeing them on the one hand, a kind way of exporting religious extremism in order to maintain its own stability, but on the other - a tool to influence the next area through related Pashtun tribes.However, the agreement failed. October 7, 2001 at military bases Taliban collapsed U.S. Air Force, and President Bush proclaimed the overthrow of the government "Taliban" in Afghanistan, one of the goals of the "war on terror."But even in these circumstances is inexplicable be overnice Americans, almost without touching the objects of the Taliban on the frontline troops with the Northern Alliance, which was headed by then an internationally recognized president of Afghanistan's Tajik Rabbani.In fact, the real military help from NATO in the fight against the Taliban were Pashtun only groups backed by Pakistan. Washington, understanding the precariousness of their position in the region until the end of trying to balance the interests of all potential and existing allies.However, this does not work: despite protests from the leaders publicly declared the U.S. and Pakistan, the first in Kabul is still entered the Northern Alliance troops under the command of Mohammad Fahim - the successor Ahmadshaha Masuda. The new Afghan government of Hamid Karzai Pashtun representatives of the Alliance have not let the key, but very important places.For ten years, managed to achieve just stunning result: the NATO operation in Afghanistan largely supplanted the activity of Taliban fighters ... back to Pakistan, where in recent years, weakening the central government in Islamabad is growing ever more clearly the internal instability.Fear of Americans bearing giftsConstructive outcomes of U.S. stay in Afghanistan is quite difficult to draw. On the one hand, Afghanistan has been spent a lot of money, and some results still achieved. On the other hand how the money was spent, sometimes puzzling.The recent report of a bilateral committee of Congress on military contracts plunged the public in a state of shock: of the 206 billion dollars spent on campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan from 31 to 60 billion have been wasted, not less than $ 10 billion - just stolen.Both campaigns have become a feast of private business, maximizing the return on the background of the reluctance of U.S. government agencies to go to Iraq and Afghanistan.Rehabilitation of infrastructure in the Afghan provinces through the stump-deck. Too many observers have noted a very superficial approach to this issue by U.S. government officials and functionaries of NGOs.Not wanting to delve into the particular and the work that is called "the land", they often prefer to allocate funds. These funds are then, of course, successfully "mastered" private traders, contractors, some stolen, but more often - just squander waste by local authorities.The latter is in no way a reason not to consider the local Afghan administration is totally dysfunctional. But in Afghanistan, regularly situations arose when American aid to regional development programs allocated significantly more than you actually spend on the public (not private) good. And it is not only evidence of incompetence of local authorities, but also a sign of bad management programs help from sponsors.Money Falls spawned yet another problem: qualified Afghan staff, clearly recognizing the major sources of income in the country, flowing out of the Afghan state apparatus of the hired staff of the local branches of American government and non-governmental structures (the difference in income between those and others - a factor of 8-10) . Such erosion of personnel extremely negative impact on the professional level of local administrations.Leave to remainBy 2014, American troops will be withdrawn from Afghanistan. But not all and not everywhere.The remaining U.S. forces in the country, appear to be at least partially close the free flow of militants from Pakistan into Afghanistan and back. This problem worries Americans more and more. The U.S. military experts and straight talk about close ties with Pakistani intelligence militants.And literally, on Thursday Barack Obama allowed himself to a very harsh statements against Islamabad's actually accusing one of maneuvering between the Taliban and the U.S.. In the opinion of the President, Pakistan is doing to insure besides fish in the troubled Afghan water after the formal withdrawal of the Americans. Obama publicly urged Islamabad to cease contact with the militants.Now the U.S. military make up the vast majority of coalition forces (about two-thirds of the nearly 150 000 people). After 2014 of them will be only 25 thousand, and they will be posted very characteristic.U.S. troops will stand along the border with Pakistan, controlling the routes through the "tribal zone" in which the Pashtun clans for centuries do what they want, not much paying attention to the Afghan, Pakistani, as well as the occupation authorities (does not matter - the British, Soviet or American).Domestic same province, the country must pass under the control of Afghan security forces - against the backdrop of advancing national reconciliation with the leaders of the internal resistance.
