"How to Manage Afghanistan, Courtesy of the British Empire " Topic

"Any recent perusal of the news from Afghanistan would lead an intelligent observer to conclude that the impending U.S. withdrawal will be a complete catastrophe. All of the gains from the last 13 years in the form of improved governance, infrastructure improvements, advances in the status of Afghan women etc are in immediate peril if the U.S. withdraws all of its forces. The U.S. departure is dangerous in that there is not a follow-on plan for what to do with Afghanistan. This is another circumstance where the "long imperial afternoon" experience of the British in Afghanistan during the 19th century provides a useful solution. Like the U.S., the British Empire had more pressing concerns than Afghanistan and could ill-afford to station large numbers of troops there for extended periods. For the British, Afghanistan was not a country, but more of a geographic location populated by a host of small tribal nations. Rather than try to fundamentally alter these tribal relationships, which proved unsuccessful, or make it one of the formal "pink bits" on the imperial map, the British embraced them at the extreme "local" level and were largely successful in maintaining peace in the Central Asian hub for many decades. The Afghan wars fought by the British were more about mistakes the British made in carrying out their own policy rather than provocations by the Afghans. The U.S. can still withdraw the vast bulk of its troops from Afghanistan as planned, but it must also realize that this central "hub" of the Eurasian continent cannot again be totally left to its own devices.

Afghanistan has been a geographic "hub" within the Hindu Kush mountain range from earliest antiquity. Rather than a "graveyard of empire" as popularly believed, the region has been more of a highway for imperial conquest. Afghanistan possesses a a virtual ring of mountain passes and flatlands within an otherwise mountainous terrain. This system facilitated easy movement within Central Asia. It was exploited by Persian satraps, Alexander the Great, Turkish and Mongol warlords on horseback, and a host of other conquerors seeking to move quickly within the vast Eurasian interior. The nearly 130 year British involvement in Afghanistan was undertaken to prevent the 19th century Russian Empire, and after World War 1 its Soviet successor, from using these same routes to threaten India. For most of their period of influence in Afghanistan, the British relied on a combination of influence-building in Kabul, good relations with all of the Afghan tribes, and small security units of native troops advised and officered by Britons. The two 19th century wars fought by the British in Afghanistan, (1839-1842) and (1878-1880), were both initially successful, punitive expeditions to disabuse Afghan rulers of any intent to admit Russian troops into their region. Both conflicts experienced bloody defeats however, when British troops became complacent, failed to manage competing tribal interests, or tried to "modernize" the Afghan state to European standards. The British were most effective in maintaining order in Afghanistan when their actual military footprint was miniscule. Small units like the famed Khyber Rifles, led by Britons who lived with Afghan villagers and adopted their custom,s successfully policed Afghanistan for decades without significant unrest. The British supported the often weak central government in Kabul, but also maintained relations with competing tribes in order to ensure some level of impartiality. Peace was maintained so long as all Afghan parties thought they had an an element of independence and influence…"
Full article here.
link

Amicalement
Armand

Indeed.

Unfortunately NATO's policy has been carrot and stick all at once. Give some people some chocolate and then drop a bomb on them

In the future, whenever anyone anywhere in the world says, "Hey, you know what would be a good idea? Let's send ground troops into Afghanistan!" they should be dragged out of the room and shot immediately.

Hell, some of us who know our history were saying that when the *Soviets* invaded 35 years ago, let alone when the *US* invaded in 2001.