After 8 years of war is difficult to say that in Afghanistan the international coalition is winning. When they say so it seem a little the Russians news in the'80s. They always said to be close to defeating the mujaheddin and was never true. Those Afghan fighters were financed and supported by CIA and the United States. Those of today are definitely financed by someone in the Islamic world, and just as certainly they have the support of a large part of the Afghan population.
The government has difficulties in controlling the country and Kabul itself, as unfortunately demonstrated the attacks at dawn on August 4. But the problem is more serious than attacks and covers the real possibility of stabilizing the country.
The military superiority is not always enough to win wars, or at least depends on how it's used. The United States were defeated in Vietnam because they could not engage in that conflict the human, military and economic force they had committed during the Second World War. Maybe they could win by sending many more men, but the internal pacifist protests and especially the danger of irritating too much the Soviet Union prevented them from doing so. But probably they would have lost anyway because their justification for war had no basis. The South Vietnamese government, dictatorial and repressive, was hated by a large part of its own people. At the end to win a war you must have a predominant military force or widespread support of the population, and better if all the two things together. In 2001, in fact, the Taliban have fallen with great ease, both because they were attacked by superior forces and because they were not especially loved by the afghan population.
But now the talibans propaganda is effective thanks to the mistakes of the West. The international coalition is afraid of losing too many men, so often used pilotless aircrafts, drones, to attack the enemies. These aircraft were often badly led and bombed defenseless villages, funerals, weddings, flocks of goats and any other kind of not-identified group, resulting in massacres of civilians. This kind of errors are like manna from heaven for estremists propaganda. Not that the taliban are better because they usually kill each year at least 1500 civilians in several attacks. But the West kill more than 1,000 afghan civilians each year.
Seeing all this the words of the number two of Al Qaeda, Ayman Al Zawahiri, sounding very convincing to the ears of the Arab world and beyond. "We have witnessed a new massacre against Muslims at the hands of Obama, the liar, the criminal" he says referring to the attack of a drone in Pakistan's Waziristan on June 24, 60 deaths among participants in a funeral. "he said that he tries to change the relations with Muslims but also spills their blood - continues Al Zawahiri - if he plants hatred in the hearts of Muslims he will only gathers death. Obama is trying to sell an illusion, he says dont' hate us, but meanwhile he kills us. We offer a truce with the West based on fair conditions. We can stop this war between us and the West if they withdraw from the muslims territories, stop any exploitation of our assets, accept a fair exchange of goods, release all our prisoners and stop supporting the corrupt governments of our countries".
It's clear that here the propaganda of al-Zawahiri has more than a foundation of truth. Unequal trade, unfair oil concessions and support to corrupt and tyrannical governments have for decades been the norm in relations between the West and Islamic world.
It's clear that here the propaganda of al-Zawahiri has more than a foundation of truth. Unequal trade, unfair oil concessions and support to corrupt and tyrannical governments have for decades been the norm in relations between the West and Islamic world.
"The mujaheddin after seven years of occupation in Afghanistan are still facing the most powerful army in the world. The same thing happens in other countries where the crusade against Islam has failed such as in Iraq or in Somalia." Also here he is not completely wrong. The military conflict and the propaganda war against terrorism could be won only with increased transparency. The West should demonstrate to the Islamic world to be truly better than its opponents. Obama promised that in his speech in Cairo but we still have to see real changes, and so to Al Qaeda is easy to say that the new American president is no different from the old. Certainly the Taliban and Islamic terrorists cannot really win a war against the West, partly because the support they enjoy in the Arab world is much more limited than generally believed. But they may continue to make attacks for years.
The European nations in Afghanistan can't stand the war no longer and often call for a dialogue with the "moderate" talibans in order to pacify the country. It's pretty clear that if Obama does not distance himself much more clearly from the international policy of Bush the war in Afghanistan can continue forever. And if the West at the end give up and retire as did the Russians in 1989 the Taliban and Al Qaeda will claim victory, even if they have not won any battle. But the West nevertheless would have lost the war.
The European nations in Afghanistan can't stand the war no longer and often call for a dialogue with the "moderate" talibans in order to pacify the country. It's pretty clear that if Obama does not distance himself much more clearly from the international policy of Bush the war in Afghanistan can continue forever. And if the West at the end give up and retire as did the Russians in 1989 the Taliban and Al Qaeda will claim victory, even if they have not won any battle. But the West nevertheless would have lost the war.
Francesco Defferrari
Part of the documentary rethink Afghanistan
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
Comments