Central Asia

With the Taliban showcasing great ‘tenacity‘ and ability to recruit new members from around the region to replace those lost, one must conclude that the Afghan government and its International supporters are in a fight for their lives. Hard decisions will have to made for them to win, including the eradication of the nation’s poppy crops and growers. Last week, I quickly mentioned this article, ‘Is Afghanistan a Narco-State?,’ by Thomas Schweich, a top US drug official in Afghanistan for several years.

Schweich brings three main points to the plate in the article; 1. Karzai and the Kabul government lack the political will to stop poppy production and in fact many major growers of the crop form their powerbase 2. the insurgency is unlikely to end as long as the Taliban can support themselves with the drug money 3. the ’starving farmer’ is a myth, as most poppy growers are already rich and just using the lack of government and ISAF pressure to continue this lucrative practice.

Schweich catalogs the various times Karzai and his other corrupt police and ministry officials have downplayed the importance of poppy eradication, emphasizing that it would just hurt the poor citizens of his country. Citing a United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime report, Schweich rejected the idea that farmers would starve without the poppy. For Schweich the ’starving farmer’ myth allowed…

’some European governments to avoid involvement with the anti-drug effort. Many of these countries had only one or two year legislative mandates to be in Afghanistan, so they wanted to avoid any uptick in violence that would most likely result from an aggressive strategy, even if the strategy wold result in long-term success. The myth gave military officers {US} a reason to stay out of the drug war, while prominent Democrats used the myth to attack Bush administration policies. And the Taliban loved it because their propaganda campaign consisted of trotting out farmers whose fields had been eradicated and having them say that they were going to starve.’

Schweich is especially hard on Karzai, claiming he’s only doing what’s best for his political survival and not the country, and the Pentagon, who he portrays as not wanting any part of the drug eradication business as it is not part of their mission of defeating the Taliban. But Schweich is correct, as Karzai and NATO forces cannot separate the poppy cartel from their efforts of governance and battle against the Taliban. The poppy’s are a crystal clear example of the weakness of the Afghan government, the law does not apply to the growers apparently and this undermines all other laws, and the Taliban need financing and sympathy wherever they can get it and the poppy fields provide both. This situation is very complicated and a lot can go wrong. Here are Schweich’s recommendations: In parantheses (hardest word to spell in the world) will be my comments and questions.

1. Inform President Karzai that he must stop protecting drug lords and narco-farmers or he will lose US support (Does the US have any alternative person to rule the government or to at least pressure Karzai with?) Karzai should issue a decree of zero-tolerance for poppy cultivation this next growing season and order farmers to plant Wheat instead, guaranteeing today’s high wheat prices. At the same time, he must authorize aggressive, force-protected manual and aerial eradication in Helmand and Kandahar Provinces (two of the heaviest growing areas, and bases for support for both Karzai and the Taliban)
2. Order the Pentagon to follow this strategy; create security pockets for the eradicators and help counternarcotic police arrest powerful drug lords (Will have to prove to them how this hurts the Taliban/insurgency, not foments it)
3. Increase the number of DEA agents in Kabul to assist Afghan judiciary in prosecuting key traffickers and corrupt officials (won’t this undermine the current government if tens of officials are arrested, even if its positive in the long term, could this short term instability further erode the government’s legitimacy and power?)
4. Get New Development Projects quickly to the provinces that become poppy-free. The north which already is poppy-free should receive significant rewards.
5. Ask NATO allies to ‘either help in this effort or stand down and let us do the job.’ (But make sure they understand our reasoning)

I am sympathetic to Schweich is all out eradication of poppies and corrupt war lords and officials, but this effort could have major blowback. Barnett R. Rubin, Director of Studies and a Senior Fellow at New York University’s Center on International Cooperation and the author of The Fragmentation of Afghanistan, warns ‘Crop eradication puts more money in the hands of traffickers and corrupt officials by raising prices and drives farmers toward insurgents and warlords.’ But the alternatives are not pretty either. The Afghan government needs to gain legitimacy and halting this illicit activity, which appears to mainly benefit the Taliban and already rich growers, can go a long way in extending its reach in the south and showing its citizens that breaking the Afghan government law will beget punishments. A strong move against corruption and illicit activity could help begin the creation of a culture of lawfulness in the state, a place where the average person believes that their life would be better off following the rule of law than breaking it or letting others break it. A difficult issue to say the least, what do you think?

