The Pashtun War

We recognize the Pashtun reality, in some form, and the Pashtuns, in turn, decouple themselves from, and kick out, Al Qaeda.
.
It's worked elsewhere. The most extremist elements if nothing else, are severe buzz-kills.

Where will Al Qaeda go? Can they be "kicked out"?

They have made common cause with the "Arabs"--Al Qaeda--because of religious affinity and the existence of common enemies (namely us).
.
Which is why we should get the f--k out of there. Our presence just makes everything worse. It's not worth the life of even one more American soldier.

Why can't the area be separated into two different states? It doesn't seem anymore difficult that the situation we are in now. Would the only group not amenable to this be Al Qaeda? Where do the poppy farmers fall geographically into these two states?

I agree with Friar Tuck. Mr Klein, the more and more you post on the Af/Pak situation, the more and more it looks like a clone of Vietnam. I mean the Taliban are clearly using the same tactics of attrition, we can't fight a war for the local populous (Afghan as well as Pakistan) that doesn't support us no matter how noble we believe the ideal of freedom may be.

The situation is certainly complicated and has been for how many hundreds of years? It is an indeciferable, uncontrollable hodge-podge. It has been proven time and again that military action cannot be successful in this environment. The issue here is the Pashtun majority and the meaninglessness of the boundries established during the unresolved Great Game when Pakistan was India. But there remains large minority ethnic groups which mostly comprised the Northern Alliance and helped reposition the Taliban (previously referred to as destroying the Taliban). Karzi and his corrupt government are also Pashtun not completely unlike the Taliban but less efficient.
.
We went there in search of binladen and to destroy al quaeda, then went scurrying off like squirrels to Iraq. While I supported the initial effort, it has lost focus. We have no defined goal, and even if there was one (destroy the Taliban, change the culture, establish democracy and a free western like state, etc.), none that I can think of are sustainable or could even have the slimest chance of success. We should pull out. Leave.
.
On the nuclear issue, we should pursue alliance with Russia to control existing nuclear threats and proliferation.
.
Finally, bless our soldiers, but I doubt that they have a clue as to the political and military complexities involved. I would hope for them to think none other than that they are serving a valid purpose for morale if nothing else in their day to day tribulations. But does their belief have any import on my opinion? None whatever. Zero. But bless them and may they be happy in their sense of purpose until we withdraw, which will happen sooner or later, with no real change.

Mr Klein, first off, thank you for your response. Yes Al Qaeda did attack us on 9/11, however, if you ask them we first attack them through our support of dictatorships or just sides they don't agree with in the Middle East. Without sounding unpatriotic, of course the 20 something year old American soldiers and marines are going to believe in the mission and the ideal that it could prevent another 9/11. Just like the 20 something year old Taliban soldiers believe in their mission of defeating the US, that's why they are fighting. I of course thank our soldiers, but idealistic kids on either side shouldn't be deciding policy for a nation.
.
I'd agree keeping the screws turned on Al Qaeda would be a great thing, however, the problem comes with once again where we are fighting the war and how we are fighting it. Supporting with economic aid, education is a great thing and something we shot ourselves in the foot for not doing when we had the chance back when we supported the Mujahideen during the Soviet invasion to build the economic, education, and local support. Economic support obviously takes time, and the problem also comes in how to we 1) ensure that the support goes to who we want it too and 2) is diminished every time one of our bombs hits civilians. Part 1 of course relies on stability, which requires more troops which in turn can cause part 2.
.
How to combat that I don't know, but it leads me back to saying we're trying to fight a war we want to fight instead of the war that is presented to us. More troops might be good if and this is a big if, we could actually get the Pakistan's to have a major assault on the Taliban in Pashtunistan to have the classic hammer and anvil style offensive. That just does not seem to be realistic to think we could get. I greatly commend Secretary Gates with his proposed changes to a leaner and meaner army that can fight in small groups against the small groups the Taliban use, but it doesn't seem like a 20,000 additional force is using this tactic.

Ironic how this keeps happening over and over... in this area, in the Mideast, in Iraq... the British Empire made a mess, pulls out, and we try to keep the whole thing going using their tactics and ideas... money to be made, the white (democratic) man's burden. It says here this originates in the fact that we grafted democracy onto the roots of the British system, hence our equivalents to the East India Company and incessant, insensitive adventurism... even down to treating politicians as royalty and the recent kleptocracy. None of these borders work, and we cannot afford to try to maintain them, it's impossible. However it is literally in our national DNA to try.

Clearly the way this ends is that the US has some sort of a serious change happen domestically, perhaps breaking into sections... and a more isolationist view predominates, if only due to lack of funds, and these natives work it out amongst themselves as they should have been allowed to long ago. Sad but true, methinks.

