Since President George W. Bush idiotically proclaimed the goal of creating a modern, progressive, pro-Western, stable, democratic state in Central Asia from scratch 20 years ago, the United States has poured $143 billion into Afghanistan reconstruction. And it has all been wasted.

Today, the biggest factor destroying the credibility of the Afghanistan government among its own people is not the attacks and military opposition of the insurgent Taliban: It is the U.S.-dominated and directed international aid which has totally undermined and discredited the very government it is supposed to support.

These elementary truths have been repeatedly pointed out by outspoken critics of the disastrous U.S. military misadventure in Afghanistan over the past two decades. I and many other contributors to this platform have repeatedly made them. But on March 10, they were all stated – clearly and unequivocally – by the most senior U.S. government official charged with monitoring the war effort in that unhappy Central Asian nation, Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) John Sopko himself.

On March 10, Sopko made these very points on the record in prepared remarks delivered at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) in Washington, DC. He warned that U.S. and international aid is the biggest factor in wrecking it by generating uncontrolled corruption and making that stink in the eyes of the Afghan people.

“(I)nternational donors have, in their own self-interest, entered into a devil’s bargain with successive Afghan governments to provide enormous amounts of financial assistance that paradoxically may end up undermining the entire military and reconstruction effort,” Sopko stated.

“As SIGAR has long reported, foreign assistance has distorted the Afghan economy and exacerbated the corruption problem,” he said.

As a result, “Afghanistan’s endemic corruption provides oxygen to the insurgency and undermines the Afghan state,” Sopko warned.

Nor is this ghastly paradox a sudden or unexpected development, Sopko recalled.

“Back in 2014, former ISAF (NATO’s International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan) Commanding General John Allen was not hyperbolic when he told Congress that corruption, not the Taliban, was the existential threat to the Afghan government,” the SIGAR chief said

“Moreover, international donors, including the U.S., have largely failed to use their leverage to insist on more robust anti-corruption efforts by the Afghan government. …Yet for all the anti-corruption benchmarks and spreadsheets that have been passed between foreign embassies in Kabul and the Presidential Palace, the Afghan government’s anti-corruption efforts remain largely ineffectual,” he pointed out.

Therefore not only have the Americans generated their own corruption and wrecked their own strategy in Afghanistan: But a very senior U.S. official charged with monitoring these issues has admitted it.

Largely as a direct consequence of these developments, “the Defense Department no longer considers the long-held goal of a financially self-sustaining Afghan security force by 2024 to be realistic,” Sopko said.

The Afghan government cannot even effectively manage the money it currently receives from international donors, especially to finance its security forces and the U.S. government believes it will not even be able to operate a state-of-the-art payroll system that the United States supplied for several years to come, the Inspector General continued.

“The U.S. military believes the Afghan government may be several years away from being able to take over ownership, management, and sustainment of the $50 million payroll system used to ensure that the U.S. taxpayer is not paying for Afghan ‘ghost’ soldiers who exist only on paper and that military and police salaries do not end up in the pockets of corrupt officials,” he said.

If the goal of the U.S.-led reconstruction effort was to build a strong, stable, self-reliant Afghan state that could protect U.S. national security interests as well as its own, it has clearly failed, Sopko admitted.

“If foreign assistance is withdrawn, Taliban forces could be at the gates of Kabul in short order,” he said.

Therefore, “Creating an Afghan state is a mission yet to be accomplished and may be impossible to do: It may prove to be ‘a bridge too far,'” Sopko said in additional, unscripted comments to his podcast presentation on March 10. “The goal of creating a self sustaining Afghan armed forces by 2024 is impossible and cannot be achieved.”

Sopko, therefore, concluded that he believed a corrupt, narcotic fueled Afghan state would never be a reliable partner able to protect itself or the interests of the United States and other donors.

Over the past 20 years, the U.S. national security establishment, virtually all members of the Senate and House of Representatives from both parties and the two term George W. Bush and Obama administrations flatly refused to acknowledge these bleak realities. All these forces rose up in united, self-righteous rage to block President Donald Trump’s tentative efforts to acknowledge reality and withdraw all U.S. forces from Afghanistan at last.

Will the Biden administration remain equally deaf to this latest devastating assessment from the government’s own Special Inspector General?

We shall soon see.

This is official recognition by Washington that Afghanistan is a catastrophe. It could not be made plainer that the place is a hellhole of unlimited shattering violence. It is also terminally corrupt, and if the grief-stricken families of the dead policemen ever receive the compensation or pension due to them it will be a miracle. Out of 176 countries, Transparency International places it at 169 in its corruption index.

Two days after the US-NATO slaughter of Afghan policemen it was announced that Médecins sans Frontières, or Doctors without Borders — known as MSF — had «reopened a small medical clinic in the Afghan city of Kunduz — its first facility there since US air strikes destroyed a hospital it ran in 2015».

MSF is a saintly organisation whose doctors, nurses and support staff «provide assistance to populations in distress, to victims of natural or man-made disasters and to victims of armed conflict». They do so «irrespective of race, religion, creed or political convictions,» but on 22 October 2015 the MSF hospital in Kunduz was destroyed by a series of US airstrikes.

It was reported that about 2 in the morning «a blast ripped apart the intensive care unit, where patients included two children. It was the start of around an hour of airstrikes on the buildings, and strafing attacks on doctors, patients and staff desperately seeking shelter in corners of the compound. As the attack planes returned again and again, and the hospital collapsed and burned, MSF staff inside the hospital, in Kabul and in the United States put in frantic calls to contacts in the US military from Afghanistan to Washington DC», but the hellish massacre continued for over two hours. In her eye-witness account, Australian Doctor Kathleen Thomas said «Our colleagues didn’t die peacefully like in the movies. They died painfully, slowly, some of them screaming out for help that never came, alone and terrified, knowing the extent of their own injuries and aware of their impending death. Countless other staff and patients were injured; limbs blown off, shrapnel rocketed through them, burns, pressure-wave injuries of the lungs, eyes and ears. Many of these injures have left permanent disability. It was a scene of nightmarish horror that will be forever etched in my mind».

As to the people who planned and executed (literally) and failed to stop this slaughter — how can they sleep at night?

The sixteen dead policemen killed by the US airstrike on 20 July had nobody to record their brief but hideous shrieking terror as missiles blasted their tiny outpost. The US National Public Radio, NPR, the most reliable source of news in America, but listened to by very few people, reported that «the US Marines guiding the strike Friday afternoon in Gereshk district thought the men gathered in the compound were Taliban, not police». Well, how wonderful.

What happens to the real-time intelligence gathered in Afghanistan by drones and the circling Bombardier Global 6000 electronic warfare aircraft? (Almost all internet reference to the Bombardier Afghanistan programme has been deleted, but you can find its tracks on Flight Radar if you’re patient.)

Here we have a country whose 2017 budget included an allocation of $53.5 billion for the National Intelligence Programme «which includes funding requested to support Overseas Contingency Operations». Over fifty billion dollars have been spent on staggeringly advanced intelligence systems that can’t tell if a group of Afghans are police or militants.

One reason Afghanistan is so important is that the war there has lasted over fifteen years and been the direct cause of colossal numbers of deaths and refugees. There are over two million Afghan refugees in Pakistan alone, and over a million ‘internally displaced persons’, almost all of whom have had their lives disrupted beyond recovery. The slaughter has been dreadful, and it is time it stopped.

