Afghanistan's biggest problem is that it is located in the "backyard" of Pakistan. During the last thirty years, Pakistani generals have again and again lamented about the lack of depth vis-à-vis India, in case a war breaks out again sometime in near future. They have gone on record stating that only Afghanistan can provide Pakistan the much needed strategic depth. Thus, since the time of Zia, Pakistan has been dreaming of "acquiring" Afghanistan through a well planned strategic maneuvering. The plan is simple-- first promote lawlessness and make Afghanistan ungovernable. Then install and nurture a fanatical Islamic ruling class, create economic bankruptcy making it impossible for the Mullahs to continue to rule. Finally encourage the ruling Taliban to pass some kind of a "resolution" or even a "Fatwa" favoring merger of Afghanistan with Pakistan.

Pakistan had almost succeeded in its plan, but then the 9/11 happened. Faced with an imminent American onslaught with active support from India, Musharraf had no choice but to make a "strategic retreat". "Officially" he broke Pakistan's link with Afghanistan and became America's partner in the war on terror. He did help Americans capture some peripheral and marginally important Al Kayida fighters but he has all along carefully protected the key Taliban and Al Kayida figures. But, all along, Pakistan's Military and Political establishment has been very much focused on acquiring the "much needed strategic depth" through the strategies discussed above.

It looks like there is not going to be any lasting peace in Afghanistan, until it becomes a part of Pakistan, just as it was during the early years of the Sultanate (from 10th to 13th century). The only way Afghanistan can be saved is by making it a powerful and prosperous nation. This can be achieved only if the world is willing to pump in a lot of money for re-building and provide a much bigger military force to safeguard its fronties.
Dr. Saroj K. Mishra, President, Center for Global Studies®

Pumping money into Afghanistan is not the answer. People of Afghanistan need to feel that they are actually a part of something legitimate and that they could be proud of. Dumping money in the country only encourages corruption. Look at Iraq for examples of how money corrupts.

There is an increasing urgency among NATO commanders in Afghanistan to downplay the Taliban and hype up Al Qaeda threat instead.

While most NATO nations do not agree and support the US since Iraq got invaded, the common threat still remains the Al Qaeda. But recent CNN reports showed tribal gunmen openly flaunting their arms and threatening western journalists in the neighbouring Pakistani province of Baluchistan. They were Taliban fighters on the run from Afghanistan and seemed to be in no real danger living in and around Quetta, while the Pakistani commanders were in hot pursuit.

Badly bogged down in an area alien to most Americans and their marines, narrowing the threat perception to Al Qaeda makes sense. Tracking too many enemies and making new ones everyday can prove difficult and so Taliban is passe. After all why did the US incinerate Afghanistan? Beacause Taliban failed to hand over Al Qaeda chief Osama.
Who claimed to have levelled the twin towers? Al Qaeda. Why did Bush attack Iraq in a hurry? To remove Saddam and his WMD's which may fall in Al Qaeda's hands.

So failing to arrest Taliban's Mullah Omar from close quarters is bad memory, best forgotten and covered under the rubble of Al Qaeda. It makes sense to make them larger than life for the world to rally behind the US in all their future preemptive strikes and invasions in search of elusive WMD's.

"Common sense suggests that a state is a failure when it cannot extend its authority beyond limited and generally urban pools, when it cannot ensure basic services beyond a thin perimeter, and when different players - whether in government or outside - effectively parcel out the country between themselves."

Gee, that sounds like an adequate description of Pakistan. Maybe if the U.S. admitted there were *two* failed states in the region, instead of a failed state and a "sovereign nation and an ally in the war on terror" we would have the perspective from which to solve the problem.

Alas, poor Afghanistan, it doesn't
have enough oil to keep the Americans attention focused on it for very long. It was once said that, for countries, location was destiny. In todays world, oil & gas
reserves are a better indicator.

The US invaded Afghanistan because the Taliban refused to accept construction of a US contracted oil pipeline across Afghanistan. That wasn't a legal reason to invade. 9/11 propelled Al Qaida into the limelight. Although there is no proof that Bin Laden was directly involved in that act, and as a consequence of the Taliban refusing to extradite him, capturing Bin Laden became the cause to invade. The US invaded to topple the Taliban for the sake of the oil pipeline and geo-strategic considerations. Karzai, involved with oil companies, is a US ally and contracts for the oil pipeline progressed. There was no intention to capture Bin Laden.

Mullah Omar started his fights for legitimate reasons, to protect his people from recurring attacks and abuse. There is no legitimate reason to capture him.

