Geopolitical implications of the Afghan conflict

Thèmes abordés

Geopolitical implications of the Afghan conflict, Afghanistan, Afghan population, Sunni Muslims, Shiite, Pashtuns, Talibans, Al Qaeda, jihadists, Massoud, Bin Laden, opium trade, coalition forces, Barack Obama, Middle Eastern country, oil and gas reserves, Caspian Sea Basin, NATO, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, gas and oil pipelines, Durand Line, Baluchistan, drugs, poppy paradox

Résumé du document

Afghanistan was created in the late nineteenth century. At that time this area was the scene of a struggle between the Russian Empire and the British Empire. This is called the "Great Game".

Today's Afghanistan was created to act as a buffer state bringing together multiple ethnicities including Pashtuns and Baluchis. Those were later divided by the Durand Line (Lord Mortimer Durand, the Viceroy of India) in 1893 that traces the border between Afghanistan and the Empire of British India (now Pakistan). This ethnic partition will remain a source of conflict for the nowadays 30 millions Afghan population.

Extraits

[...] Beginning with its political relationship with Russia and moving towards the present, in which the United States, Great Britain, Russia, Japan, and China are competing for Afghanistan. But in order to understand the present situation factors from the past should be also taken into an account. Over the last decades many countries played important role in the course of Afghan History. At the time of the industrial revolution when Western European countries were flourishing and expanding their territories Afghanistan became a territory of interest for the British Empire. [...]

[...] Afghanistan, Drugs and the War The evolution of the drug by the Afghan conflict: For years, Afghan heroin kills more people in France than the fighting in Afghanistan In all countries members of NATO, the number of people who die every year from heroin overdoses (more than 10,000) is five times the total number of NATO soldiers killed in Afghanistan over the past eight years. However, in both cases, the enemy stays the same- Afghans insurgency movements. Afghan Opium production represents of world heroin and the equivalent of 70% of local GDP. This market represents 15 billion dollars a year and provides for more than 15 million addicts worldwide. Less than of the opium and heroin produced in Afghanistan is seized before leaving the country. [...]

[...] Many groups, backed and supported by Pakistan have operated in India and trained in Afghanistan with a certain proximity to the Taliban (and Al Qaeda by extension). India is categorical on this point : Afghanistan must not become a haven for terrorists. Another aspect that interests India is the ability of Afghanistan to monitor and influence Pakistan. India is therefore very interested in cultivating its ties with Afghanistan, although Pakistan strongly opposes it and tries to lock these opportunities. Finally the issues between Afghanistan and Pakistan have important and sometimes negative effects of the Indian social fabric. Particularly in the Kashmir region. [...]

[...] The United States organized the direct and indirect control through active intervention. However, this war seems to be doomed to failure because the power of the US military makes any attempt of direct confrontation impossible and asymmetric modes of intervention are the only strategy available for states and organizations that want to take on the United States. This "war" on terrorism will only increase the desire for revenge of some victims groups and expand this means of action to actors hitherto preserved. [...]

[...] To counter this action, Russia invades Afghanistan. With the presence of a dominant world power on each side, internal political conflicts arose between the political groups of Afghanistan In his book “Charlie Wilson's George Crile describes the American Central Intelligence Agency's largest, most expensive and successful clandestine operation in history. objectives of the operation were simple. Supply training and weapons to the mujahedeen (“freedom fighters”) in support of their (holy war) against the Soviet “infidels” and thereby “turn Afghanistan into the Soviet Union's Vietnam”.”3 By the time the Soviets were driven out of Afghanistan in January the mujahedeen were well trained, fighters, “armed to the hilt” with modern weaponry, and beholden to no external control. [...]