US and British forces invaded Afghanistan at the end of 2001 and were joined by the rest of the countries in the NATO military alliance in August 2003. NATO was desperate to find some justification for survival, as there was (and is) no reason for its continuing existence, so Brussels eagerly latched on to the war in Afghanistan. US-NATO embraced another dozen or so nations that sent a few soldiers to Afghanistan, naming the organisation the International Security Assistance Force, and after exactly fourteen years, NATO has achieved precisely nothing. The slaughter continues, by both sides, and, as the State Department tells us, «travel to all areas of Afghanistan remains unsafe».

Afghanistan is the world’s largest producer of heroin. Not only that, but there are now over three million heroin addicts in the country, thanks to the explosion in drug production after the US invasion. When I first visited Afghanistan, in 1993, the number of addicts was inconsequential, in spite of the Western hippy legacy. Poppy growth was expanding because it was profitable, but then the Taliban forbade it. As reported by the New York Times in May 2001, «The first American narcotics experts to go to Afghanistan under Taliban rule have concluded that the movement’s ban on opium-poppy cultivation appears to have wiped out the world's largest crop in less than a year… The American findings confirm earlier reports from the United Nations drug control program that Afghanistan, which supplied about three-quarters of the world's opium and most of the heroin reaching Europe, had ended poppy planting in one season». But now we’re back to normal.

Few people remember that in May 2001 the United States announced «a $43 million grant to Afghanistan in additional emergency aid to cope with the effects of a prolonged drought. The United States has become the biggest donor to help Afghanistan in the drought». The US Secretary of State declared that «'We will continue to look for ways to provide more assistance to the Afghans, including those farmers who have felt the impact of the ban on poppy cultivation, a decision by the Taliban that we welcome».

The rabid hypocrisy of the Western world was evinced in the NYT’s fatuously sententious observation that «American experts and United Nations officials say the Taliban are likely to face political problems if the effects of the opium ban are catastrophic and many people die».

Mandated by the United Nations, NATO-ISAF’s primary objective was «to enable the Afghan government to provide effective security across the country and develop new Afghan security forces to ensure Afghanistan would never again become a safe haven for terrorists».

There is no effective security in the country. As reported by the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, the Taliban «continue to contest district centres, threaten provincial capitals, and temporarily seize main lines of communication throughout the country, especially in high-priority areas like Kunduz and Helmand provinces». The last two being, not coincidentally, the regions in which US airstrikes killed so many innocent people.

National Intelligence Director Dan Coats told the US Senate on 11 May that «The intelligence community assesses that the political and security situation in Afghanistan will almost certainly deteriorate through 2018, even with a modest increase in military assistance by the United States and its partners». So what’s the point in carrying on?

The disastrous Trump has no knowledge of military strategy or international politics, or very much else, but even he must be able to understand that the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable by the forces of the corrupt, incompetent Kabul government backed by the hated foreigners whose fifteen years of interference have been a disaster.

In October 2005, I wrote that «The insurgency in Afghanistan will continue until foreign troops leave, whenever that might be. After a while, the government in Kabul will collapse, and there will be anarchy until a brutal, ruthless, drug-rich warlord achieves power. He will rule the country as it has always been ruled by Afghans: by threats, religious ferocity, deceit, bribery, and outright savagery, when the latter can be practiced without retribution. And the latest foreign occupation will become just another memory». The foreigners should leave as soon as possible.

According to Afghan official sources, the Islamic State is recruiting in Afghanistan with dozens of propagandists sent to spread the group’s ideas among the ranks of young people. «We will either become captors or martyrs», say propaganda messages from the Islamic State published in Fatah, a pamphlet published in local languages and distributed to Afghans. These pamphlets invite citizens of Afghanistan to pledge allegiance to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the self-declared caliph of IS, and join the jihad against non-believers. There are no calls for an alliance between the Islamic State and the Taliban – the terrorist groups which are on the path towards a direct military conflict. The Islamic State would like to open a third front in Afghanistan (after Iraq and Syria). The Taliban remains to be an important element of Al Qaeda – the group the Islamic State distanced itself from to offer a much bloodier scenario aimed at its coming to power. Evidently, the situation may spur a new wave of escalation in Afghanistan. 

In the south the Islamic State is trying to split the Taliban to make the group’s militants join its ranks. The sources say that Mullah Abdul Rauf is recruiting Afghan fighters for IS in Helmand, the largest Afghan province. He spent six years in the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay after being captured by American forces in 2001 to join the Islamic State in Syria. He believes the IS and the Taliban have common ideological ground but the existing differences exclude a close union. The IS objective is to provoke a split in the Taliban’s ranks and make at least part of the group change sides. 

The Taliban’s spiritual leader Mullah Omar left the country after the US invasion of 2001. He is not in active command. His inactivity does not suit many Taliban warriors ready to adopt the IS tactics. The Islamic State tries to prevent the process of reconciliation in Afghanistan and gain time. The group is not strong enough to take a foothold in the country, but it plans to support those who take its side with arms and money. The clashes between the security forces and armed opposition have intensified recently. Normally the militant formations are 500-600 men strong. They wear the same black clothes and operate under the same black flags as the Islamic State. More foreigners are fighting in their ranks. Newcomers belong to the branch of Islam that differs from the one practiced by local population. Government forces suffer great losses. The militants do not limit their actions to local attacks and subversive activities only; they try to hold the captured facilities and populated areas for more than just a day. More militants taken prisoner come from the neighboring Pakistan. 

The leaders of Pakistani Taliban have already pledged allegiance to the Islamic State and are ready to contribute into the creation of Islamic Caliphate. In a message translated into Urdu, Pushto and Arab says, «All Muslims in the world have great expectations of you … We are with you, we will provide you with Mujahideen (fighters) and with every possible support». It’s a call for all terrorist groups operating in the Middle East and South Asia to coordinate their activities aimed at toppling the Afghan government. The Pakistani army is launching an attack against the local Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan. It has made the group’s militants move to Afghanistan. They are well armed and mainly deployed in the central and southern parts of Afghanistan – the areas where the government control is weak. Pakistani Taliban fighters face no obstacles on the way of building training infrastructure to enhance their combat skills on the territory of Afghanistan. This is one of deplorable results the 13-year long operations conducted by the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and the United States together with some of its NATO allies (the Operation Enduring Freedom). 

The Islamic State activities are not limited by some part of Afghanistan. The IS propaganda efforts are on the rise in the north of the country. The leadership of Afghan special services has confirmed that the Islamic State militants have appeared in the areas adjacent to the Turkmenistan border. Their activities have intensified near the border with Uzbekistan. The group named «Marg» (which means death in Dari, one of two official Afghan languages) has emerged in the Afghanistan’s northern Balkh province. A few days ago it stated that fighting the Islamic State is its primary goal. Kabul welcomed the statement as timely and necessary. In October 2014, the head of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU), Usmon Gozi, made a statement that his terrorist organization had joined the terrorists of Islamic State. A few hundred militants coming from Uzbekistan are fighting in the Islamic State ranks in Syria and Iraq. 

On December 23, President Vladimir Putin said at the meeting of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), «The current situation causes concern», Putin said. «The units of the so-called Islamic State fighters appear which aspire to include some provinces of Afghanistan into the so-called Islamic Caliphate. The terrorist and extremist groups are trying to spread their activity to Central Asia. In these conditions the CSTO countries should be ready to take appropriate, preventative measures». Moscow believes that common sense will overcome and do away with the hindrances on the way of practical interaction between NATO and the CSTO. Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov called for intensifying efforts to counter the threat coming from Afghanistan within the framework of the United Nations and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. 

