Central Asia

I’m a couple days late, actually with the saturated media coverage it seems much longer, but Presidential candidate Barack Obama visited Afghanistan, meeting with US troops and the Afghan leadership. Reports stated that he made the trip to highlight the nation as the main front as the war on terror, more so than Iraq. I was pleased to hear that Obama visited, or at least flew over, the Pakistan-Afghan border where the insurgency is the strongest and where most NATO/US soldiers are dying. As I wrote last week this strategic area is of vital importance to US, regional, and international security and has been widely misunderstood by US officials and the media at large, so hopefully Obama was able to provide himself a clearer picture of the conflict by his visit (which I must say is about time, why did it take him this long to checkout the war-torn/vital nation? Well I’m at in this parantheses opinion piece, I have been also less than thrilled with Presidential candidate John McCain’s emphasis on Afghanistan, the public needs to know what the US/NATO/Afghan government is up against.) In positive news, Obama is reportedly going to ask Europe to ’shoulder more of the burden to help deal with global security threats’ in his upcoming Berlin speech. The global security threats definitely include Afghanistan and hopefully a fresh dialogue of NATO’s role can be opened.

In a reversal from the past few years, Afghanistan has taken over Iraq as the top international news story in the US. We can only hope this leads to more educated and effective policy prescriptions by politicians, backed by a knowledgeable populace. Here are a few worthwhile stories about the Afghan situation. I will not call this a link dump, there is just too much to cover for me to comment on them all, so let’s call it a ‘link gentle lay down’ instead.

Iraqi Ambassador Samir Sumaida’ie asserted that Al Qaeda was for the most part leaving Iraq and that many of its members were heading to Afghanistan. The Ambassador stated, ‘’We have heard reports recently that many of the foreign fighters that were in Iraq have left, either back to their homeland or going to fight in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is now seeming to be more suitable for al-Qaida fighters.'’ Good news for Iraq, bad news for Afghanistan. That seems to be the trend lately.

Top Pentagon officials have recommended hundreds of more troops for the Afghan effort, but the official recommendation hasn’t been approved by Joint Chief of Staff Adm. Mullen or Defense Secretary Gates. Obama, McCain, and top commanders in Afghanistan have recommended about 10,000 more troops for the war.

Nancy Hatch Dupree, director of the Afghanistan Center at Kabul University, advocates greater support for education and literacy development in Afghanistan in her New York Times Op-Ed ‘Rebuilding Afghanistan, One Book at a Time‘. The Taliban have made schools, specifically ones that teach girls, a central target in their insurgency against the Afghan government.

Lastly, the New York Times Magazine has a major article about Afghanistan’s drug trade, titled ‘Is Afghanistan a Narco-State?’ I have not had a chance to read the whole article, but here is a shorter preview about a former US official who apparently was the main source for the article. I will try to summarize and analyze the article at a later date.

(Photo Source: New York Times)

Kazakhstan has found itself in the news lately, firstly, to no one’s surprise concerning energy resources, as the nation has begun building a natural gas pipeline connecting Central Asia to China and Gazprom’s recent announcement that they expect to double the price they pay for Central Asian gas (bad news for their Euro customers as Russia will not be the last entity to foot the bill). However, Kazakhstan’s leader, capital, and 2010 Chairmanship of the OSCE provide just a few other reasons for it to be in Central Asia’s spotlight.

Chairmanship of OSCE - OSCE Chairman-in-Office, Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb paid a visit to Astana last week and met with President Nazarbayev, leader of Senate, Foreign Minister Tazhin, and political party and civil society representatives. Stubb stated “Central Asia plays a key role in the OSCE, both as a region facing several challenges and as an active participant and supporter of the Organization’s plans to intensify engagement with Afghanistan.’ In reference to Kazak’s future chairmanship, Stubb stated the nation had a “unique chance to demonstrate its leadership by preparing carefully and by adopting and implementing reforms.” Now what could these reforms be, possibly democratic? Indeed, Stubb went on; “we welcome progress achieved so far, and hope to see swift continuation of reforms in fields such as media, elections and political parties.” Stubb went on to be more specific about these reforms, speaking of freedom of assembly, elections, religious freedom and religious associations, and ‘emphasized’ the ‘need for all political forces in society to have a chance to be heard.’ It would be a wonderful thing if Nazarbayev and the Kazak government could respond to these words and the 2010 chairmanship with real reform in these key sectors.

