“THE guerrilla wins if he does not lose,” said Henry Kissinger. We don't know whether the former US secretary of state was referring to the Viet Cong that defeated the US in Vietnam. But what he said could apply to Afghanistan as well. And last week's developments should open the eyes of even the most blind optimists in the US military and political establishment. On Friday, Taleban insurgents engaged government forces on several fronts, killing at least eight Afghan soldiers in three separate incidents. Militants breached the perimeter of a huge former US and British base handed over to the Afghan army last month. Militants and army forces were exchanging sporadic gunfire on Saturday morning at Camp Bastion in the southern province of Helmand as fighting entered a third day. Elsewhere in Helmand, a suicide bomber attacked an army checkpoint in the heavily contested district of Sangin, killing at least five soldiers. This took place just a day after three serious attacks around the country, including two in the capital city of Kabul. Insurgents also attacked the headquarters of the paramilitary Afghan National Army Civil Order Police in Now Zad district of Helmand, killing four officers. Afghanistan may not yet be Vietnam in terms of the troops committed or the casualties suffered. But we should remember that at one time 120,000 American military personnel were fighting in Afghanistan, a figure higher than the 115,000 troops Soviets employed during their 9-year war. Still the US is not nearer to anything which can be described as victory or stability in Afghanistan. In fact, the Taleban are stronger than ever, inflict more casualties than ever, operate in more areas than ever, and employs tactics that are more sophisticated than ever. Making an already bad situation worse, a wave of attacks against coalition forces by Afghan security forces have all but destroyed the partnership between NATO and Afghan troops. NATO has halted outright partnered patrols with Afghan security forces. Many NATO allies have already withdrawn their troops. It is against this background that we should view Obama's decision to reverse an earlier plan to end all combat activity by the end of this year and authorize the use of air support and other activities in Afghanistan in 2015 and beyond. From next year, about 12,000 foreign troops, including about 8,000 Americans, are likely to stay on as part of a NATO-led training and advisory mission while some 1,800 Americans will conduct counter-terrorism missions. This means Obama will not have to withdraw all his troops by the end of his presidency. He can cite the latest developments in Iraq as a justification for his decision. Republicans are blaming all the problems of Iraq, including the emergence of the self-proclaimed Islamic State or IS, on Obama's decision to “precipitately” withdraw troops from Iraq. But he can't be unaware of the fact that some 14 years after the US invasion, conditions in Afghanistan are far from settled. In the absence of political stability, the economy is deteriorating. Continued war and occupation by Soviets and later by Americans and the resulting insurgency and cycle of violence have only made things worse. Despite billions invested in reconstruction since 2001, the country is dependent on donors for most of its income. If massive show of force by Americans can't ensure security for the Afghans, will a reduced force save them? Facts fly in the face of US claims. Afghan forces suffered record casualties last year and retreated from some locations in the face of rising insurgency. For the first time, the insurgents inflicted almost as many casualties on Afghan security forces in 2013 as they suffered themselves. More than 4,600 Afghan police and soldiers have been killed in the war against the Taleban since the start of the year. White House says continued presence of foreign troops is necessary to consolidate the gains already achieved by US and its allies. It is obvious these “gains” don't include the basic level of security that would induce the refugees created by the war and civil strife to return to their homeland. Last June the UN recorded that there were 574,327 Afghans internally displaced by war. The figure is now 630,000. There are still 1.6 million Afghan refugees being looked after in Pakistan. What Afghanistan needs is not more unrest which direct or indirect combat missions and air strikes will create but a negotiated political settlement with all insurgents including the Taleban. After all, “the conventional army loses if it does not win,” as Kissinger said.