The US administration shies away from recognizing the fact that the Western military presence in Afghanistan has lasted for many years to produce no practical gains. The US has widely praised its fight against terrorism which in practice brought about quite opposite results than expected. The terrorist threat has grown. The crisis in Afghanistan has put into doubt the whole Western strategy aimed at turning Afghanistan into a contemporary state. 

The US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel does not exclude the possibility of sending US army units to fight the Islamic State in Iraq. Pentagon spokesman Rear Admiral John Kirby says it may require three-five years to defeat the Islamic State. Until now American have not made any comment on the fight against the IS in Afghanistan. Washington takes no steps to prevent the jihad warriors’ movement into that country. 

The overall strength of Afghan security forces has doubled since 2009 up to 344500. The army’s strength is around 185300, including approximately 11000 strong special operations forces. The army is divided into six regional Corps spread around the country, one division consisting of two brigades is located in Kabul, twenty four infantry and two mechanized brigades are deployed in other large populated areas. Afghan national police is around 152600 strong being a single law enforcement agency responsible for the whole country. It comprises typical elements such as territorial, criminal, border, drug enforcement, as well as emergency response and urban anti-terrorist units. The Afghan air force is about 6 thousand men strong. The service lacks aircraft, badly needs more helicopters and is not able to wage combat actions independently. It was established later than the army and police. The Afghan air force is expected to take over full combat responsibilities only in 2017. According to the US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel’s recent report to Congress on Afghanistan, Afghan forces are now handling 95 percent of conventional operations and 98 percent of special operations. With the training not up to par and morale rather low, the security forces suffer much greater losses than the ISAF contingent. The allies average monthly death toll was 13-27 in 2013, while the Afghan national security forces lost 3200 in 2012. 3000 civilians lost their lives as a result of operations they conducted against armed formations of the opposition. The attacks committed by Afghan military against Americans have become more frequent, there have been 41 cases of clashes between US and Afghan forces resulting in the death of 41 US servicemen and 11 American civilians. 

The Afghan government has not reported the losses in 2013. At least 3 thousand Afghan military are estimated to perish. No matter in roughly the same period of time around 45 thousand Afghans were recruited, the overall strength of armed forces was reduced by 10 thousand. Desertion is widely spread, about 30-35 thousand leave the ranks yearly. Losses, desertion and service leavers – it all creates problems with retention and translates into a third of the security forces strength to be recruited again to make up for lost personnel. The situation is exacerbated as a result of the NATO’s decision to reduce the security forces by one third down to 230 thousand before 2016. There is one more problem which negatively affects the army’s combat readiness – the Pashtun prefer to keep away from service. Today ethnic Tajik dominate the ranks while Pashtun are obviously underrepresented. The numbers of Tajiks and Pashtun holding top positions in the units deployed in the Pashtun populated areas are almost equal. It creates problems for the relationship between the military and the local population. The Taliban militants view the regular government forces as puppet army units pursuing the goal of spreading the Tajik influence across the country. Roughly a third of population is concentrated in only seventeen out of four hundred compounds. The army can control only large cities where ISAF forces are deployed. According to estimations, The Taliban controls the fourth of Afghanistan’s territory. ISAF decided to drop the plans to increase the Afghan army’s strength making it remain at 195 thousand, while the main effort is focused on honing professional skills and boosting combat readiness. The same policy applies to the police force. 

In 2012 US Congress allocated $11, 2 billion for the Afghan Security Forces Fund reducing it down to about $5, 7 billion in 2013. The United Nations and NATO also contribute to the Fund. In 2013 NATO members’ allocated $700 million with Germany shouldering the largest share ($55 million). The Law and Order Trust Fund for Afghanistan – LOTFA (UN Development Program) has been created. In the period 2002 – 2012 the United States allocated around $1 billion, other countries accounted for over $1, 7 billion. The Afghan government’s contribution is to be about $500 million. 

The international community is interested in preserving peace and stability in the country but Afghan bureaucrats make it a bargain. The Afghan government thinks the international aid is not enough. The Afghanistan’s state budget for 1393 financial year (December 21, 2013 – December 20, 2014) is $7, 9 billion. The Afghan Minister of Finance believes the international community should shoulder the brunt of army and police expenditure. Nobody can be sure that the funds allocated will be spent properly and according to law. The Karzai’s government’s effectiveness has been seriously undermined as it has been plunging into the quagmire of corruption and squandering. 

The Afghan security forces lack clear understanding what they are defending and who they are fighting against. The West believes that the main mission is to defend the Afghan constitution and fight against rebels. Many servicemen believe that the President of Afghanistan, the Supreme commander, violated the constitution himself in 2009, many a time he called the Taliban militants «brothers». The Afghan military has many claims to the corrupted leadership of the country; the servicemen have no desire to defend its corporate interests. The effectiveness of security forces’ structural organization leaves much to be desired. The difference between the missions assigned to the army, police and intelligence (the National Security Directorate) is blur enough giving rise to internal strife for resources and clout, something that seriously undermines the unity of regime. 

As a whole the United States and NATO pinned their hopes on finding solutions to a number of questions before the troops pull out. Mainly the solutions are still to be found. Soon we’ll see if Afghanistan is able to maintain stability in the country on its own – the Taliban has promised to undermine the plans to hold a presidential election in April 2014… 

Tehran believes that U.S. and NATO military presence could have negative consequences both for Afghanistan and for the region as a whole. The Iranians may be right in fearing that Afghanistan could be used by the U.S. to regulate the threat level to states bordering on Afghanistan to its own advantage. However, Afghanistan's other neighbors do not agree with the position of Iran's leadership; they are certain that, on the contrary, without American military support the Afghan police and army, to which responsibility for over 70% of the country's territory has already been transferred, will most likely be unable to maintain order and safety.

Even now over 100 men are killed and 300 wounded in the Afghan national police and local defense brigades each week, and there is no reason to believe that these losses will decrease or the intensity of armed conflict will decline after the Americans leave. A resumption of the active phase of the civil war is predicted, and warnings of the likelihood that the bloody "Syrian scenario" will repeat itself are being heard, as no one political group today is capable of establishing a stable balance of powers. The inevitability of an escalation of the situation in the country after the Americans leave frightens everyone, but it seems that Tehran considers it to be the lesser of two evils. For the Iranians it is more important not to allow the continued long-term American occupation of Afghanistan up to the year 2024, as provided for in the draft agreement which so far Karzai does not want to sign…

From the perspective of international law, Iranian diplomacy has every reason to press its neighbor not to agree to U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, as the UN Security Council mandate is ending, and the Americans plan to stay there by agreement with the acting Afghan government, which in spring 2014, after the presidential election, may not even exist anymore. Iran plans to continue persuading the Afghan leadership to turn down the agreement with the Americans. 

Kabul understands that Iran is trying to put up barriers for the U.S. and other Western countries in order to create conditions for strengthening its own influence in the region. Iran is attempting to simultaneously build relations with both the Afghan government and the Afghan Shiite minority. The Iranian regime's promotion of its own ideology is creating tension between Sunnites and Shiites. Some are also accusing Tehran of "cultural invasion" and trying to control Afghanistan using the media and religious activities. Currently in Afghanistan 6 television channels and 15 radio stations are operating on Iranian money. Afghan intelligence agencies periodically report that Tehran is supporting pro-Iranian anti-government rebel groups in various regions of the country. The Afghan government has more than once stated that Tehran is not honoring the strategic cooperation agreement between Iran and Afghanistan. Apparently Kabul has plenty of complaints against the Afghan policy of its neighbor to the west.