Ban Ki-Moon and Astana and Nazarbayev’s Birthday - UN General Secretary Ki-Moon spoke about Kazakhstan and its capitol and president’s birthday as well, but he left out the part about democracy. He expressed ‘admiration’ with the role the nation plays in the ‘provision of peace and stability’ in the region and gave his ‘warmest wishes’ to Astana’s 10 year jubilee and Nazarbayev’s birthday. Here is a quick history of the Kazak capitol. Nazarbayev has made quite the effort in modernizing the city in recent years and just made a speech detailing future improvements to what he calls ‘Central Asia’s first postindustrial city.’ In the speech, he discussed the development of high technological productions, service sectors, and the hope that the city will continue to become a regional business center. He concluded his speech, ‘Astana will be a city of high standards.’

One more bit of Kazak news: High level meetings have taken place recently between the leaders of Hungary and Kazakhstan as trade between the two states has considerably increased in recent years. A Hungarian diplomat stated that they consider Kazakhstan as a strategic partner.

That’s all folks, I hope I covered at least half of Kazak news.

Here are a few interesting items to keep you cool this weekend.

The Central Asia plus Japan Dialogue fourth representational level meeting took place in Tashkent on July 15. For Japan the meeting was ‘aimed to deepen the multifaceted interaction with Central Asia and Uzbekistan, provide for stability and regional security, enhance the trade and economic relations.’

The US Senate confirmed General Petraeus as the chief of Middle East and Central Asia Central Command last week. I guess this is kind of important, right? Petraeus replaces Admiral William Fallon, who stepped down a couple months ago (rumored to be because of policy differences with the Bush Administration regarding Iran policy), and will be replaced by Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno as the lead military man in Iraq.

Not sure how big this story may get, but Stephen Payne, a Houston businessman and GOP activist, is now under a House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform investigation, probing whether he violated federal law by suggesting he could arrange access to top White House officials for Kyrg government officials, including President Akayev, in return for large donations to the Bush presidential library. There is a recorded video of Payne and Akayev meeting and discussing meetings with President Bush and VP Cheney in exchange for hundreds of thousands of dollars to the library.

I wrote a short exert about the passing of Kyrg author/ambassador Chinghiz Aitmatov, and now here’s a sad story from Eurasia.net discussing Aitmatov accomplishments and Kyrgyzstan’s lack of an ability to produce another influential writer or artist.

I am originally a California boy, but I had no idea the northern California city of Fremont had a significant Afghan population, which according to this interesting story, it does!  The piece discusses a local book club called ‘One Book, One Community‘ which recommended its readers check out ‘Three Cups of Tea,” the true story of Greg Mortenson’s travels and charity work in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Apparently, Mortenson was saved by a group of villagers in Pakistan after fallin g from K2 in the Himalyas, and decided to show his appreciation by building schools in remote parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan (now I just hope the Taliban doesn’t burn them all down). Anyways, the city of Fremont and even its mayor have taken on this mission and started donating to the cause themselves.

With what can only be called a victory for the Taliban, US forces abandoned their makeshift base in the Kunar Province, which was ambushed days ago. In this context, Today I want to bring to your attention two outstanding articles which provide a greater understanding of the Afghanistan/Pakistan border Pashtun people, culture, and security situation. Seth Jones, Thomas H. Johnson, and M. Chris Mason have written provocative pieces that both portray a security situation spiraling out of control. Though both articles mainly agree on the nature of the conflict and its dire consequences, they depart partly in their appraisal of the insurgency’s reliance on the Pashtun ethnic tribes and even more so policy recommendations.

1. Seth G. Jones. “The Rise of Afghanistan’s Insurgency: State Failure and Jihad.” International Security 32 4 (Spring 2008): 7-40.

