David and Goliath was an epoch that was written centuries ago in the Old-Testament. It is a classic rendition of when an underdog defeats a much stronger opponent.
Twenty years after the tragic events of 9/11 that led to the loss of thousands of innocent lives, a Goliath has presumably been driven out from David’s lands. A miscalculated bravado, an end to Bush’s ‘crusade’ or a checkmate on regional countries?
The question remains whether David won or Goliath and whose side was King Saul on in this epic battle?
This article will trace the trajectory of ‘America’s longest war’ and its implications on Pakistan, focusing on its possible ramifications.
American-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization (N.A.T.O) forces invaded Afghanistan with the operational objective/pretext of defeating Al-Qaeda and removing its sanctuaries from Afghanistan. Pakistan’s intelligence agencies were co-opted for this role, and they aptly did their work initially. 9/11 masterminds such as Khalid Sheikh Muhammad and Osama Bin Laden, amongst others, were either captured or killed. However, soon a new breed of militant outfits emerged that turned their guns on the state and citizenry of Pakistan. They supplemented it with a toxic ideology that looked to weigh down the state.
Multiple operations concluding with Operation Zarb-E-Azb sapped thousands of men and millions of dollars of equipment worth of material of the Pakistani military. It dragged Pakistan into a quagmire that was not of the country’s creation. Pakistan was fighting a battle of ill-advised and unclear American ambitions. A political settlement from Pakistan’s establishment was a cry that fell on deaf ears in Washington and Brussels.
PAKISTANI NATION’S ENTRY INTO THE ‘GLOBAL WAR ON TERROR’:
Nevertheless, two events happened at a gap of six months in 2014 that shook the nation’s conscience. The first incident was the militant attack on Karachi airport. The second was the more inhumane and tragic militant raid on Army Public School, Peshawar. It rang alarm bells not only across Pakistan but the World. People from all walks of life joined in the grief of the families of innocent lives that had ended too soon. The nation finally awoke to the militancy that was looking to tear apart the state and society. It had targeted Pakistan’s economic lifeline and its future across the length of the country. The Pakistani nation was drawn into the ‘War on Terror.’
Seven years since that cataclysmic day, it seems that the primary operational objective of ‘Global War on Terror’ has also been left wanting. Even though Osama Bin Laden is no more, the peril from America’s antagonist, i.e., Al-Qaeda, has metastasized and become a threat across Asia, Africa, and other developing nations. Moreover, other transnational terror outfits have found an audience, appeal, support, recruits, funding, and weaponry to become a problem for societies and citizens worldwide, particularly in West Asia. For instance, the recent attack by a religiously motivated militant on innocent civilians and American Marines-conducting non-combat duties-set a dangerous precedent for times to come.
That brings to the second question of whether the American strategic objective of bringing a modern centralized state structure premised on democracy and infrastructural development to a war-ravaged nation succeeded. Yes and No. As for development, the answer, according to a Pakistani economist, is yes. Afghanistan’s population’s electricity access has increased from 22% to 97.7%; its road network has grown manifold with the development of the National Highway and its peripheries; the internet usage has increased to such an extent that proportionally more Afghans use Twitter than any other country in the South Asian/Central Asian region. However, the answer becomes blurry if the development is measured according to the Human Development Index indicator. Education has increased across the urban centers, so has access to primary care health. However, that infrastructure might not be sustainable if instability – according to Christine Fair, a Southeast Asian geopolitical expert, is counterintuitively furthered by Pakistan-continues in Afghanistan post U.S evacuation. Moreover, Human Rights (read: Women’s Rights) will become a casualty if the Taliban government starts implementing its strict laws.
Let us zoom out and see whether American strategic objectives have been met regionally. There is again ambiguity here. America has left a militarized society with the latest sophisticated armory (falling in the hands of the neo-Talibs) in the neighborhood of two of its first-tier and one second-tier adversary.