But Iran's anti-American policy suits the leaders of the Taliban movement, which is urging President Karzai to decline the agreement with the Americans. The Talibs' logic is clear: they do not want continued American occupation because they hope to return to Kabul as victors in the coming civil war. While one may doubt the victory of the Taliban, there is no doubt in their plans to start this war. It is impossible to maintain stability in Afghanistan without including the Taliban in the existing political system, but the Talibs do not intend to take part in the upcoming presidential election in April 2014, preferring the "right of force". Kabul has little chance of reaching a mutual understanding with the Talibs, as do the Americans. Nevertheless, Kabul is looking for ways to get the Talibs to the negotiating table. The Americans, for their part, are also counting on renewing direct contacts with the Taliban. 

Many experts believe that Iran also has its own "Iranian Talibs"; in any case, not only have the Iranians not gone to war with the Talibs, often they have come to agreements on the division of spheres of influence. Such agreements cannot be ruled out in the new situation either. In order to achieve its goals, the Talibs could very well lean on Iran's shoulder; after all, in their minds the Iranians are much better than the Americans and do not make any claims to all of Afghanistan. Iran is seeking to dominate in the Shiite region of the country; this is approximately 15% of the population of Afghanistan, whose representatives could never come to power in the country. Tehran has traditionally tried to have a firm foothold in regions with a dense population of ethnic Tajiks. Note that the former president of the IRI, Mahmud Ahmadinejad, made it his goal to revive Persian nationalism, in contrast to the position of Iranian spiritual leaders, who believe that the foundation of Iranian identity can only be Islam. The Tajiks in Afghanistan are included in the sphere of Iran's interests and have always been supported by the Iranians. 

The fact that Tehran could significantly increase the number of its supporters in Afghanistan through the compulsory return of Afghan refugees, of which there are over 3 million in Iran, almost half of them illegally, must also be taken into account. The majority of Afghans in Iran have assimilated with the Iranians, speak the same language, and have much in common with regard to culture and lifestyle. In November 2012 the Iranian government made the decision to deport over 1.6 million Afghan refugees to their homeland by the end of 2015. This caused a vigorous objection from Kabul; nevertheless, the deportation of Afghan refugees from Iran has already begun. Finally, Tehran is the main benefactor of Herat, one of the largest provinces of Afghanistan, located in the western part of the country and bordering on Iran. The majority of the population of Herat are Shiites, and during the years of the previous civil war they fiercely resisted the Taliban forces. Now Iranian investments in the economy of Herat have made it possible to increase the volume of two-way border trade to almost 2 billion dollars (data for 2012). 

Besides the expansion of trade, reconstruction work, the construction of educational centers and investments in infrastructure, Iran is paying special attention to cooperating with the authorities in neighboring Afghan provinces in fighting the illegal drug trade. Here Iran has very serious complaints against the Americans.

During the 12 years the ISAF troops have been in Afghanistan, this country has produced and exported more heroin than any other country in the world. The Americans set foot on Afghan soil in 2001, when the smallest volume of opium was produced since 1992, only 185 tons. The years of foreign occupation led to a nearly 40-fold increase in drug production in Afghanistan. The Western coalition made Afghanistan the sole leader among the drug traders of the entire planet. Today 80% of the world opium poppy harvest is gathered in Afghanistan. Iran is on the transit corridor between Afghanistan, which produces raw opium, and its consumers in Europe. The government of Iran spends over 800 million dollars each year on fighting the illegal drug trade. But international organizations give Iran very little money for fighting the drug trade, a total of around 15 million dollars.

Iran's fight against the drug trade is extremely effective. For comparison, while Russian law enforcement agencies are only able to seize around 4 percent of the heroin and opiates entering the country, Iran seizes around 33 percent. Iran is a world leader in the seizure of drugs and an important partner of the UN in fighting their distribution. In recent years over 700 kilometers of trenches have been dug on the Iranian-Afghan border and extensive border fortifications have been built, including barriers made of barbed wire and concrete walls. The Iranian government has redeployed thousands of security service and other law enforcement personnel to the eastern part of the country. Iran accounts for 80% of the opium and 40% of the morphine seized throughout the world. Over the past five years Iranian special services have seized an average of 600 tons of drugs from smugglers each year. Through the fault of the Americans, who have given up fighting the Afghan drug business, drugs have become a national disaster for Iran itself; there are already around 2 million drug addicts in the country.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, who was in Kabul recently, is confident that the Afghan government will sign a bilateral agreement before the start of 2014. The Iranians, on the other hand, will attempt to dissuade Hamid Karzai from signing the Afghan-American pact during the Afghan president's upcoming visit to Tehran. Tehran would not like to see the Americans remain in Afghanistan for long years to come.

The Taliban has branded the meeting a US-designed plot, and has vowed to pursue and punish its delegates as traitors if they approve the deal. Russia, China, and India – were backing the accord

The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan, which has been fighting radical Islamists in Afghanistan since 2001, is expected to withdraw from the war-torn country by the end of 2014, leaving responsibility for security in the hands of local police and military forces.

The agreement would go into effect January 1, 2015, and last «until the end of 2024 and beyond, unless terminated» by mutual agreement and with two years notice by either party.

Speaking on October 20, White House spokesman Jay Carney stressed that any U.S. forces would have «a very limited mission» and would not be «patrolling cities or mountains». «The war in Afghanistan will end next year, as the president has promised», Carney said. «The combat mission will be over». State Secretary John Kerry used similar language in calling the U.S. military's role in Afghanistan «very limited», adding «it is entirely (to) train, equip and assist» Afghan forces.

According to the draft, the US is not committed to defending Afghanistan from foreign attacks, while the phrasing does not absolutely rule out the US acting on its own while facing situations such as an al-Qaida threat.

US stays after 2014 – deal’s major provisions

The Parties acknowledge that U.S. military operations to defeat al-Qaeda and its affiliates may be appropriate in the common fight against terrorism», the agreement reads. «The Parties agree to continue their close cooperation and coordination toward those ends, with the intention of protecting U.S and Afghan national interests without unilateral U.S. military counter-terrorism operations». The document outlines a broad, long term relationship with Afghanistan that commits the United States to sustaining the Afghan security forces for years to come, and likely deploying thousands of American troops in the country to carry out that training and the limited counter-terrorism role. The meat of the deal is that the U.S. will keep around at least 7,000 troops in Afghanistan fighting terrorism and training Afghan security forces through 2024. Afghan officials wanted this figure to be 10,000 to 15,000 to remain in Afghanistan for at least a decade. The deal also outlines continued funding for Afghan national security forces to the tune of $4 billion annually, mostly at the expense of the US.  And United States Special Operations forces will retain leeway to conduct antiterrorism raids on private Afghan homes — a central American demand that Afghan officials had resisted and described as the last sticking point in negotiations. 