2. Thomas H. Johnson and M. Chris Mason. “No Sign until the Burst of Fire: Understanding the Pakistan-Afghanistan Frontier.” International Security 32 4 (Spring 2008): 41-77.

Seth Jones argues in The Rise of Afghanistan’s Insurgency: State Failure and Jihad that the Afghanistan insurgency was not a creature of ethnic grievances or greed. He argues that though the insurgency is largely led by border land Pashtuns, there are segments of the ethnic group that do not support the Taliban and the current Afghan government is led by a Pashtun, Karzai and has a rather balanced ethnic representation. Regarding greed, mainly the growing and selling of narcotics as a reason behind the insurgency, Jones claims that the evidence shows that the increase in the drug trade was a result of the insurgency, not a precondition to it.

Jones instead argues that the ongoing insurgency was caused by a collapse of governance and the strength of the Taliban and its supporters’s ideology. Concerning the Afghan government’s failure, Jones emphasizes its lack of ability to provide essential services and adequate security to all parts of the country, especially the rural areas near the Pakistan border. He goes into greater detail discussing how the lack of legitimate local police and army forces, along with too few NATO forces, led to communities having to either rely on the Taliban for protection or being subjugated by them. In regards to Ideology, Jones describes insurgent groups, such as the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Hizb-i Islami as being motivated by an extremist interpretation of Sunni Islam, where a Muslim’s primary obligation and loyalty are to his/her religion and that it is a ’sacred right’ and obligation to wage Jihad to protect the Muslims of any country. Jones also has harsh words, as will Johnson and Mason, for Pakistan’s government and policies in regards to the tribal areas and the Taliban, pretty much acknowledging their direct support for the insurgents.

So what does Jones suggest the US, Afghan, and Pakistan governments do to stop the insurgency? Jones believes the Afghan central government needs to extend its presence into the nation’s rural areas and provide them essential services, such as electricity. He then advocates an increase in the number and quality of police and army forces, including more NATO forces. Lastly, he asserts that the Pakistani government needs to start clamping down on insurgent leaders in its own territory and argues that the US needs to push them harder and harder until results can be concretely seen.

Thomas Johnson and Chris Mason’s No Sign until the Burst of Fire: Understanding the Pakistan-Afghanistan Frontier takes an in-depth look into the Pashtun people’s history and culture and paints a very dark picture of the region’s current, ‘chaotic’ state. Johnson and Mason (for now on JM) begin by differentiating between the Pashtun people and their geographic, tribal neighbors and come to the conclusion that it is only the Pashtun tribes who ‘have ever demonstrated an interest in the type of Jihad being waged by the Taliban.’ JM go on to give a short history of the Pashtun people, emphasizing times when a foreign force tried to subjugate them under another form of rule, the British, Soviets, Pakistan Government, and now NATO forces. They provide a thorough look into the complicated culture and way of order for the Pashtuns, called Pashtunwali, a system too complex for me to summarize on these pages. The important factor JM describe about Pashtunwali is its effect on current geo-strategic situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan today. JM call the Pashtuns ‘perfect insurgents,’ and quotes a Pashtun elder talking to a British official in 1809; “We are content with discord, we are content with alarms, we are content with blood…we will never be content with a master.”

It is with this viewpoint, that Johnson and Mason call the current US/NATO strategy a ‘bankrupt approach’ and ‘precisely the wrong answer to apply to a highly developed culture in which ‘central government’ is anathema and reaction to it is insurgency.” For the US and world security the situation becomes darker, as JM provocatively explain that the Pashtun culture and people, though strongly resistant to outside social and governmental change, have been proven to be susceptible to religious extremist movements and that this has and may have tragic consequences. JM blame the US, through the CIA, Pakistan, mainly the ISI, and Saudi bankrolling in the 1980’s onward for the marriage of extremist Islam and Pashtun culture. The US/Pakistan/Saudi policy was to stop the Soviet advance in Afghanistan in any way possible and JM assert that the policy, especially Pakistan’s so-called ’social experiment’ to replace ethnic identity with religious, therefore matching the rest of the nation, ’spun it out of control.’ As one can see from the dramatic increase in suicide attacks in Pakistan and Afghanistan, the battles between Pashtun tribes and tribal leaders, the Red Mosque incident, and the influx of foreign fighters from the Middle East and Central Asia.