In his recent article, Dr. Andrew Latham has painted a rosy and optimistic picture for American audiences of how these adversaries might be adversely affected due to the Taliban’s victory in Afghanistan. Thus, according to him, American strategic objectives have been met apologetically. However, is that only to write Goliath’s wishful obituary. Dr.Latham would have been wise to add to the list Pakistani law enforcement agencies’ contributions as a frontline state to the ‘War on Terror,’ a.k.a Bush’s crusade. This acknowledgment should be highlighted in unambiguous terms as the nuclear-armed state was at a high risk of facing radicalization a decade ago. However, a prudent long-term strategy finalized in the shape of the National Action Plan of 2014 and backed by the Pakistani military ensured that this threat was eradicated – a knockout battle for which Pakistan nearly gave its life.
Twenty years later since that now-infamous speech by former U.S president George W. Bush, the American economy cannot sustain the ambitious ‘Global War on Terror’ project of certain war-hawks. On Aug 31, 2021, the U.S. Central Command noted the prevailing sentiment and pronounced Bush’s crusades dead. It took two trillion dollars, the lives of 47,000 Afghan civilians, and thousands of North Atlantic Treaty Organization (N.A.T.O) soldiers to meet this end.
In the days preceding and succeeding that date, the Liberal International Order (L.I.O) project has faced its most significant credibility question since Cold War. However, Joe Biden decided to cut the umbilical cord of the Ashraf Ghani regime convincingly. At what cost? Tactical or Operational victories?
As for the tactical victories, the lives of hundreds of thousands of civilians lost since Operation Enduring Freedom started in October 2001 is a blot on the Western Powers’ conscience (even though Biden administration is trying to make Americans find solace in O.B.L.’s killing a decade ago). Three thousand N.A.T.O personnel have also died. What has been gained? Collateral damage? Millions displaced and wounded? There is very little data on civilian casualties in Afghanistan.
In all this mayhem, where does the opportunity lie?
Firstly, the neo-Taliban, Turkish and American forces manned the Kabul airport before the final American evacuation. The images broadcasted live across the Television screens around the World showed that the war had become one of narratives rather than arms. They have a common enemy in global militant outfits. Therefore, cooperation, even in the toughest of circumstances, is possible.
THE IMPACT OF N.A.T.O’S WITHDRAWAL ON PAKISTAN
Pakistan has faced immense socio-economic and military losses since the time the United States invaded Afghanistan. Some people calculate the amount to the tune of $150 billion as the economic cost of the war on Pakistan. Moreover, thousands of civilians and law enforcement personnel have died. Pakistan is also home to one the largest Afghan Refugee population, with an estimated 1,438,000 documented refugees living inside its borders. This figure is likely to be affected in the coming days as Afghanistan faces a humanitarian crisis due to a ‘not-so-peaceful transition of power. Pakistani state and citizenry will bear the burden if and when Afghan refugees start pouring into the country.
Nevertheless, the government should take proactive measures to ensure that the refugees are accorded all the rights as enshrined in the 1951 Refugee Convention and the 1967 Protocol, including the right for ‘non-refoulment. The non-refoulment principle as contained in Article 33(1) of the convention prohibits states from forcefully expelling refugees “in any manner whatsoever to the borders of a territory where their life and freedom might be under threat on account of their religion, race, or political views.
However, being a developing country itself, Pakistan cannot undertake the heavy lifting required to rehabilitate the refugees on its own. Multilateral institutions and developed countries must share the burden by either resettling the refugees in their own country or providing adequate aid to assist the refugee effort by Pakistan.
The upcoming Shangai Cooperation Organization (S.C.O) summit in Tajikistan due to be held in mid-September could also offer a timely and valuable opportunity for high-level consultations regarding Afghan security, humanitarian relief, refugee management, stability, and future socio-economic development.
