Amartya Sen
Rookie
- Apr 9, 2015
- 3
- 0
- 1
It is clear to me that the US military authorities should slow down its withdrawal from Afghanistan and keep a sufficient amount of armed forces there. First, there is a growing threat of Islamic extremism in the Middle East and Central Asia. Second, not only would it open the door for terrorist organizations like Islamic State (IS), turning the lives of ordinary Afghans into suffering, but it would also harm the US image as global social engineer and peacemaker.
Keeping the US army in Afghanistan is a crucial element of the preservation of stability in the region. It is rapidly becoming an issue of vital importance today, as IS is gaining influence and recruiting new members. Yesterday’s power of Al-Qaeda has not evaporated completely with the neutralization of its local offshoots. Quite the contrary is true – thousands of Muslims are being subject to IS propaganda, and, given freedom of movement, radicalized volunteers would pour into Iraq and Syria. Next, the potential, even small, of the Taliban seizing back power in the region still exists. Weakened and drained of support since 2001, the Talibs still pose a threat to Afghans as well as neighboring countries as they demonstrate no tolerance to non-Afghans. Thus, there is no way terrorist activity can be suppressed in Central Asia without the U.S. and its allies keeping an eye on IS, Taliban and others.
This step would affect not only the whole Islamic world, but the U.S. itself. The presence of troops in Central Asia would sustain the image of America and provide the necessary bargaining power to influence decisions made by Islamic governments. Giving up Afghanistan would mean that the United States is incapable of bearing the burden of global social engineering. Acquiring friends and maintaining relationships is the key to participating in conflict resolutions, settling intra- and inter- governmental issues arising in the Mid East. Take Iran as an example - its confrontation with Afghanistan may morph into a full-scale war unless someone defuses the tension. Iran’s nuclear program should also be taken into account. A regular army is one of key factors that make them more compliant. Leaving Afghanistan would imply ceding Central Asia and the Middle East, which might be considered as a signal of political impotence of the Obama cabinet. Hence, the role of the United States as a global, political and social trendsetter would be irrevocably damaged.
In conclusion, maintaining a military presence in such an explosive region is more likely to alleviate the tension than to cause it. At the same time, it would remain a trump card for the U.S., one that may exert decisive influence over Islamic governments, preventing them from going to extremes. Therefore, it would be for the benefit of both the West and the Middle East. However, 10 years’ experience has shown that something more than just military intervention should be done to accomplish the purpose of creating a truly democratic and prosperous country in the midst of the Asian desert.
Keeping the US army in Afghanistan is a crucial element of the preservation of stability in the region. It is rapidly becoming an issue of vital importance today, as IS is gaining influence and recruiting new members. Yesterday’s power of Al-Qaeda has not evaporated completely with the neutralization of its local offshoots. Quite the contrary is true – thousands of Muslims are being subject to IS propaganda, and, given freedom of movement, radicalized volunteers would pour into Iraq and Syria. Next, the potential, even small, of the Taliban seizing back power in the region still exists. Weakened and drained of support since 2001, the Talibs still pose a threat to Afghans as well as neighboring countries as they demonstrate no tolerance to non-Afghans. Thus, there is no way terrorist activity can be suppressed in Central Asia without the U.S. and its allies keeping an eye on IS, Taliban and others.
This step would affect not only the whole Islamic world, but the U.S. itself. The presence of troops in Central Asia would sustain the image of America and provide the necessary bargaining power to influence decisions made by Islamic governments. Giving up Afghanistan would mean that the United States is incapable of bearing the burden of global social engineering. Acquiring friends and maintaining relationships is the key to participating in conflict resolutions, settling intra- and inter- governmental issues arising in the Mid East. Take Iran as an example - its confrontation with Afghanistan may morph into a full-scale war unless someone defuses the tension. Iran’s nuclear program should also be taken into account. A regular army is one of key factors that make them more compliant. Leaving Afghanistan would imply ceding Central Asia and the Middle East, which might be considered as a signal of political impotence of the Obama cabinet. Hence, the role of the United States as a global, political and social trendsetter would be irrevocably damaged.
In conclusion, maintaining a military presence in such an explosive region is more likely to alleviate the tension than to cause it. At the same time, it would remain a trump card for the U.S., one that may exert decisive influence over Islamic governments, preventing them from going to extremes. Therefore, it would be for the benefit of both the West and the Middle East. However, 10 years’ experience has shown that something more than just military intervention should be done to accomplish the purpose of creating a truly democratic and prosperous country in the midst of the Asian desert.
