In Wake Of Afghan Election Fiasco, COIN Becomes Colonialism

By Steve Hynd

The Afghan Independent Electoral Commission stands revealed as not at all independent, as Dave noted earlier - declaring Karzai the victor in the presidential election without a run-off. That, as I understand it, isn't technically constitutional. They themselves were saying just the other day that it was too late for Abdullah to withdraw and that even if he didn't campaign the election would have to proceed. But the IEC is Karzai's tool to use, and so they've about-faced.

Before Abdullah's withdrawal was even confirmed, one of the UN election officials who resigned in solidarity with Peter Galbraith had an op-ed at the London Times which perfectly captured the truth of the situation for the U.S.-led occupation. Nick Horne wrote that:

Although I have tried to remain optimistic, I now believe that strategic failure is the most likely outcome of our engagement in Afghanistan.

Among the greatest mistakes of the international community has been its laissez-faire approach to the corruption, cronyism and venality of the Afghan Government. The insurgency is winning not so much because the Taleban�s ideology and platform have popular appeal, but because the Afghan Government is seen as corrupt, unrepresentative and ineffective. The counter-insurgency approach promoted by the ISAF Commander, General McChrystal, is entirely dependent on there being a government that Afghan people feel is worth fighting for, rather than against.

Ideally this would have been delivered through elections.

...Afghanistan requires fundamental political reform � a stronger parliament so that power can be shared between Afghanistan�s myriad ethnicities, who can hold the executive to account; and decentralisation to enable Afghans to participate in governance within their communities � something much more in keeping with Afghan traditions.

So whenever and however these dreadful elections end, we will require a political process to build legitimacy for a new government. This should be brought about through a series of �jirgas� � traditional meetings � with the participation of tribal leaders, civil society and women�s groups. It should involve Afghans currently outside the political class, including those opposing the Government. The process should culminate in a �Loya Jirga�, to approve amendments to the constitution, approve the make-up of a new government and reach a fresh agreement between Afghanistan and the international community.

The only way to make this happen is for the international community to force it upon a reluctant Afghan Government, using our aid monies as leverage. This may seem an affront to Afghanistan�s sovereignty � foreign meddling that Afghan politicians like to complain vociferously about. But we�re paying a very high price in blood and treasure to prop up this Government and, unless we are prepared to take a much firmer stance, we will fail. We have empowered an Afghan elite that is doing very well out of the present arrangements. We often talk earnestly about putting the Afghan Government in the lead, but senior Afghan politicians have little interest in reform. They must know that the whole edifice will come crashing down, but for the time being will continue to make as much money as they can.

Trying to use aid money as leverage to get Karzai and his coterie of leeches and warlords to do what's needed is exactly what I expect the U.S. and its allies will now try to do. I'm pessimistic about it working. They're making far more from opium trafficking or from providing services to the occupation - the two biggest industries in Afghanistan nowadays. Aid money graft is lucrative but nothing compared to these two - most of the aid money ends up back in the pockets of Western companies, not Afghans.

Meanwhile, the U.S. is already spinning the election as hard as it can. But preserving a fig-leaf of international legitimacy isn't about saving Karzai - it's about saving the ongoing and escalating occupation. The manual has been thrown out the window. As Marc Lynch a.k.a. Abu Aaardvark tweeted today "Old COIN: can't work without legitimate govt. New COIN: who cares?".

COIN has indeed become the new Colonialism. As Doug Sanders reported back in February:

"We do not believe in counterinsurgency," a senior French commander tells me. "If you find yourself needing to use counterinsurgency, it means the entire population has become the subject of your war, and you either will have to stay there forever or you have lost."

With even supposedly liberal policy thinktanks that feed right into the heart of the Obama administration utterly ignoring their own past arguments for withdrawal timetables in such situations, it seems the plan is to stay forever - or at least to punt to the next President again.