However, globalization will mean that the burden of bringing Afghanistan into the twenty-first century and keeping Pakistan stable will be keenly observed by Western policymakers from the other corner of the World, for at least the foreseeable future. Americans might instead, according to American academics and diplomats, leverage towards the ‘Asia-Pivot,’ i.e., Indo-Pacific region. However, their interests and stakes are inextricably linked to developments in the Af-Pak region. For instance, creating a united front against transnational militants’ presence in Afghanistan will be an area where American and Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (I.E.A) interests might converge. Order and Stability premised on Human Rights, and Economic self-sufficiency in the country will be another area of convergence between the two former adversaries. According to a Columbia University professor, one pull factor, the U.S administration could use would be to make the new Afghan setup aware of the workings of the International Financial System. In that way, they could be made aware of the $9.8 billion held in the U.S Federal Reserve that can be unfrozen if specific accommodations are made with the Americans. Moreover, the new Afghan government would also become entitled to $440 million in special drawing rights it is entitled to under the $650 billion global allocation.
However, presently United States government would be wise to heed the advice of Henry Kissinger, that no clear strategic move is available for the existing future to overcome this self-inflicted defeat and loss of American credibility globally.
Democracy will be something that has been the desire of Western liberals around the World. However, neither of the states of the West have the capacity or capability to sustain this venture, particularly in the West Asian region. They are faced with bigger challenges (read: Eastern Europe/Indo-Pacific). Therefore, thirty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the L.I.O project has lost steam. Therefore, glaringly America is unlikely to use hard power to bring democracy to any other country in the Middle East/South Asia for at the least the foreseeable future. Yet, now or never, the U.S. can scrap its global killing program abroad and focus on the refugees it’s morally indebted to take in at home.
BACK TO OLD GAMES:
Strategic stability in South Asia is what will be of longer-term interest of American policymakers. There would be a sustained effort by London – which hosts a large South Asian diaspora- and Washington to ensure this between the three nuclear powers in the region. However, it remains to be seen whether Pakistan’s reliance on strategic weapons will increase or decrease in the future. This strategic stability might be prefaced on two reasons:
- Increasing Conventional asymmetry between Pakistan and India & India and China, respectively
- New Delhi’s increased ambition to undercut Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence through:
- Advanced Ballistic Missile Defense technology sourced from Russia and Israel
- Ambiguity in its No First Use policy (N.F.U), as stated by people in the highest Defence offices
However, nuclear deterrence can never act as a substitute for conventional forces that are necessary for war-fighting and internal peace.
The conventional military threat that Pakistan will face from across its borders cannot be underestimated. The muscle-flexing by regional powers (even though top Pakistani leadership has conveyed in unequivocal terms its desire is for ‘peace’) will continue to pressure Pakistan to continue modernizing its Armed Forces, primarily its Air Force.
However, it is time to ‘bury the past and see where the future opportunity for Pakistan lies.
In all this regional and global jockeying, there is an opportunity for the South Asian state that should not go begging. Two of the World’s superpowers (besides a host of European powers) are using their influence to rein Pakistan in their camp. Pakistan is America’s only designated Non-N.A.T.O ally in the region, whereas China and Pakistan are economic, strategic, and diplomatic partners. The Sino-Pak alliance has only strengthened over time and will continue to overtime.
Therefore, post U.S evacuation, there might be fewer problems faced by Pakistan when borrowing from International lenders from an economic standpoint. United States holds veto power in the leading multilateral lending agencies in the World, such as the International Monetary Fund (I.M.F) and World Bank. Henceforth, after evacuating from Afghanistan, the lending would not be connected to security-related conditions, and the United States could offer an olive branch to Pakistan. However, it must be cautioned that the Western aid to modernize the military will likely dry up. Pakistan might increasingly source defense and security needs from the Eurasian powers.
Economically, the Chinese-backed China Pakistan Economic Corridor (C.P.E.C) might also see a new pathway/route through Afghanistan. It might create a dense network of roads and connectivity across the Af-Pak region. Pakistan could also become a central transit hub between Energy starved India and Resource-rich Central Asia. It can also result in increasing land trade between Central Asian Republics and Afghanistan with India. Free from predatory lower-level officials seeking to enrich themselves, Pakistan could instead benefit from this new potential geo-economic opportunity. This is because the shortest land route between these countries and India passes through Pakistan.