The agreement includes the following major provisions: 

– US forces remaining after 2014 reportedly to receive immunity from Afghan courts. The U.S. military «shall have the exclusive right» to discipline and prosecute its members for alleged acts committed on Afghan soil, though Afghan authorities can ask that anyone be taken out of the country:

– US forces will not to launch attacks on Afghan soil without consulting the Afghan authorities first. The language in the proposed security agreement, in fact, speaks to that point: «Unless otherwise mutually agreed, the United States forces shall not conduct combat operations in Afghanistan»;

– The US would not protect Afghanistan from external attack to avoid getting mired in a war with Pakistan;

– The foreign troops strength may be as high as 15,000 foreign troops remaining after 2014 (the US says it has not yet taken a decision on exact numbers);

– The proposed deal mentions «Afghanistan's sovereignty and territorial integrity», and adds U.S. forces «shall not target Afghan civilians, including in their homes». It explains that, «U.S. military counterterrorism operations are intended to complement and support (the Afghan military's) counterterrorism operations, with the goal of maintaining (the Afghan military's) lead and with full respect for Afghan sovereignty and full regard for the safety and security of the Afghan people, including in their homes». Although it says the US forces «shall not target Afghan civilians, including in their homes», the phrasing clearly does not deny US troops the right to enter Afghan residences.

– The agreement does state that U.S. forces will play a support role in Afghanistan, while at the same time ceding that «U.S. military operations to defeat al Qaeda and its affiliates may be appropriate in the common fight against terrorism».

– The draft also allows unfettered overflight rights of US military aircraft. 

Russia, NATO: Afghanistan fills common agenda

Speaking a NATO-Russia Council meeting at the level of defense ministers on October 23 Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said the participants of the are concerned about the situation in Afghanistan and regions bordering the country. «The decision to withdraw the International Security Assistance Force has contributed to terrorist groups' planning and is enhancing their activities. Groups of armed opposition in the northern provinces of Afghanistan, which border our partners in the Collective Security Treaty Organization, grow», he told reporters in Brussels. Russia proposes cooperation on Afghanistan to remain a priority of the NATO-Russia Council work in 2014, Shoigu stressed. In particular, it is planned to hold the international security conference, which is traditionally conducted by the Russian Defense Ministry in Moscow. «We will discuss the most pressing security issues», he said.

The Minister noted that Russia is already training Afghan Air Force specialists and policemen specializing in drug trafficking. He also proposed a similar program of training for Afghan mine clearance specialists to rid Afghanistan of mines and unexploded munitions and, at the same time, providing decent employment for large numbers of young Afghans who might otherwise choose to join terrorists.

Russia launches steps to address the situation

Speaking at the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) held late September in Sochi Russian President Putin said the planned 2014 ISAF withdrawal from Afghanistan could pose a major threat to its neighbors… «The development of the situation in Afghanistan under any scenario should not take us by surprise», he said emphasizing further military cooperation and strengthening of the CSTO’s rapid-reaction force. 

On October 1 the Tajik parliament ratified a deal to extend Russia's lease on military bases in the Central Asian state until 2042. Russia's 201st military base consists of approximately 7,000 troops, as well as significant quantities of main battle tanks, armored personnel carriers, and helicopters, deployed at three sites: Dushanbe, Kulayb, and Kurgan-Tyube. An Ayni air base lease agreement is also on the agenda. As an air base, the facility would complement the land forces base of the 201st Motorized Rifle Division that is based in Tajikistan.

On May 8 the President of Russia said at the Security Council meeting that, «We need to strengthen the security system in the strategic southern area, including its military component», emphasizing the need for close cooperation with fellow members of regional security alliances. He added, «International terrorist and radical groups do not hide their plans to export instability». Vladimir Putin said the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) should speed up efforts to better arm and equip a rapid-reaction force that has done little so far. This May  the CSTO has already announced the decision to establish a combined air force formation of SU-25 fighters and SU-27 attack aircraft located in Kant, Kyrgyzstan. According to Bordyuzha, the mission is to support peacekeeping ground forces fighting terrorists, especially in mountainous terrain. The President also stressed the role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which includes Russia and China as well as the Central Asian states of Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, should be involved in efforts to improve security. President Putin emphasized another acute problem saying, «International forces have done practically nothing to root out drug production in Afghanistan» and ignored Russian proposals to eradicate crops of poppies used to make heroin. Putin said Russia, which is separated geographically from Afghanistan by the ex-Soviet states of Central Asia, should step up migration controls on its southern border and «exponentially increase the effectiveness of work to stem drug trafficking». Putin said the Shanghai Cooperation Organization should be involved in efforts to improve security. 

* * *

The withdrawal of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan (ISAF) will inevitably lead to intensification of internal political struggle for power in the country. There probability is high that the turf hostilities will turn into an armed confrontation between different actors. A flow of refugees is expected increasing the risk of armed gangs penetration and illicit arms trafficking from the country. According to the UN 2012 Drug Report, Afghanistan accounts for over 60% of global opium poppy cultivation and remains the leading producer of opium in the world. 

The risk that Taliban-inspired militancy spreading into Central Asia is now a critical concern for regional powers. With US military presence reduced and keeping away from combat missions, the chances of a civil war are very much real. Afghanistan just cannot be left alone. The SCO and the CSTO, as well as the USA, have an important role to play gradually involving the country into the normalization and restoration process. Afghanistan needs large-scale economic programs implemented with the help of the international community and under its control. The CSTO and the US-led NATO joining together in economic projects would be a logical step for the benefit of all. But the agreement just reached with Afghanistan pushes the multinational cooperation issue to the fore. The US-Afghanistan agreement say the US military presence remains so the problem of supplies is as acute as ever. The Pakistani border is subject to frequent closings for reasons large and small. The air route with short hops to ports such as Dubai or directly back to the United States is extremely expensive. The alternative is the northern route that originates in the Baltic states, and then comes down via rail through Russia, Kazakhstan, and Uzbekistan going to the border town of Termez». Then, the trucks pass over the «Friendship Bridge» into Afghanistan. Once the new agreement between the US and Afghanistan envisages military presence, the significance of the northern route remains, making the issue part of Russia-US agenda.  

The NRF is made up of land, air, naval and special forces units committed by NATO nations for a twelve-month period. Partner countries can contribute to the NRF once their participation has been approved by the North Atlantic Council and the forces designated meet the required NATO standards. They reinforce the contribution of NATO Allies to the NRF, but do not replace them. NATO’s Connected Forces Initiative, launched by the Secretary General, foresees a reinforced program of exercises in the coming years – and reinforced cooperation with partners. «Over the past 20 years, NATO and our partners have stood shoulder to shoulder in our operations. We have learned to work as a team. The Connected Forces Initiative will make sure that that team keeps on getting better», according to Mr. Rasmussen. 

There is a series of NATO Steadfast exercises scheduled this fall to certify the capabilities of NRF. The first live-fly one was Brilliant Arrow involving 40 fighter aircraft, 2 airborne early warning platforms and approximately 800 exercise participants in central Norway (25 Aug – 5 Sep) putting aircraft from nine NATO Allies into a realistic scenario to ensure the preparedness to assume the NRF mission in 2014. In late September and early October Exercise Brilliant Mariner honed the skills of maritime forces certifying their readiness for NRF rotation. There have been a variety of land drills like the NATO special forces exercise Brilliant Arrow to be held this October in Italy. To date, about 20 exercises have been held, with elements hosted in 14 different countries. The goal is to make sure that NRF troops are ready to deal with any situation in any environment. All of this training will finally culminate with one wrap up event. 

