Monday, January 09, 2006

Bringing Order to Afghanistan

The head of the Dutch Army Chief Dick Berlijn commented that rolling out activities by the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) are crucial for the establishment of Law and Order to Afghanistan. The Netherlands have invested for four years in Security, Law and Order in Afghanistan, by the activities of the Dutch Commando's, Dutch Royal Army and the Dutch Royal Airforce. Further extension of the ISAF mission is "crucial" to the success of the reconstruction of Afghan Society.

"It should not be permitted for disorder to spread to from the South to the relatively peacefull area's in the North and West."

The comment was made while the general bade farewell to the last group op F-16s and approximately 100 service personel. They are to be garisonned in Kabul, the Aghani Capital.

Afghanistan has not had an established central authority for the last 1,000 years. The government traditionally is run as a kinship society with clans warring and feuding amongst each other endlessy. The central government seldomly is able to assert any strength of laws outside of a circle of about 50 kilometers outside its capital. It is unclear how any outside force, would be able to change that, short of killing the entire population and repopulating the country with Swiss or Japanese.

Let them stew in their own juice, Snouck says.


netron said...

militarily , Afghanistan is of vital strategic importance.

look at where it is:

it borders China, Pakistan AND Iran, and also borders the "Stans" in Central Asia.

no wonder the Russians invaded it. And no wonder the British did before that.. and even before that, the Greeks under Alexander.

if the West is to secure future energy supplies in Central Asia ( in preference to the Chinese doing it or , god forbid, the Islamic Fundementalists) , then it is vital that we have bases and a military presence in Afghanistan. Indeed, its a sad situation, and imperialism is something I thought that the West should have given up ages ago, but in the face of things like the Taliban, we had no choice.

Wiag said...

I do agree a lot of countries including the USA - although probably one of the countries that is the most remote - see a military significance in Afghanistan.

Well, if it's about energy supplies: maybe the western world should make work of other resources and reduce it's dependency soon, as you are undoubtatly refering to oil.

And the rhetoric that one has no choice is meaningless. One always has a choice, choosing to do something, nothing or something else is exactly the choise you have. If it follows from your believes that you have to do something, it's still by choice.

netron said...

wiag -> what i meant was that west could no longer ignore the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, bearing in mind that right next door, Pakistan was developing nuclear weapons. The invasion had to occur - there was no choice.
Energy control and revenge for 9/11 were a bonus, and indeed 9/11 gave the Americans a justification for going to war. But the west could not let the Taliban go unhindered, otherwise lots more 9/11s would occur in the future, maybe with nukes.

We had no choice but to intervene.

Snouck said...

Pakistan has nuclear weapons indeed. And is also an ally to the USA. I can not see the reason to invade Afghanistan in connection to Pakistan's nuclear capacity.

Not the Taliban are responsible for 9-11 but Osama. Hitting Taliban is not the same as hitting Al-Queda, although both are allies and Al-Queda hides in Afghanistan.