The consequences of this ‘monster’ are tremendously dangerous for the US and the world, argue JM, and one must agree to a large extent. After all, the attacks on 9/11, London subways, and Madrid train bombings ‘were planned and trained for’ in the region. JM argue that the Pakistan government can no longer contain, let alone suppress, this insurgency. JM predict for the short-term the continued destabilization of southern Afghanistan, spread of the Taliban insurgency, and the further faltering of Pakistan’s democracy, and for the long-term, if left unchecked, ‘potentially devastating’ consequences for the US.

Well Mr. Johnson and Mr. Mason, what shall we do about this ‘monster’? The two scholars advocate a near complete reversal of current US, and Seth Jones’s recommendations, policy of spreading out security and governmental forces into the Pashtun territory. Instead they argue that in the short-term, we need to strengthen and rebuild the Pashtun tribal structures from the inside, take them back from religious extremism, and reduce the pressure on them from the outside. They want to ‘empower’ the tribal leaders and restore the traditional balance of power to their tribal system, in other words, forget about central government control. In the long-term, JM suggest bringing rapid improvements into the everyday lives of the Pashtun people; health care, education. Regarding Pakistan government’s role, they advocate ’strong and consistent’ military action when required, not ‘half-hearted’ measures which the Pashtun people see through. (though this seems to contradict their proposal for US/NATO forces, but it is true that Pakistan’s government does need to show some grit and muscle to the tribal areas in order to keep the country cohesive). Like Jones, JM also believe the US needs to probe a lot harder into the ISI and Pakistan’s involvement with the insurgency and make sure things are getting done.

These two articles provide a lot of mental food to chew on. Whether one agrees with their assessment of the situation, policy recommendations, or scholarly frameworks, one must admit that they bring to the forefront important cultural/ethnic aspects to this conflict which are not widely discussed by the US government, let alone the media. This is a tremendously complicated and dangerous conflict, with many possible outcomes, and to make effective policy we need to know what we’re up against.

If you would like to learn more about the Pashtun’s history with foreign entities’ attempts to subjugate them under a form of central government, google Ty L. Groh’s (Thomas H. Johnson’s pupil) ‘Ungoverned Spaces: The Challenges of Governing Tribal Societies.’

In an incident that looks like it could be linked to two stories recently discussed on this blog, Russia’s energy policy in Central Asia and Islamic militant groups based in the region, a 20-mile section of a natural gas pipeline, which travels from western Kazakhstan into Russian territory, was shut down late yesterday after an explosion damaged the line.  There were no reported casualties or injuries and Russia nor Gazprom has commented on the incident just yet.  There is no word about what caused the blast and no one has claimed responsibility.  Terrorist and militant groups have attacked pipelines in nearby Pakistan and Nigeria on a regular basis.  It is pure speculation that I linked the region’s Islamic groups to this incident and I will keep tabs on any further developments.

Freedom House put two new reports out in June of interest: Nations in Transit 2008 Annual Report and Supporting Freedom’s Advocates?: An Analysis of the Bush Administration FY2008 Budget Request for Democracy and Human Rights (Follow the link down the page and download the pdf under ‘Past Reports’) These reports are linked in an unfortunate way, the decreasingly open and democratic nature of Central Asia’s regime is key to both of them.

The Nations in Transit report ‘measures progress and setbacks in democratization in 29 countries and administrative areas from Central Europe to the Eurasian region of the Former Soviet Union.’ In its overall analysis of the former Soviet States, specifically in Central Asia, the report stated; ‘In distinct contrast to the trajectories of the other regions, the former Soviet Union has moved toward a more deeply anchored authoritarian, democratic accountability is an ever-scarcer commodity.’ Dierdre Tynan of Eurasianet.org gives an overview and analysis of the report’s findings here.