Exercise «Steadfast Jazz» is the largest in scale NATO training event in seven years to be held from Nov. 2 to 9 in a number of locations across the Alliance with the largest elements being hosted in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. If NATO were ever called on to defend an alliance member, «we have to be prepared for the more high-end of military operations», said U.S. Air Force General Philip Breedlove speaking at a NATO headquarters at Brunssum in the Netherlands on September 18…

The event involves about 6,000 personnel from many allied and partner nations. Around 3,000 headquarters personnel from Joint Force Command Brunssum and other headquarters will be involved in a command and control exercise on the Adazi Base near Riga, Latvia and at several other headquarters locations across the Alliance. In addition, multinational troops will participate in a live-fire exercise at Poland's Drawsko Pomorskie Training Area. Air, land, maritime, and special forces will also participate from several locations. At the conclusion of the exercise, the headquarters staff from Joint Force Command Brunssum will be officially certified to lead NATO joint operations in 2014.

The drill will also include a «sizable cyber threat», said French Major-General Michel Yakovleff, deputy chief of staff for plans at Brunssum. This is the largest of its kind organized by NATO since 2006.

«The NATO Response Force is the spearhead of this Alliance: a rapid-reaction group able to defend any Ally, deploy anywhere, and deal with any threat. Exercise Steadfast Jazz will make sure that the spearhead is sharp, and ready to use», the Secretary General Rasmussen said.

NRF non-NATO contributors

Sweden has offered substantial forces to the next four rotations of the NRF, including aircraft, ships and land forces. Sweden is thus the fourth partner to join NRF, following Finland, Ukraine and Georgia, who will make forces available for the NRF in 2014, as well as Georgia, who offered to contribute to the NRF in 2015. According to a NATO statement, the Swedish move comes after the North Atlantic Council approved the Swedish contribution on October 14. «I welcome Sweden’s participation, alongside that of Finland and Ukraine. Our relationship is already strong, and this will make it even stronger», NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in a statement.

The news was welcomed by Sweden’s Defence Minister Karin Enström. «The important thing is that we get access to the advanced training exercises that get carried out within the NRF frameworks by being accepted as participants», Enström told the TT news agency. «And this is important to maintain and develop our defence capabilities».

This year Swedish defense capability is a hot issue inside the country. There are political circles that try to intimidate public opinion with the obviously invented «Russian threat». They say Russia presents a growing menace combined with a feeling that the EU’s CSDP might be insufficient security insurance could yet instigate a Swedish application to join. In July the Social Democrats – the party traditionally opposed to stronger formal links with the alliance, reversed its position to support a government initiative to allow Swedish forces to train with NATO’s Rapid Response Force. Sweden’s Christian-Democrat opposition party, meanwhile, is lobbying for full membership in NATO. The Christian-Democrats say NATO membership offers the only long-term viable defense solution to protect the sovereignty of Sweden and neighboring Nordic states. 

At that, the idea remains highly unpopular in the country. According to latest opinion poll in May, 29 percent of Swedish people support Sweden becoming a member of NATO unlike 32 percent who are against. 39 percent, a very large swing section is undecided.

In interview with the Voice of Russia on February 5, Agneta Norberg, Vice Chair of the Swedish Peace Council, Member of Steering Committee of the International Peace Bureau and a member of the board of directors of Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space discussed the facts surrounding Sweden’s non-neutrality and the country’s involvement in NATO and Western military expansion. According to her, «the people in Sweden and in Finland are against. It is only about 19% of the Swedish population that accept NATO; the others don’t. So, they have that problem here. But I can see the lust, how they try to form an enemy out of Russia, and you should understand this: how Russia now is demonized, again». She also added, «I think you have to start to understand that Sweden has quite another position now and we are a NATO country. It is only a document that is left to be done. That’s the situation now in Sweden».

Finland is a contributor to a Response Forces Pool, which can supplement the Immediate Response Force when necessary; it is also a participant in the Steadfast Jazz event. 

Ukraine is an outside-NATO contributing nation. NATO Deputy Secretary General Alexander Vershbow has said that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will support the European aspirations of Ukraine. At the same time, he noted that NATO respects Ukraine’s choice to adhere to the non-aligned status. 

«The topic of Ukraine’s national security and its relations with international organizations is important, and recent developments in your country as well as in Russia, Republic of Moldova and Armenia have made it even more urgent», he said. «As I look to the future, I see great potential for closer cooperation between Ukraine and NATO in a number of areas. One particularly promising area is defence reform and military transformation. And I note that a NATO expert team on these issues has arrived in Kyiv just yesterday for consultations with Ukrainian experts», Vershbow said.

Ukraine was the first non – NATO partner to join the NRF. One hundred Ukrainian troops will also join a «live-fire» part of the drill in Poland's Drawsko Pomorskie training area. Ukraine's ambition to join NATO faded when Germany blocked its «membership action plan» in 2008. Apart from joint manoeuvres, Ukraine also contributes forces to NATO operations in Afghanistan, the Indian Ocean, Kosovo and the Mediterranean Sea. The country is also an important contributor to the EU operations. 

Georgia – party to NRF outside Alliance

The Georgia’s armed forces are to join the NRF activities starting from 2015. During his October 14 visit to Brussels, Georgian State Minister on European and Euro-Atlantic Integration Alexi Petriashvili met with Deputy Secretary General of NATO Alexander Vershbow. Mr.Vershbow assured the readiness of NATO to continue supporting Georgia in the way of integration. He expressed the hope that this process will be irreversible and the government will continue with its democratic reforms. «In this sense, comprehensive support will be provided by NATO that will be reflected in future decisions. It is hoped that when the time comes for these particular solutions, the progress made by Georgia both from the point of view of an indemnity in the ISAF operation (International Security Assistance Force) and in the successful implementation of democratic reforms, will be accordingly and adequately reflected in the decisions of NATO», Petriashvili said.

The training event viewed from outside NATO

The planned NATO exercise includes ex-Soviet Baltic Republics; Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania as well as Poland, and envisage those countries being attacked by some unidentified «phantom menace» – a «foreign power». This is reminiscent of the Cold War according to the Deputy Defense Minister of the Russian Federation, Anatoly Antonov.

At the July 2013 meeting of the Russia-NATO Council in Brussels, the Deputy Defense Minister stated the following: «As we prepared for this meeting, we carefully studied information received from NATO countries about Steadfast Jazz-2013, and I can’t hide the fact that the Russian Defense Ministry was bewildered by the proclaimed goal of this exercise, which envisages the application of Article 5 of the Washington Treaty triggering a response to an aggression against Poland. These drills are in the spirit of the Cold War». He added, «I will not conceal the fact that the stated aim of this exercise providing for the invocation of Article 5 of the Washington treaty in response to the aggression against Poland made some officials from the Russian Defence Ministry raise their eyebrows. A chill of the Cold War is creeping from this exercise. How can these steps facilitate the increased confidence between NATO and Russia?»

Russia and NATO need to joint efforts to ensure security in the Euro-Atlantic area. The agenda implementation of the controversial missile defence component in Europe, moving NATO military infrastructure closer to the Russian borders, the North Atlantic policy towards NATO enlargement and the use of military force getting around the international law. The legacy of the Cold War, like the Steadfast Jazz scenario, hinders the efforts to reach the goal. 

The return of Taliban to Kabul is a matter of special concern for Russia and the neighboring CIS (the Community of Independent Nations) states. President Karzai believes Afghanistan is a sovereign country and has a right to determine its own fate, including the involvement of Taliban into the political process. He is self-assured and not concerned a bit about the fact that with ISAF gone the Taliban can come back to the political scene and share power. Those who took the reins after the Soviet forces withdrawal let the movement turn Afghanistan into the springboard of international terrorism. They were self-assured too. Those who headed the country back then had no political will to make the gained independence work for the benefit of Afghan people. 

