Skip to main content

America's failure in Afghanistan spells the end of West's dominance in Eurasia

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

"The West has already failed in Afghanistan, just as the Soviets failed in the 1980s and the British way back in the nineteenth century."--John Humphrys

After having fought for more than a decade in Afghanistan, America has yet to show any considerable gains for its brutal occupation. Nonetheless, there are some diehard American strategists who beg to differ, and argue that America has achieved its primary objective, which was to establish a few military bases in Afghanistan to counter Russia, China and the future Caliphate state for the eventual supremacy over Eurasia. But, even this lofty ideal when measured against the reality on the ground appears too remote to be categorized as a useful accomplishment. On the contrary, the rampant instability in Afghanistan not only puts into jeopardy the viability of such strategic objectives, but more importantly raises questions about how long can America afford to stay stuck in the Afghan quagmire and continue to post failure after failure.

Clues about this very prospect were provided at the NATO summit convened in Chicago back in May 2012. Speaking about America's ubiquitous nemesis the Taleban, Obama candidly admitted that they were a hardened opponent and whatever gains NATO had made could easily be undone. He said,"The Taliban is still a robust enemy, and the gains are still fragile. But think about it. We've been there now 10 years. Ten years in a country that's very different, that's a strain, not only on our folks but also on that country, which at a point is going to be very sensitive about its own sovereignty." Just how much time does the world's lone super power need with all of its sophisticated weaponry to defeat a rag tag army of no more than 25,000 or so? America has assembled under its supervision 400,000 soldiers-not to mentions the tens of thousands of private contractors- on both side of the Afghan-Pakistan border, and after several years of warfare it is still unable to crush them. Outgunned and outmanned Taliban are definitely proving to be more than a robust enemy.

Equally unfathomable is that it has taken several years for the US to accept the fact that NATO is not only fighting the Taleban but also the Afghan people. The reference to "be very sensitive about its own sovereignty" is an admission by president Obama that NATO faces a popular resistance which cuts right across ethnic fault lines and trumps traditional tribal loyalties.

Another fiasco of America's Afghan war is its exorbitant cost, which has placed a huge toll on the defense budget and this has been further exacerbated by the economic crisis of 2008. America has spent circa $550 billion on the Afghan war since 2001. Other NATO member states like Britain have spent in the region of $20 billion. Yet despite squandering billions of dollars of tax payers' money, NATO has very little to show. Karzai's government is corrupt to the core and hated by ordinary Afghans. Karzai's writ does not extend beyond parts of Kabul, and if it does exist elsewhere, it is totally reliant on foreign forces. According to some estimates Taliban controls around 80% of Afghanistan and this probably explains why it is so difficult for NATO to hold on to territorial gains. All attempts to coopt the Taliban into a political solution have also failed. The Financial Times summed up West's sorry state: "Five years ago the Americans were refusing to speak to the Taliban. Now the Taliban are refusing to speak to the Americans. That is a measure of how the balance of power has shifted in Afghanistan. The western intervention there has failed." Added to this is the human toll on NATO forces, which cannot be quantified in monetary terms. So it came as no surprise to find that the joint communiqué issued at the end of the Chicago summit expressed the collective desire of all the NATO countries to draw the curtain on their Afghan misadventure. The statement read: ‘After 10 years of war and with the global economy reeling, the nations of the West no longer want to pay, either in treasure or in lives, the costs of their efforts in a place that for centuries has resisted foreign attempts to tame It'.

Allah (SWT) says: "Indeed, those who disbelieve spend their wealth to avert [people] from the way of Allah . So they will spend it; then it will be for them[source of] regret; then they will be overcome. And those who have disbelieved - unto Hell they will be gathered. " [TMQ 8:36]

Whilst 2014 (a date revised several times) is the final withdrawal date for most NATO countries, America and her junior partner Britain both steeped in arrogance have still not learnt their lesson and plan to stay beyond this date. No doubt they will do their utmost to delay the inevitable collapse of Karzai's government and try and save face with their domestic populace. But the writing is on the wall; America and NATO are heading for a catastrophic defeat and no matter how hard they try to dress up their failings their only success will be to unite and embolden Afghans along with their brethren across the border in Pakistan to claim the scalp of Pax-Americana and deal a devastating blow to NATO's first ever mission in Eurasia.

"On that Day shall the believers rejoice- With the help of Allah, He helps whom He will, and He is Exalted In Might, Most Merciful." [30: 4-5]

Abid Mustafa

07 Ramadan 1433
26/07/2012


Source

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An advice to Muslims working in the financial sector

Assalam wa alaikum wa rahmatullah wabarakatahu, Dear Brothers & Sisters, We are saddened to see Muslims today even those who practise many of the rules of Islam are working in jobs which involve haram in the financial sector. They are working in positions which involve usurious (Riba) transactions, insurance, the stock market and the like. Even though many of the clear evidences regarding the severity of the sin of Riba are known, some have justified their job to themselves thinking that they are safe as long as they are not engaged in the actual action of taking or giving Riba. Brothers & Sisters, You should know that the majority of jobs in the financial sector, even the IT jobs in this area are haram (prohibited) as they involve the processing of prohibited contracts. If you work in this sector, do not justify your job to yourself because of the fear of losing your position or having to change your career, fear Allah as he should be feared and consider His law regard

Q&A: Age of separating children in the beds?

Question: Please explain the hukm regarding separation of children in their beds. At what age is separation an obligation upon the parents? Also can a parent sleep in the same bed as their child? Answer: 1- With regards to separating children in their beds, it is clear that the separation which is obligatory is when they reach the age of 7 and not since their birth. This is due to the hadith reported by Daarqutni and al-Hakim from the Messenger (saw) who said: When your children reach the age of 7 then separate their beds and when they reach 10 beat them if they do not pray their salah.’ This is also due to what has been narrated by al-Bazzar on the authority of Abi Rafi’ with the following wording: ‘We found in a sheet near the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he died on which the following was written: Separate the beds of the slave boys and girls and brothers and sisters of 7 years of age.’ The two hadiths are texts on the separation of children when they reach the age of 7. As for the

Q&A: Shari' rule on songs, music, singing & instruments?

The following is a draft translation from the book مسائل فقهية مختارة (Selected fiqhi [jurprudential] issues) by the Mujtahid, Sheikh Abu Iyas Mahmoud Abdul Latif al-Uweida (May Allah protect him) . Please refer to the original Arabic for exact meanings. Question: What is the Shari’ ruling in singing or listening to songs?  What is the hukm of using musical instruments and is its trade allowed? I request you to answer in detail with the evidences? Answer: The Imams ( Mujtahids ) and the jurists have differed on the issue of singing and they have varying opinions such as haraam (prohibited), Makruh (disliked) and Mubah (permissible), the ones who have prohibited it are from the ones who hold the opinion of prohibition of singing as a trade or profession, and a similar opinion has been transmitted from Imam Shafi’i, and from the ones who disliked it is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal who disliked the issue and categorised its performance under disliked acts, a similar opinion has been tran