Opinion – America is out of ideas in Afghanistan – POLITICO – John Gelmini

Afghanistan presents a conundrum for America, having planned to invade it as far back as 1999, long before 9/11 was used as the bogus excuse.

Dr Alf will recall the desire to build the Turkmenistan oil pipeline, the quest for lithium and copper totalling 6 trillion USD in the Aynak mine which 350,000 Chinese mine workers now work in and the ever-present spectre at the feast, the Afghan poppy crop.

History tells us that Afghanistan used to be part of India, so the Indian Government ought to be encouraged to send troops there, as the price for getting BPO/IT related work and call centre outsourcing from the West.

Pakistan is venal, corrupt and a breeding ground for terror, via the ISI , which is has links to the  Taliban. It is also China’s ally.

The US should talk to President Xi Jin Ping and agree a way to contain Pakistan and eradicate the Taliban, ideally using robots, rather than wasting the lives of young soldiers. Drones need to be used more widely to effectively occupy Afghanistan without such an overriding need to send more troops and Erik Prince of XE who has suggested replacing regular US troops with his security people should be listened to seriously.

America has not run out of ideas but, as the conqueror of Afghanistan, needs to impose its will more by clearing out the Waziristan tribal regions, punishing Pakistan with a full range of options, including cutting off aid if they fail to curtail the activities of the Taliban.

Afghanistan itself needs to be less corrupt and that may mean imposing “cleanskin” from the Diaspora as a puppet ruler.

John Gelmini

U.S. Policy in Afghanistan: Changing Strategies, Preserving Gains – Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

NATO Training Mission Afghanistan

NATO Training Mission Afghanistan (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

As the world focuses on President Trump’s NATO meeting, global think-tank Carnegie takes a hard look at US policy in Afghanistan. It concludes that to protect the integrity of the Afghan state, U.S. policy should aim to end the conflict in ways that mitigate the threats of terrorism, instability, and regional conflict.

Source: U.S. Policy in Afghanistan: Changing Strategies, Preserving Gains – Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

US policy in Afghanistan was radically changed following the 911 terrorist attacks on the US mainland. But President Obama was committed to US troop reductions, rather than securing strategic goals. On his first overseas visit, President Trump will be watched carefully for changes in US defense and foreign policy. The tragic terrorist attack in Manchester, UK, reminds us that we still need the US as a global superpower and peace-keeper. In particular, it would be risky if the Far-Right elements supporting President Trump prevail and the US becomes more isolationist. There are signs that the Trump Administration will continue with its global reach. As the Carnegie article highlights, further retreat from Afghanistan could risk a new terrorist threat.