Now Karzai is on the verge of repeating the same mistake, he goes on insisting his government is ready to take on full responsibility for the future of the country. Actually the incumbent Afghan government is siding with the United States and NATO getting the country embroiled into the mess with consequences hard to predict… The US-led NATO readiness to retain its presence within the framework of Resolute Support mission aimed at security transfer to Afghan forces should not mislead. The same way, according to NATO, Kabul is already responsible for 90% of combat operations inside the country, but it does not mean the puppet regime is strong enough. NATO evidently exaggerates saying the government forces enjoy the support of major part of population. The affirmations of the West that the Taliban enjoys only minor public support after the 12-year war, that brought about no tangible results, look more like an awkward propaganda maneuvering to cover up the fact that the US-led operation is a failure. 

Will ISAF leave fully or let some forces stay as part of the Resolute Support? It all depends on the US and the Karzai-led government; will they let the Taliban return to the country? 

The moment of truth has come. The US and NATO are to report to the international community on the results of their 12-year presence in Afghanistan. It’s not serious when they say the 100 thousand strong force has eliminated the Al Qaeda’s infrastructure and it’s the major achievement of the West. Afghanistan faces the prospect of becoming a Taliban dominated state once again. 

The movement is supported by Pakistan – its homeland. For Islamabad the friendly Taliban-controlled Kabul is a strategic advantage. Let me remember that during five years of the Taliban rule, the movement failed to spread its control throughout the entire country with all the leverage they had holding the reins of state power, and it was the failure for Pakistan too. Those days the Taliban got very limited international support from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Pakistan, the countries that have not changed their stance as yet. The money flows coming from the Directorate for Inter-Services Intelligence (more commonly known as Inter-Services Intelligence or simply by its initials ISI), never stopped, sometimes the process even ran out of government control. The Taliban is the only means of leverage Islamabad can use to influence the Afghan politics; the Pakistani elite will never sever ties with it. Pakistan will do its best to make the Taliban return as a result of reconciliation process under «the predominant role of Afghan people» meaning the possibility of making a choice thanks to elections at various levels. 

The logic of Pakistani approach is based on the fact the Pashtun are the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan. The fact that it dominates the Taliban is hushed up. The calculations show the Taliban candidate has a chance to win at the election of 2014. In any event the new presidential election may become the main political event for Afghanistan. The incumbent head of state Hamid Karzai does not exclude the possibility the next presidential hopeful may come from the Taliban ranks. It could be the Taliban founder Muhammad Omar. Karzai is ready to cooperate with him on the condition the Taliban refuses armed struggle. It had been reported earlier the Taliban started to hold secret talks with the government. The place is not any foreign country but Kabul. It means the US supports the process. The position of Mullah Omar before the withdrawal is getting stronger; he knows the incumbent government is weak. So the Taliban leaders have not refused to take the power in Afghanistan into their hands again to revive the Islamic Emirate. No doubt the Taliban is intent to resort to forceful methods to the political management process. 

The group has not said openly it intends to take part in the election though many forecast that Mullah Omar would hold a sweeping victory if he had an opportunity to run. The Taliban has many faithful supporters among the voters. At that, there are other options, the choice is not limited by the Taliban and the supporters of incumbent President Karzai, other Islamist political forces have emerged which are not that close to Islamabad and appear to be less radical in comparison with the Mullah Omar supporters. 

Abdul Rassoul Sayyaf has registered at the offices of Kabul's Independent Election Commission. He is a Pashtun from Paghman valley and an hereditary theologian. Sayyaf is one of the most influential Islamist politicians of the country, for many years he led the Mujahedin faction Islamic Union for the Liberation of Afghanistan fighting against the Soviet Union. In February 1989 he was elected the first Prime Minister of Mujahedin transitional government, and then became a close associate of Afghan leaders Burhanuddin Rabbani and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Sayyaf has always been an opponent of the Taliban and fought it together with the Northern Alliance. After the American forces came into the country he took the side of US and supported Karzai at the election. 

Before the registration as a presidential hopeful, he had been a member of the lower chamber of parliament preserving the status of a conservative and respected imam. Field commander Ismail Khan agreed to become first Vice-President in the Sayyaf- led government if elected. Ismail Khan has always been influential in the western province of Herat near the Iranian border. Abdul Ahad Irfan, the chairman of parliamentary upper chamber and the leader of Afghanistan National Unity Committee, has registered too to run for the position of second Vice-President. 

These personalities that make up the triumvirate of hopefuls may challenge the Islamist Taliban at the election. It’s up to people to appreciate the reputation of Sayyaf as a religious Pashtun leader and the fact he has broad connections among the Islamist groups inside Afghanistan and outside. The voters don’t doubt his military record and his influence in the western parts of the country. The Islamic youth has sympathy for his educational level; he is a new kind of religious preacher, who does not share the Taliban ideology which requires religious rigidity in all aspects of everyday life according to the Muslim moral standards of the times of Prophet Muhammad. Let’s not forget the Taliban banned women from leaving their houses. Now over two million girls go to school, over 300 thousand Afghan children have Facebook accounts, the young people younger than 25 years old account for 70 percent of population. All these factors have weight in case the election is fair. 

If Sayyaf wins the presidential election the coalition he is going to head will cement ties with NATO as the organization that came to support Afghanistan in the times of trouble (a hint it seeks US blessing). Sayyaf promises to stick to the principle of equality in the process of national reconciliation and respect for all nationalities including: Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras which have never had real chances to have a President coming from their ranks. This time Abdullah Abdullah, former leader of Northern Alliance, runs too. He had got his registration two days before Sayyaf. It’s not excluded the both will agree on concerted actions against the Taliban which never shared his power with those who come from the north of the country. At present, as the experience of Karzai government shows, it’s impossible to talk about the Afghan unity without bringing in national and religious minorities. Under certain circumstances the Northern Alliance voters may shift to support Sayyaf, if no serious rivals appear. Minister of Foreign Affairs Zalmai Rassoul, liberal politician Ashraf Ghani, Qayum Karzai, the brother of incumbent President, – they all run and have hopes to win. The issue is defining the main sponsors, including the ones outside the country. 

(To be concluded)

The popularity of the Taliban is growing because of the huge rate of unemployment, drugs, poverty and corruption. There was an embarrassing revelation made earlier this month that British intelligence agency MI6 regularly provided Karzai’s government with ‘ghost money’ estimated to run in the tens of millions of dollars in order to buy influence through bribes. Karzai’s government is widely seen as corrupt as it is unpopular with many Afghans. There was significant overlap between the corrupt Afghan political establishment and the country’s illegal heroin trade, including the president’s brother Ahmed Wali Karzai, who was assassinated in 2011. A UN report released last month showed that Afghan poppy production was rapidly expanding, and that the country was expected to produce 90 percent of the world’s opium this year.

Russia expresses legitimate concern 

Russia has voiced concern over the security threats increasing following the planned withdrawal of most US-led foreign combat troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014. On May 8 the President of Russia said at the Security Council meeting that U.S. and NATO-led forces «have not yet achieved a breakthrough in the fight against terrorist and radical groups» and that these groups have become more active recently. He noted, «We need to strengthen the security system in the strategic southern area, including its military component», emphasizing the need for close cooperation with fellow members of regional security alliances. The President further pointed out that «international forces have done practically nothing to root out drug production in Afghanistan» and ignored Russian proposals for more efforts to eradicate crops of poppies used to make heroin. As a result «there is every reason to believe that in the near future we may face a worsening of the situation»… He added, «International terrorist and radical groups do not hide their plans to export instability». Vladimir Putin said Russia should step up migration controls on its southern border and «exponentially increase the effectiveness of work to stem drug trafficking». According to him, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) should speed up efforts to better arm and equip a rapid-reaction force that has done little so far. The President also stressed the role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which includes Russia and China as well as the Central Asian states of Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, should be involved in efforts to improve security.