(Photo Source: New York Times)

Yesterday, all Bush’s problems seemed so far away. But now it looks as China’s authoritarian government is here to stay. The Chinese are shall we say displeased about the US House of Representatives resolution requesting China to honor their IOC commitments in regard to human rights, internet blocking, and treatment of its Tibetan and Uighur citizens and about Bush’s meetings with 5 Chinese dissidents. A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman called the House measure an “odious conduct” and said the United States should stop “making use of so-called religious and human rights” issues to score political points. I have previously talked about how controversial these Olympics may become, as China’s government fears destabilizing and embarrassing terrorist attacks, political protests from a host of groups, and desperately desires to impress its domestic populace with a well-run games in which they can be proud of (and therefore keep the Communists in power). Having the world’s superpower voicing displeasure toward their policies and way of governance does not fit into this plan.

A story I briefly mentioned days ago, has gotten more bite to President Bush’s chagrin, though he appears to have had no direct role. The House has launched a congressional inquiry into a scandal involving a donation from members of the Kazak government to Bush’s Presidential library in exchange for diplomatic visits from Bush, VP Cheney, and Secretary of State Rice. The main man involved is Stephen Payne, a long-time lobbyist for Bush, who accompanied Dick Cheney on a diplomatic visit to Kazakhstan in 2006, a trip in which Cheney praised the Kazak government and did not mention human rights issues. At the moment, it is unknown how high up Payne received permission to work out such a deal or if the 2006 Cheney visit was a part of any agreement. To make matters worse, John McCain’s adviser Randy Scheunemann has lobbying connections with Payne. US national security and the spreading of human rights and democracy should never be short changed for financial composition. Payne and anyone else involved owes the US and the Kazakhstan citizenry an apology.

Lastly, it appears that there is concrete evidence of Pakistan’s intelligence services’ role in the July 7 terrorist attack on the Indian embassy in Kabul. The US also stated that they had evidence that showed the ISI informing insurgent elements of upcoming US attacks. These new details no doubt strain relations between Pakistan and the US and India.

Last week I went over two articles from journal International Security which both discussed the deteriorating security and governance situation along the Afghan/Pakistan border. Both articles emphasized Pakistan’s intelligence service, the ISI, as being either too weak, lacking decent effort, or of actually being a partner in some of the Taliban’s insurgent efforts against NATO and the Afghan government. In fact, both papers’ accusations were rather damning against the ISI. Combine this analysis and evidence along with a report by the New York Times today regarding a high level visit by the CIA and Joint Chief of Staff Adm. Mullen with Pakistan’s government leaders, where the US side outlined accusations against the ISI’s role in the insurgency. The CIA and US military specifically accused the ISI of having continual links with the militant network lead by Maulavi Jalaluddin Haqqani, who is known to have direct links to members of Al Qaeda. The article also discusses how Pakistan’s nascent civilian government was having a hard time asserting control over the intelligence agency.

This is not the first time the US has sent senior officials to Pakistan to discuss ISI nefarious links, and the CIA and the ISI do have a long standing relationship that has been peppered with suspicion and ‘mutual deception’ since the days of the Soviet takeover in Afghanistan. But this meeting and the dire situation along the Afghan/Pak border, including a recent flare up in violence between Sunnis and Shia in Pakistan’s Parachinar, where the Taliban are showing increasing strength and violence, may portend a deteriorating relationship between the two spy agencies. Even a mild break between the two would have major ramifications and this should be avoided at all cost. Both sides desire stability in the region and they need to find mutual ground to work on. Suspicion is there on both sides, here is an article published in the Pakistan Daily showcasing a deep concern over US ambitions in the region, but the stakes are too high. The US risks losing control in Afghanistan and allowing Al Qaeda to recuperate and the Pakistan’s new civilian government is facing a colossal test in its northern territories, a test it must pass to keep its nation intact.

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)

Unfortunately before the Olympic Games could even begin in China, a terrorist event has occurred. Two bombs exploded on commuter buses in the city of Kunming, killing two and injuring several others. The Chinese police would not officially classify the attack as a terrorist incident, but that’s what the evidence points too. The Chinese government’s number one concern at the current moment is to have a successful, peaceful, and ‘quiet’ Olympic Games and stopping terrorist attacks and boisterous political protests tops this agenda.