The problem with the west is that it cannot accept other ways of life and government. Because for the US Afghanistan has only strategic interest, a failed state under Karzai's government suits US interests. It keeps Afghanistan in disarray, impoverished and subject to US policy. The problems of reality, that people have to live, never entered. Left with ruins, farmers turned to planting poppies as a way to make enough money to rebuild their shattered lives. The problem could easily have been solved by using the opium for legal pharmaceutical purposes, thus giving Afghanistan a sizable export income with which to develop the country. That would cross US plans to dominate the drug trade for its own purposes, notably financing and delivering weapons to guerilla movements in other continents; and it would end Afghanistan's poverty and dependence on the US.

Which leaves the Taliban no other choice but to fight against the foreign invaders. Because foreign jihadis entered the fight in support of the Taliban, the war became un-winnable and was delegated to Nato to free US troops for other wars.

Afghanistan is hardly better off now than it was under the Taliban, nor is there any hope that it will become any better. It is what Bush denotes with "the long war against terrorism, which will last for generations to come". It is a euphemism for US actions to incite jihad for its own strategic purposes.

Hitler's Reich was supposed to last for a thousand years, but ultimately ended after some 15 years. It can only be hoped that Bush's "generations to come" will end with his presidency.

America has a solution to Muslim problem.

Talibans are not the problem, they are willing to work for ISI for very meger benfits. I think USA and NATO can offer a better package to real Talibans to work together for betterment of Afghan nation. problem lies in Pakistan........Punjab do not share a single inch of border with Afghanistan........Punjabi military want to see underdevelop and pakistan dependent Afghanistan. neutralize ISI, provide political and economic freedom to Pushtoons in Pakistan and introduce a real democracy .....you will get the result.how a better Afghanistan will emerge.

Why we the great and secular Afghanis have been forced to follow the pakistan military agenda...........USA should think..........if USA and NATO has a friend like Musharaf a man with double standares..........no body would be able to win this puzzle game.
get rid of Punjabi-Muhjir Alliance and Army and Empower Pushtoon and Balochs in the region, the real friends of Afghanistan and see the possitive change.

Most afghanis are happier with NATO/US because the aleternative of a pakistani aided Taliban fundoos is something most afghans dont want to return too.
Karzais biggest challenge would be to build a
decent fair police and a really independent military(very unlike pakistan) and not neglect the economy.

Unless something drastically changes in the very near future, Afghanistan is, I fear, doomed.

I have workeded here for the last five months and see the daily lives of Afghans. It is still a donor society; i.e. "what will you give me today." Corruption remains rampant - from the lowest border guard to the the upper reaches of parliament. Opium production has increased by 50% over last year, and I have yet to see any woman over the age of fourteen NOT wearing a burqa. The infrastructure is still a hodgepodge of scattered pipe schemes and barely adequate mini-hydroelectric power projects, roads are rutted and dangerous.

I weep at the thought of what we COULD HAVE ACCOMPLISHED here over the last five years had we not wasted hundreds of billions of dollars on that great debacle: Iraq. If we had only focused on this country and spent that money and effort here, it would be a very, very different place.

Lastly, and apart from all else, any society who subjugates fully half of the population - women - will never become a successful nation regardless of how much assistance and money the world invests in it.

As long as heroine is the being cultivated, and war lordships being tolerated by int. community in Afgahnistan, there is no way to achive peace. You can hammer Pak is ground from not interfering in Afghanistan, it wont help.

When USA brings briefcases of 100 dollar notes to war loards, thats the end.

Not surprisingly, Mr Mishra, an Indian, after offering the usual and tired cliches and exaggerations, decides to dump all that afflicts Afghanistan on its neighbor. If India really had any real capacity or sincerity of intent, it had a an ample chance to show its chops as a local superpower, a mantle it desires more than air to breathe.

There are so many depressing issues in relation to Afghanistan. The poppy, illiteracy, child mortality, corruption. Bush may have been serving his own interests and Karzai may not be the strongest leader. We can go on and on.

Perhaps the goals of foreigner powers operating in Afghanistan are not being met quickly enough to suit their opinion polls, but we have to remember: it has only been 5 years!

In the two years I have lived here I have seen the bombed out areas of Kart-e Seh & Karte-Char transformed into lovely neighbourhoods. City power has improved, there are pavements being put in all over the city, street lights, signs, construction, new shops, new restaurants etc. etc.

More important than all of this, is that I see Afghans (returned Afghans and locals) investing in their own country. Time and money. It is a travesty how much foreign aid has been squandered away, but a country that builds itself on foreign aid is not going to last in the long run anyway. It is when the Afghans start putting their own time, money & resources into Afghanistan that the country will stand a fighting chance.

The growing Afghan middle class has a greater vested interest in seeing their country suceed. And I believe that it is they (not Bush, not Karzai, not NATO) who will make the real difference in this country.

Nobody expected Karzai to mould a new Afghanistan in so short a time. His role has been that of a mediator. And that he has done fairly well.

Rome wasn't built in a day, so why should we expect Afghanistan to be?