After a meeting with UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon in the southern Russian city of Sochi on May 17, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Russia is counting on the UN to develop proposals regarding the international presence in Afghanistan after 2014. As to him, «We consider it important to start discussing in advance what forms of international presence there will be in Afghanistan after 2014; we will count on the proposals that the UN Secretary General is planning to prepare together with his colleagues».

After the ISAF withdrawal from Afghanistan the situation in the part of the country near Russia’s southern borders will worsen, Nikolai Bordyuzha, General Secretary of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), warned the same day. He pointed out a zone of instability will emerge in regions bordering Afghanistan, and the influence of extremist groups will grow, as will the penetration of Islamist fundamentalist ideas in neighboring states. «The member countries of the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) will offer all possible help to Tajikistan to ensure security at its borders after the withdrawal of the ISAF from Afghanistan» the General told journalists on May 17. According to Bordyuzha, mountainous terrain complicates the mission of ensuring security at the Tajik-Afghan border, which can be «easily trespassed». «We are coordinating our efforts with Tajikistan, offering assistance in logistics and weapons supplies, and personnel training», he stressed.

Russian Ambassador to Afghanistan Andrei Avetisyan said Russia is considering deploying border guards on the Tajik-Afghan border. He noted, «We prefer to tackle this problem on the Afghan border to stop these threats of narcotics and terrorism reaching Russia». As to him, «We used to have a serious presence on the Afghan-Tajik border and, at that time, the situation there was much better, so it would be in the interest of both Russia and Tajikistan and even Afghanistan if Russia is present there.» Avetisyan said such a presence would involve Russian border troops, but he did not give a number. He told Reuters on May 17 that any agreement on border troop deployment would «of course» have to be agreed upon with Tajikistan.

Russia has previously expressed concerns over the presence of foreign military forces in Afghanistan. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Igor Morgulov said at the third ministerial conference of the Istanbul Process on Regional Security and Cooperation for a Secure and Stable Afghanistan held in Almaty, Kazakhstan, «We will not accept reformatting the International Security Assistance Force into long-term foreign military presence in Afghanistan under a different cover and without a relevant UN mandate. We are confident that such a step will not bring stability to Afghanistan and will only escalate tension in the region».

The Afghanistan security issue was also part of NATO-Russia Council Chiefs of Defence meeting in Brussels on May 14. 

Steps to enhance security

Russia has already contributed some 12,000 paratroopers to the CSTO; it has an air base in Kyrgyzstan and more than 6,000 soldiers in Tajikistan, its largest deployment abroad. Tajikistan, which shares a long border with Afghanistan, has not yet ratified an October agreement extending Russia's lease on the base where the troops are stationed beyond the end of this year. Let me note here that General Valery Gerasimov, Russia’s chief of the General Staff, announced last month the formation of a Special Operations Command. According to General Gerasimov, the new command will include a Special Forces brigade, a training center, and helicopter and air transportation squadrons. These forces will be used exclusively outside Russian territory, including in U.N.-mandated operations. The CSTO has already announced the decision to establish a combined air force formation of SU-25 fighters and SU-27 attack aircraft located in Kant, Kyrgyzstan. According to Bordyuzha, the mission is to support peacekeeping ground forces fighting terrorists, especially in mountainous terrain. 

Other countries

Other countries with stakes in Afghanistan are also preparing strategies for post-withdrawal Afghanistan as they fear a spillover of violence once the international troops pull out.

The fact that military contingents will remain not only in Afghanistan but also in the region is doubtless and is openly stated by officials. On April 23, the U.S. Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asia Robert Blake said the fact of the coalition’s presence in Central Asia is unequivocal, adding that it is still not decided on what other transit points and bases will be maintained in the region. The US also plans to leave behind a sufficient number of troops in Afghanistan to help the Afghan National Army deal with terrorists. President Barack Obama is expected to announce a plan in this regard soon, as Afghan President Hamid Karzai has given his consent for the continued presence of the troops. The exact number of troops to stay behind is not known yet, but it could be between 2,500 and 12,000, according to US officials. It still remains unknown what type of military contingent will remain in Afghanistan and Central Asia thereafter and which countries of the region will be selected by the West for this purpose. The stated aim of the plan is that soldiers would continue to train the Afghan army and police, and carry out attacks on Al-Qaeda militants.

China is strictly in favor of stability in the region. From the economic aspect it is clear that China and Central Asia have close economic relations. Regarding the security issue, China is worried about if Afghanistan becomes a base for separatists in West China. Therefore, the interests and the targets of Russia and China primarily coincide. Beijing is taking this approach welcoming Mr. Karzai to Beijing last month for the fourth time, and responding favorably to requests for economic co-operation, technical training and preferential tariffs for Afghan exports.

New Delhi is also actively discussing its role in Afghanistan. President Karzai arrives in India May 20-22, coinciding with the visit of Chinese Premier Li Keqiang. This is Karzai's 12th visit to India, where he last came in November 2012. Military aid is high on the agenda. So far India has been training a limited number of Afghan military officers for years at its military institutions, but provided little weapons assistance except for some vehicles. The timing of Mr. Karzai’s India trip is likely related to recent border skirmishes with Pakistan. A politically and economically stable Afghanistan is of a strategic significance to India, but more collaboration is necessary. Despite little support among India’s policy makers for greater military cooperation with Afghanistan, the lingering ambiguity around Afghanistan’s future after 2014 provides a good opportunity for New Delhi to step up its efforts to be a force for stability in the country. Afghanistan and India signed a comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) in October 2011. The SPA serves as the foundation of the two nations expanding bilateral relationship in multiple sectors, including security and defence cooperation, as well as cultural and people-to people cooperation.

Neither China, nor India will expand their efforts in co-operation with NATO. Instead, they are expected to act in their independent national interests to contain militancy and drug trafficking, while also moving to protect significant investments of time, capital and expertise in the country. China has pledged US$3.5 billion to develop the Aynak copper mine 60km south of Kabul, and has built a state-of-the-art hospital in the city. India has committed $1.2bn on a broad program of assistance; including power transmission lines from Uzbekistan that now supply Kabul with reliable electricity, as well as a major hydroelectric dam in Herat. India has also invested hundreds of millions of dollars in small, community-based projects that have brought roads, water, schools and health care to hundreds of impoverished Afghan villages. US plans to drawdown troops may threaten those projects, particularly in the rural hinterland. 

* * *

The risk that Taliban-inspired militancy will spread into Tajikistan and other parts of Central Asia is now a critical concern for regional powers. With NATO gone, the chances of Taliban control of large portions of the country and a civil war are the most probable scenario. The US has actually lost the war and failed to win peace. But the country cannot be left alone. The SCO and the CSTO have an important role to play gradually involving Afghanistan into the cooperation process. Afghanistan now needs huge economic programs implemented with the help of the international community and under its control. The CSTO and NATO joining together in economic projects would be a logical step for everybody’s benefit. Still NATO rejects the very idea of dealing with the CSTO, be it security or economy. No matter, the time is ripe for the countries involved to get united and address the regional security agenda, there is not much time left. Russia and its SCO-CSTO allies are doing just that.