Similarly, China might undertake development projects in Afghanistan with resolve as a semblance of non-Western backed order returns. China might also seek to link its strategic allies in the region and reschedule debt repayments that Pakistan owes to it. Lastly, with deeply entrenched economic interests in the region, China might act as a mediator to prevent a new era of proxy warfare in Afghanistan. Under the neo-Taliban, Islamic Emirate’s assurance for not permitting anybody to utilize their country against regionally contiguous countries should be a promise that China, Pakistan, Iran, and the Central Asian Republics would see positively. However, deeds more than words are what is required.
Nonetheless, the new signs that the Chinese are seriously thinking about offering the new Afghan government monetary help and possibly transitioning C.P.E.C through Afghanistan offer some ray of hope for the financially stressed Afghan Taliban. Likewise, the new Turkish-Qatari plan to together oversee the Kabul air terminal is also a positive improvement that will guarantee that Afghanistan stays associated with the rest of the World and the international community and mitigate the effects of an impending ‘financial crunch’.
However, the security needs of both these countries are appendaged to Pakistan’s security apparatus. Pakistan can use this opportunity to either strengthen itself economically or seek to achieve conventional arms parity with its rapidly advancing Eastern neighbor. Pakistan and India’s defense gap in technology, budgetary allocations, and modernizations are increasing at an ominous pace. With the help of global powers, Pakistan is likely to invest more in Strategic Stability. However, in the conventional domain, things might have to be more self-reliant. In a hurriedly called press conference, Pakistan’s National Security Adviser stressed that Pakistan’s only desire is ‘Peace, Peace and (solely) Peace.’ However, a week later, the army chief in a Defence day speech reiterated that the country’s desire for peace should not be construed as weakness.
Returning to Pakistan’s perils and weak economic situation, the country will have to keep its allies in the region happy to sustain its competition with its Eastern neighbor. However, the regional realignment shows that although the country has not become a regional or global pariah, it is quickly losing its diplomatic clout. The right-wing Indian government will maximize its efforts to isolate the country and bend it to its demands. New Delhi also has a sour taste of its Afghan allies losing power in a rather scuttled manner. Indian active role in Afghanistan, cemented in the broader anti-Pakistani agenda, has always tried to keep Afghan territory a launching ground for crafting various anti-Pakistani clandestine activities. The promotion of anti-Pakistani sentiment has become a difficult task for India with the U.S. evacuation.
However, according to the former foreign secretary of Pakistan, Ambassador R.M Khan, the country must accept that New Delhi is a regional player and (take into consideration its legitimate demands). This initiative will aid the country focus on ‘geo-economics and take advantage of the rapid regional development on the East Side.
Nonetheless, Pakistan considers the reduced Indian influence and role within Afghanistan as a geo-politically and geo-strategically favorable development. The hurried exodus of the Indian diplomats, intelligence, and defense officials immediately after the Afghan Taliban’s take-over indicates that New Delhi’s understands that its influence and intelligence role was only possible due to the following three reasons
- The consent of the U.S backed erstwhile Afghan government
- The support of Afghan intelligence agency (National Directorate of Security)
- The cover of the ‘rapacious’ Afghan National Security Forces.
This is just one example of the hybrid war that was being mocked by specific media analysts in Pakistan and taken advantage of by the Indian media. This kind of hybrid/information warfare has counterintuitively aided transnational militant groups in increasing their recruitment and tap shadowy revenue networks (read: foreign funding) to sustain and grow their ideological base. Therefore, Pakistani law enforcement and intelligence agencies must remain vigilant against this kind of warfare in the future. Dismantling, disrupting, and pre-empting against this kind of warfare is what Operation Raad-ul-Fasaad aimed to achieve strategically. Information warfare will gain increasing importance in future warfare, particularly in South Asia (where social media outreach creates a toxic combination with illiteracy, multidimensional poverty, and religious extremism).