The Chinese authorities have taken many measures, some of them basic and some severe, to intimidate and curb possible terrorist or political groups and individuals from ‘acting out’ during the games. For the Chinese government, the Uighur majority province of Xinjiang is a major concern and they have taken many police actions there to keep a lid on region’s independence movement, much like the situation in Tibet. The government announced that they arrested 82 suspected terrorists from the region and to board a plane in the area’s Urumqi Airport a passenger has to go through six checkpoints. The Chinese authorities are specifically worried about the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), an underground separatist organization based in several CA states and in Xinjiang, and recently performed an atrocious act to intimidate the nation’s populace. Thousands of Chinese students and workers were bused into a city square and were made to watch the execution of three convicted ETIM members who were said to have plotted attacks on the games.

The Washington Post has covered these stories very well and had this to say about the consequences of such harsh anti-terror/protest police methods;

“With the Games three weeks away, the precautions already have proved so sweeping that some observers question whether the sense of fellowship and fun that is supposed to accompany the Olympics can survive. Alongside the crackdown against Muslim extremists here in Xinjiang, for instance, have come confusing new visa restrictions, multiple roadside checkpoints, reinforced pat-downs at airports and subway stations, and raids on bars popular among foreigners. The result has been an atmosphere of coercion, not celebration.”

For the Chinese government though, a safe and stable Olympics may be acceptable enough;

“A safe Olympics is the biggest indicator of the success of the Games,” Xi Jinping, a member of the party’s elite Politburo Standing Committee and the senior official supervising preparations, said in a recent speech. “A safe Olympics is also the biggest indicator of the positive reflection of our nation’s image.”

When you’re watching the Olympics and everything seems to be going swimmingly, just remember that behind the tranquility could be quite the eruption.

(Photo/Map Source: The Washington Post)

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.’

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.

Today I have several stories to treat you to; some old, some new, some interesting, some bor…well you get the idea.

• Last March, Turkmen President Berdymukhamedov announced his country’s second military doctrine. The change appears to be in accord with Turkmenistan’s recent more open diplomatic and international posture, a strong departure from its recent isolationist past. Though one must not expect too much change too soon, as Berdymukhamedov stated that the nation’s military doctrine will ’still be based on permanent neutrality of the state and the acknowledgment that necessary levels of defense capability must be maintained.’
• Co-Chair Alcee Hastings on the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) and a bipartisan Congressional delegation, led by Senator Ben Cardin, was the largest ever diplomatic delegation to visit Kazakhstan. The attendees discussed Kazak’s 2010 OSCE Chairmanship as well as energy, igration, security, religious freedom and women’s rights. Here’s a telling and hopeful quote from Chair Hastings; “I think it will be extremely successful. The reason is that Kazakhstan is the first Central Asian country to chair. The simple fact that I believe - this will help Kazakhstan and this will help others in Central Asia and by the time that they finish their chair they will have learned a lot and that will be implemented here, that will benefit the people of both sides and reform elections and human rights here in this country.” It is much too early to tell how the Chairmanship will help open up Kazak or the CA states’ governments, but this particular delegation seemed hopeful and they may have possibly laid down some groundwork to hold the Kazak government accountable in its claims of transparency and allowance of individual freedoms.
• Pakistan’s new Prime Minister, Yousuf Raza Gilani stated that ‘foreign elements’ from the CA region were behind the latest unrest in his country’s tribal belt, aka the Pashtun-majority Federal Administrated Tribal Areas. Gilani gave no evidence to back up his claim. He also announced his government was adopting a 3-pronged strategy to bring peace and stability to the tribal areas; 1. Political Dialogue 2. Development of the area 3. Use of violence as a ‘last resort.’ Seems like the same old carrot and the stick policy.
• Paris’s Luxemburg palace held a scientific conference titled ‘Central Asia facing Globalization’ this past month. The event featured regional experts and local and international diplomats.
• Lastly, Mongolia is not an ‘official’ part of this blogs Central Asian theme, but it is an important regional country nonetheless. It is a democratic state and US ally sandwiched between the authoritarian and strong great powers of Russia and China and has a historical legacy and connections to nearly all the CA states. Here is a quick ‘Five Facts’ about the Asia’s landlocked giant.