For the past 50 years, Pakistan and its monstrous Intelligence Services tried all means (Terror Training, Terror Networks, Terror Imports, Terror Exports, Terror Schools, Terror Funding, Terror and Terror, Jihad, Intervention, Agrression, Religious & Minority Hatred, Demagogie, and etc) in order to survive. As we can see from the day of Pakistani inception, the situation is getting worse day by day. People living in the area are in a stagnant situation. Socioeconomic conditions are getting worse. I believe that it is the right time to disolve Pakistan by encouraging Pashtun or Baluchi Nationalism, so National States could emerge. This will provide us with the opportunity to save our tax payers' money, nuture a peacefull coexistence, and make people of the area more responsible for taking care of their own countries. I mean who should be faithful, caring and responsible for Pakistan, if Pakistan itself survives by Terror, outside money, and full of hatred ideology.

Pakistan is not a National State! Pakistan does not have a national language. Pakistan does not have a National Identity. Pakistan does have a National Culture. Pakistan is the greatest Terror hub. Pakistanis live by extrem fundmentals developed by Pakistani Zealots. There is no reason to maitain the status quo of Pakistan!

This post contradicts so many of Mr. Klein's previous assertions that ISI had a major role in letting Taliban achieve it's goal whatever it was. (I.e. Helping them ascend to power in Afganistan or by providing them with help and comfort once they were chased away from Afganistan by the US troops after September 11.)
You have written exclusively about how ISI helped Taliban to counter India's influence in the region. As ISI always fears that unchecked India would engulf entire Kashmir do you think the highly nationalist ISI would support Taliban' quest to repeal Durand's line and expand Afghanistan's border well into Pakistan's western provinces?
.

With this post you would have me believe Pakistan dears rugged terrains of Kashmir more than say Swat valley which is much closer to Islamabad.
.
To Imarca, Pakistan does have a national language. It's called Urdu.

Urdu is not the National Language of Pakistan. It is the Official Language as English is. Urdu is the language of no nation. It is something like Esperanto. Without dissolving Pakistan, instability will remain in the area, and the socioeconomic conditions will not improve. With its Fascist Islamic Foundation, Pakistan is a danger to its neighbor, and to the World. Why we have to pay for maintainence of Pakistan, its ISI Mafia and its ineffective Army.

Urdu is the national and official language of Pakistan, though less than 8% of Pakistanis speak it as their first language......
-Ministry of Culture, Government of Pakistan.

hotbbq asked, #4 above, "Why can't the area be separated into two different states?"

My understanding of the history of these boundaries is that, like those of the Persian Gulf, Africa, etc., they may have been deliberately designed to pit the largest ethnic groups against one another --to divide and conquer. And it is my belief that the same impulse guides U.S. military policy. They do whatever they can to subjugate the people into the U.S. sphere as cheaply as possible militarily. That means destroying their indigenous culture and fomenting internecine warfare.

Incidentally, the population of Pakistan is so large, and so dominated by its urban centers, I see little likelihood of the country being overrun by the rural Pashtun populations. I recognize this is an awful simplification but that's my guess.

I think that a simple solution and the only solution to this issue is that the Pashtuns should be repatriated with their root country Afghanistan. Then we can demand the Afghans to take responsibilities for their people and the territory. For many reason, the Pashtuns are a State within the Pakistani State. For example, Pashtuns are linguistically, religiously (SUNNIS), culturally, socially, and even mentally different than their brethren from Punjab and Sindh. Currently, Pashtuns are the victims of Pakistani State Conspiracy, its Monstrous Intelligence Services, and its Army. Since Pakistan is a Fascist Islamic State, many ordinary Pashtuns never support its existence. The unification of Pashtuns to their root country Afghanistan will reduce our costs, improve socioeconomic conditions in the area, and it will help us to succeed in bringing prosperity, peace and democracy to the area. The unification of Pashtuns with their root country of Afghanistan will leave no reason for Pakistan to feel threatened by its Afghan neighbour. Also, the unification will eliminate the Terror Networks, Terror Training Facilities, and Terror Schools in the area. Is it our responsibility to spend billions of our tax payers' dollars for maintenance or even existence of Pakistan? Isn't Pakistan a monster to itself and to the world? Maintaining a monster Pakistan will cost us even more if we do not act now.

If a language does not belong to a Nation, it could never be National! Another reason is that Pakistan is not a Nation at all.

Apart from the areas described by Joe Klein, the Pashtun Homeland also includes the whole northeastern chunk of the Province of Baluchistan in Pakistan.

There is a map in the 'The Pathans by Olaf Caroe' that shows the extent of the Pashtun Homeland.