Pakistan must consider raising deepening Indian interest, commitment, and role in the U.S. ‘Indo-Pacific’ strategy and Quad formation at the upcoming S.C.O. summit because New Delhi cannot be expected to remain simultaneously committed to both the ‘Eurasian geo-economics-based continental vision of Asian Century’ as well as the Western-led geopolitical grand-strategy aimed at containing and contesting it, at the same time.
TOWARDS A BRIGHTER HORIZON:
However, Biden can still restore allied confidence in U.S. Leadership, laying out a robust counterterrorism strategy based on Afghanistan’s changed reality and assuring allies in Eastern Europe and Asia.
Pakistan will have to be wary of the recent developments regionally and globally to protect its national interests, i.e., the welfare of its people, the ideology of the state, and economic development. Even though the challenges are many. However, the opportunities are also there. It is up to the policymakers to either focus on the opportunities or fall under the weight of the challenges. The vacillating manner of Pakistan’s social and political growth has been highly detrimental to its diplomacy, security, and economic growth. Millions have left the country searching for physical and economic security.
Moreover, according to Ambassador Lodhi, it has come to be regarded as a ‘clientalistic state’ by regional and global powers. Also, former American defense secretary Jim’ Mad Dog’ Mattis described Pakistan in December 2019 as the ‘most dangerous country in the world’. These are not suitable labels for a country like Pakistan.
With a significant social media presence, a animated media, and one of the fastest-growing middle class in the World, these agents can be leveraged to shed these labels.
According to a director at the Centre for Aerospace and Security, Studies Pakistan is (presently) driving the strategic work to urge the global powers to stay engaged with Afghanistan regardless of changing political realities. In any case, the global mood is, for the most part, suspicious towards the Afghan Taliban’s ascent to control in Afghanistan. Also, a few concerns have likewise been raised inside Pakistan. These are with regards to its national security (from traditional and non-traditional threats) and financial stability.
Today the country stands at a turning point. In regional and global diplomacy, the ball is once again in Pakistan’s court. Militarily, the nation has paid the price alongside innocent civilians. Politically, there is a time for consensus and cooperation rather than conflict and point-scoring. Moreover, issues such as the fight against CoVID-19, economic well-being, and climate change have also once again united the nation. It must be underscored that Pakistan is a country that is one of the most likely to be affected due to climate-related disasters.
CONCLUSION:
Pakistan has paid a heavy price for the Global War on Terror (read: American neo-cons messianic fight against Osama’s psychopaths). However, it would be wise to seek the future through internal reforms and resolve domestic issues before meddling in the affairs of another country. That being said, the hazard from across Pakistan’s Eastern and Western borders is real and cannot/should not be disregarded.
Similarly, Afghanistan has paid a heavy price in terms of lives lost and internal instability. The new Afghan government would do well to integrate into the regional economy and bring order internally. It will be up to the new Afghan administration to work towards a more inclusive form of governance over time. Moreover, it can work on establishing a solid diplomatic corps. The precedence of the Holy Prophet (P.B.U.H) and his interaction with the established powers of the time (Byzantine, Persian, etc.) can act as a guide on navigating foreign relations with the regionally adjoining countries and the World in general. A positive development this time around has been that Kabul and other cities have not been reduced to rubble as they were in the civil war ensuing Soviet withdrawal.
Lastly, the United States and its Western allies had noble intentions to bring development and democracy to Afghanistan. However, the way they went about it cost them a fortune in blood and treasure and a fragmented reputation. United States would do well to continue long-term sustained engagement with the Af-Pak region to ensure regional stability and good governance. Nonetheless, how the Taliban overturned the throne of power in Kabul and subsequently the American investment of trillions of dollars in eleven days is reminiscent of the German blitzkrieg campaign of World War 2. The American evacuation from its embassy building through a Chinook helicopter in Saigon was repeated in Kabul to add salt to the wounds.
In conclusion, it would be good to be reminded of Churchill’s quote:
“No war is over until the enemy says it’s over. We may think it [is] over, we may declare it over, but in fact, the enemy gets emboldened.”
The question remains which side King Saul was playing in the past forty years of turmoil in David’s land starting in 1979.