The Transit report grades each country from 1-7, with 1 being the most free, on 8 different categories and then assigns a overall score. The categories are: 1. Electoral Process 2. Civil Society 3. Independent Media 4. Governance 5. National Democratic Governance 6. Local Democratic Governance 7. Judicial Framework and Independence 8. Corruption. In a sadly similar formula to last year’s Freedom of the World rankings for Central Asia, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan’s scores could hardly get lower, ranking near the bottom of the world, 6.93 and 6.86 disrespectfully. Kyrgyzstan received the best score in the region, 5.93, with Freedom House calling its 2005 upheaval now a time of ‘lost promise.’ Tajikistan’s score worsened from 5.96 to 6.07, with Freedom House stating that ‘justice is bought and sold’ in the nation.

Concerning the analysis of the Bush Administration’s FY2009 Budget Request for Democracy and Human Rights, Deirdre Tynan also wrote up another overview and critique (I haven’t had time yet to read FH whole report). Tynan reports that FH is disappointed in the President’s proposed budget for two critical reasons; 1. A lack of transparency as to where exactly the money where go, for instance to help civil society, rule of law? 2. Though the budget request increased overall, funds for most Central Asian states fell. The report argues that the US government needs to put more funds in developing the civil society of the region, particularly Kazakhstan, and has harsh words for Russia’s presence in the region, calling it a ‘negative influence over its former Soviet neighbors’ and as sliding evermore ‘towards increased autocracy.’ Freedom House leaves out hope that Congress will put the money back in when they have an opportunity to appropriate funds.

I couldn’t agree more with Freedom House about greater transparency in the appropriation of these funds, we should know where and to whom they are going. And I am more than sympathetic to their promotion of greater aid to support Central Asia’s civil society, independent media, and promotion of the rule of law and free and fair elections, but there are indeed strategic elements to consider, such as energy supplies and the fact that we need to work with these authoritative leaders at time on issues such as Afghanistan’s security. To leaders like, Islam Karimov, Berdymukhamedov, and Nazarbayev this money is aimed at their removal from power and that can’t sit too well, not to mention that China and Russia both few it as an affront to their regional interests and influence.

However, in the end, these are two informative, important, and brave reports by Freedom House.

Two interconnected, disturbing trends concerning Islamic militants from Central Asia committing violent and terrorist acts in and around the Afghanistan/Pakistan border are becoming more visible by the day. The first is the report from unidentified two US senior military officials based in the Middle East that Al Qaeda has stepped up its recruitment in Central Asia in the past two years and has found success recruiting children.

CBS News reported on this late last week and stated that Al Qaeda and other militant groups in Pakistan’s tribal areas have had success bringing in new, younger members to replace their casulties. Last May, a Pakistani military official showed CBS a video of young boy, possibly 12, chopping off the head of a middle-aged tribal man who they accused of being an American spy. The video below shows militant/terrorist training of children in Iraq:

The two US military officials assert that Al Qaeda and Taliban-associated groups were recruiting in Central Asian states, mainly Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, because there was ‘too much pressure’ on them in the Afghan/Pak border by US and international forces. One official stated that there was ‘one big advantage’ to recruiting in CA, ‘there is less focus by the US.’ The officials believe that there have been hundreds of cases of successful recruiting of Central Asian boys in the past two years.

Not all the militants coming from Central Asia to the Afghan/Pakistan war front are boys or recruits. In another disturbing trend, the Pakistani government has acknowledged the increasing presence of members of Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) in their border lands. Prime Minister Gilani confirmed reports that there are hundreds of IMU militants ‘holed up’ in Pakistin’s tribal belt committing violence against US/NATO/Afghan forces and within Pakistan’s tribal groups as well. The IMU have been strongly linked to Al Qaeda and the Taliban and there have even been reports that the group has picked a fight with certain local Pashtun tribes, assassinating tribal leaders loyal to the Pakistani government. Experts believe that there may be as many as 500 IMU militants around the border.

