America - In Iraq and Afghanistan and There to Stay

First it was Defense Secretary Robert Gates session with Iraq's Maliki to broach the idea of American forces remaining in that country (shall we say indefinitely) after the end of 2011 deadline set for their complete departure.

Now it's Afghanistan where US forces are supposed to begin a gradual withdrawal process beginning this summer to be completed with a handover to Afghan forces in 2014.  The late Richard Holbrooke's replacement, Marc Grossman, is busy trying to negotiate a Strategic Partnership Declaration for post-2014 Afghanistan.

Strategic Partnership Declaration is essentially code for permanent American military bases in Afghanistan.   Critics have a better name for it, Great Game 3.0.

When word got out it sparked a buzz of activity from the neighbours.   Iran's interior minister raced off to Kabul.   He was followed by Indian and Russian national security advisors.


One person’s long-term base is another’s permanent base, however — and in the region many people took Mrs. Clinton’s assurances as proof that the United States was not leaving, whatever the bases are called.

“A 10- or 20-years agreement can be prolonged at any time,” Mr. Anikeev said. “And we have no guarantee they’re not permanent.”

“The Americans have not been honest about this, even among themselves,” said Mullah Attullah Lodin, deputy chairman of the High Peace Council of Afghanistan, which is charged with leading reconciliation efforts with the Taliban. “One says we are not building bases, another says we are building them, and it’s very confusing.”

The big concern, he said, was that if any such agreement were reached, it would make it that much harder to enter into serious peace talks with the Taliban. “That is the first thing the Taliban demand is the withdrawal of foreign troops,” Mullah Lodin said. 

What is politely left unsaid in all of this is what an indefinite American presence in either Iraq or Afghanistan will mean for those countries.   In both cases it's going to mean a hell of a lot more fighting as nationalist groups of all stripes join together to drive out the Infidel occupiers.  It will be like going back to 2005 except the ranks of America's enemies will be greater and more lethal.  Muqtada al Sadr has already warned that his Mahdi Army forces will be hunting any American soldiers remaining in Iraq after New Years day.   The Pashtun Talibs will probably be able to recruit other ethnic warlords into their own coalition of the willing to make a continued US presence unacceptable to the American man on the street.

So why is America bent on stirring up these hornets' nests?   Could it be that Afghanistan and Iraq provide their sole opportunities for maintaining a large, strategic military presence in a resource rich yet unstable region on the Middle East/South Asia?   Could it be that America still wants to get a lock on the Caspian Basin oil and gas to keep it out of Russian control?   Could it be that Washington is fearful of expanding Chinese influence in the region?  It's probably all of these and more.