The story of Afghanistan really returning slowly to ten years ago, in September 2001 - first. The Taliban once again perceived as a regional political force with which the international coalition believes it possible to negotiate the future of Afghanistan.Excesses of the pastAfter all, the move to a military operation against the Taliban was made by the Americans not immediately. Back in late September 2001, President Bush met with members of Congress pointed out that the removal of "Taliban" from power in Kabul is not indispensable to the global counter-terrorism operations.At that time, Washington seems to be more clearly distinguished between the Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar (bad type, but with whom you can somehow deal), and covered them over Osama bin Laden (guaranteed released outside of any political communication).Apparently, the U.S. government has fueled some hope that there will agree with the regime of "Taliban" and, thereby, to somehow fit in the new context of combating terrorism in Central Asia, neighboring Pakistan.The same Pakistan that all the 1990s holil, nurtured and supported the Taliban in their struggle for power in Afghanistan. Seeing them on the one hand, a kind way of exporting religious extremism in order to maintain its own stability, but on the other - a tool to influence the next area through related Pashtun tribes.However, the agreement failed. October 7, 2001 at military bases Taliban collapsed U.S. Air Force, and President Bush proclaimed the overthrow of the government "Taliban" in Afghanistan, one of the goals of the "war on terror."But even in these circumstances is inexplicable be overnice Americans, almost without touching the objects of the Taliban on the frontline troops with the Northern Alliance, which was headed by then an internationally recognized president of Afghanistan's Tajik Rabbani.In fact, the real military help from NATO in the fight against the Taliban were Pashtun only groups backed by Pakistan. Washington, understanding the precariousness of their position in the region until the end of trying to balance the interests of all potential and existing allies.However, this does not work: despite protests from the leaders publicly declared the U.S. and Pakistan, the first in Kabul is still entered the Northern Alliance troops under the command of Mohammad Fahim - the successor Ahmadshaha Masuda. The new Afghan government of Hamid Karzai Pashtun representatives of the Alliance have not let the key, but very important places.For ten years, managed to achieve just stunning result: the NATO operation in Afghanistan largely supplanted the activity of Taliban fighters ... back to Pakistan, where in recent years, weakening the central government in Islamabad is growing ever more clearly the internal instability.Fear of Americans bearing giftsConstructive outcomes of U.S. stay in Afghanistan is quite difficult to draw. On the one hand, Afghanistan has been spent a lot of money, and some results still achieved. On the other hand how the money was spent, sometimes puzzling.The recent report of a bilateral committee of Congress on military contracts plunged the public in a state of shock: of the 206 billion dollars spent on campaigns in Iraq and Afghanistan from 31 to 60 billion have been wasted, not less than $ 10 billion - just stolen.Both campaigns have become a feast of private business, maximizing the return on the background of the reluctance of U.S. government agencies to go to Iraq and Afghanistan.Rehabilitation of infrastructure in the Afghan provinces through the stump-deck. Too many observers have noted a very superficial approach to this issue by U.S. government officials and functionaries of NGOs.Not wanting to delve into the particular and the work that is called "the land", they often prefer to allocate funds. These funds are then, of course, successfully "mastered" private traders, contractors, some stolen, but more often - just squander waste by local authorities.The latter is in no way a reason not to consider the local Afghan administration is totally dysfunctional. But in Afghanistan, regularly situations arose when American aid to regional development programs allocated significantly more than you actually spend on the public (not private) good. And it is not only evidence of incompetence of local authorities, but also a sign of bad management programs help from sponsors.Money Falls spawned yet another problem: qualified Afghan staff, clearly recognizing the major sources of income in the country, flowing out of the Afghan state apparatus of the hired staff of the local branches of American government and non-governmental structures (the difference in income between those and others - a factor of 8-10) . Such erosion of personnel extremely negative impact on the professional level of local administrations.Leave to remainBy 2014, American troops will be withdrawn from Afghanistan. But not all and not everywhere.The remaining U.S. forces in the country, appear to be at least partially close the free flow of militants from Pakistan into Afghanistan and back. This problem worries Americans more and more. The U.S. military experts and straight talk about close ties with Pakistani intelligence militants.And literally, on Thursday Barack Obama allowed himself to a very harsh statements against Islamabad's actually accusing one of maneuvering between the Taliban and the U.S.. In the opinion of the President, Pakistan is doing to insure besides fish in the troubled Afghan water after the formal withdrawal of the Americans. Obama publicly urged Islamabad to cease contact with the militants.Now the U.S. military make up the vast majority of coalition forces (about two-thirds of the nearly 150 000 people). After 2014 of them will be only 25 thousand, and they will be posted very characteristic.U.S. troops will stand along the border with Pakistan, controlling the routes through the "tribal zone" in which the Pashtun clans for centuries do what they want, not much paying attention to the Afghan, Pakistani, as well as the occupation authorities (does not matter - the British, Soviet or American).Domestic same province, the country must pass under the control of Afghan security forces - against the backdrop of advancing national reconciliation with the leaders of the internal resistance.