At the moment, the Pakistani government seems to have a hands-off approach to the foreigners, hoping the local Pashtun tribes will send them packing. Unfortunately, some of these tribes, like ones led by militant leader Baitullah Mehsud, find the IMU militants as allies in their fight against the Pakistani and US/Afghani governments. Lastly, here is a great analysis comparing the IMU and a similar Islamic militant group also based out of Uzbekistan, Islamic Jihad Union. It also discusses the IMU, and for that matter the IJU’s, presence in Afghan/Pak border area and the groups recent use of suicide bombing as a major tool in their arsenal. The report acknowledges the importance of Uzbekistan’s oppressive government as a cause of IMU and IJU’s birth and existence and how the Karimov regime in turn uses their presence to further tighten his leadership and power in order to defend his nation’s national security and safety. The analysis is told from a European perspective and charts these two militant groups recent past and possible futures.

In the next few days, I will discuss more deeply the tribal politics around the Afghan/Pakistan border that have now become one of the most dangerous and important security situations for the entire globe, as the most recent Taliban attack on a US base in Kunar Province, killing 9 American soldiers, attests.

On Friday, we discussed Russian President Medvedev’s recent three nation visit to Central Asia, a visit that seemingly had one thing on its mind; gas and oil. A couple weeks ago, EU representatives made their second major stopover in a matter of months to Turkmenistan to discuss energy, specifically gas reserves for the Nabucco pipeline which would circumvent Russian territory and land space, and trade, basically getting Turkmenistan into the WTO. However, just by taking a glance at the EU’s first annual Progress Report of their 2007-2013 EU Strategy for Central Asia, one can see that the EU is interested in more than just oil/gas/trade. Human Rights issues dot the document and EU perspectives on their role in the region.

The Report stated 5 Goals for the EU-Central Asian Strategy:

1. Promotion of Human Rights and Democratization

2. Enhancement of Education

3. Increasing the Rule of Law

4. Promote Regional Integration in the areas of environment and water

5. Coordination on Border and Drug Trafficking Management

Here is an analysis of the EU-Central Asian Strategy of the its 1-year progress report by Eurasia Daily and a local one by Kazinform. The Eurasia Daily quotes the EU report’s analysis of its accomplishments, calling them ‘encouraging’ and that ‘after only one year, a new quality of cooperation has evolved between Central Asia and the EU.’ Concerning the sticky issue of human rights promotion, the report asserted that all 5 CA states were willing to commit to the human rights dialogue. The Eurasia Daily analysis of the report also acknowledges the Strategy’s critics, some who argue that the overly ideological (idealistic?) approach the group takes with the region’s authoritative states is excessive, and others who instead assert that the EU plays too much realpolitik in region, ignoring human rights and democracy issues in order to secure energy resources and strategic interests. Here are two voices who agree with latter assertion: Danish journalist and political scientist Michael Andersen and Cornelius Graubner at the Central Asian-Caucacus Institute.

Like all things in domestic and international politics, the truth is somewhere in the middle. There is no doubt in my mind that the EU’s belief and policy’s in regards to human rights and democracy promotion are genuine. Putting a liberal bent on geopolitical policies in a region without a history of such ideals is a challenging endeavor to say the least. Europe desires relief from one autocratic energy ruler, Russia, and to accomplish this they need to deal with other autocratic rulers. But unlike Russia and China, the EU blatantly advocates and concretely promotes human rights and democracy in the region to go along with its material interests. This can be exemplified by a recent visit to CA by the German Commissioner of Human Rights. The Commissioner was due to speak and listen to civil society and opposition groups in several nations. This small visit by a ‘Commissioner’ may not be as significant or visible as an oil/gas deal, such as Nabucco, but it has an affect, and hopefully this ripples and ripples throughout the region.

Russian President Dmitri Medvedev has made his second visit to Central Asia, this time stopping by Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, and Kazakhstan for the second time. Gas was apparently the only thing on the diplomatic menu. Medvedev and his Gazprom officials are wary of European and Chinese influence and engagement in the region’s energy resources, a sphere Russia has dominated for years, and this trip’s purpose appears to keep that monopoly intact.

Medvedev first went to Baku, Azerbaijan and reportedly told the nation that it was willing to buy up all of its Caspian Sea and land gas to keep it from heading to Europe via the BTC pipeline already functioning, or the Trans-Caspian and Nabucco pipelines in discussions right now. This would be a tall order for Medvedev to accomplish, as Azerbaijan has been courted by the West and strategically faced that way for some years now.

Immediately after this visit the Russian president visited Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan before heading off to the G-8 summit. Russia/Gazprom already dominate gas flow from these two states, but it faces growing competition from Europe and China and therefore wants to solidify its position. Last December, Russia and these two states agreed to build a new pipeline a while later Russia agreed to up its price for their energy resources, both moves to hurt Europe/China’s chances of getting in ‘on the game.’ The purpose of this recent visit also appears to be for Russia to buy up as much of the two nation’s gas as possible in order to stifle any deals the states would make with the EU/China and India for that matter. Russia’s energy policy is not one of just paranoia, as China has just announced the start of construction of a huge, 30 billion cubic meter natural gas pipeline transversing from Turkmenistan, through Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan, and ending in its own Xinjiang Province and EU representatives are in serious talks with Turkmen officials about the Trans-Caspian and Nabucco pipelines.

(Photo: Medvedev with Azerbaijan President Aliyev: Source Asianews.it)

Ahmed Rashid a Pakistani journalist/author has a new book called ‘Descent into Chaos: The United States and the Failure of Nation Building in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia.’ I have not read the book yet, but here is a review by Philip Bowring and an interview with the Rashid by Radio Free Europe correspondent Abubakar Siddique.

Rashid aims his criticism for the ‘failures’ to stabilize and implant democracy in Afghanistan and beyond on the Bush Administration and Pakistan’s President Musharraf and his ISI intelligence agency. In the interview he lays out three major mistakes by the Bush Administration: 1. The major distraction and pulling of resources for the war in Iraq 2. A lack of an effective plan to rebuild and reconstruct the Afghan nation 3. No long term plan as to how to dismantle and defeat the Taliban. Just a couple days ago the New York Times ran a major articles about the US failures in Afghanistan and how this was currently leading to a Al Qaeda and Taliban resurgence.

Rashid is also reportedly very critical of US support of Musharraf, support of Afghan warlords, and uncomprehensive narcotics plan. Concerning the Taliban’s resurgence, Rashid states ‘I wouldn’t say it’s winning. But it’s certainly showing a huge capacity to mount ever more sophisticated attacks.’ In the interview Rashid also voices concern over Afghan President Karzai’s ability to win and even hold the upcoming election, even stating ‘I don’t think the country can afford an election…’ The review mentions that the ‘Descent into Chaos’ also explores how the instability and political happenings in Afghan/Pakistan have effected the smaller Central Asian states, but I am sorry I do not have more details. Here is the part of the interview where he addressed Central Asian states movement, or lack there of, toward democratic governance;

RFE/RL: Finally, given the discontent with authoritarian rule in Central Asia: do you see it moving towards a democratic transition in the near future?

Rashid: Well, there is a lot of progress in some areas of Central Asia. But, by and large, the leaders are still dictatorial, they are authoritarian. The expected political and economic reforms that should have been carried out after 9/11 and which — I think, the people of Central Asia were hoping would be carried out — was never done.
So we really do have quite a grim situation in Central Asia. And of course, in midst of this, you have much worse poverty than ever before. You have much greater repression and you really don’t have any steps forward as far as the democratization is concerned.

Rashid comes across as a very intelligent and thoughtful journalist and political and geopolitical observer, but it is much easier to criticize policy than make it and implement it. The Bush Administration clearly took some of its eye off the ball and the world is paying for that right now, but as history has shown us, the Pashtun-led Taliban will not go down easy nor is it ever simple to foment or build democracy where it never existed before. I put this up about a week ago, but here are some statements by the US State Department regarding the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is in many ways a dire situation, proven by the fact that more US and coalition troops died in Afghanistan this June than in any other month since 2001, but as I have said before, definitely something worth fighting for.

(Photo: New York Times)