These are good insights. I would add one:

"Pakistan's interests in Afghanistan are not the same as Americas."

The irony should not be lost on those who study this problem that Pakistan's efforts to exert control over Afghanistan for their interests destabilized that country and led to the ultimate U.S. intervention; that then led to the destabilizaton of Pakistan as the U.S. exerted controls over Afghanistan for U.S. interests.

The victim in all of this is the popualce of Afghanistan. There are many competitors with widely varying interests involved here. First thing that any way ahead should do is map those competitors and their interests out; and then shape engagement and divvy out roles accordingly.

Take what I say as the statements of an ignorant man, a man who has never been to Afghanistan. An acquaintance of mine who has a few tours in Afghanistan tells me that a key fact to remember about Afghanistan [as opposed to Iraq] is that no infidel--no outsider who is an infidel-- will ever win an Afghan Muslim's heart. The Koran makes it clear that for a Muslim to lie, cheat, or otherwise take advantage of an infidel is perfectly moral and wise. So, I think America's goal ought to be that our outlook not be on winning Afghan hearts, but winning the minds of Afghans that we infidels can be useful to what the Afghans want--and hopefully what they see as useful and what we think is useful will coincide. He asked a simple question: What is the GNP of Afghanistan? What is the cost of sustaining an Afghanistan army and police force? What is it that an Afghan army and police force provide for the majority of Afghan people within the context of Afghan culture and history? He sarcastically mentioned that every day an Afghan official is "winning the lottery" in increasing his personal wealth and power. Most care little for anyone outside of themselves and their family and tribe.

Sir,
Agree but then to do/consider anything more assumes issues after the major's first (the coalition has won the war and has dealt an almost mortal blow to the enemy that originally was Al Qaeda) are strategic interests to the United States. His assumption and the larger COIN debate assumes the affirmative. I posit having met condition one and being able to separate the Taliban from AQ, issues 2 through 5 are nullified as to our vital interests. As you said, "Pakistan's interests in Afghanistan are not the same as America's" so why should we fight their war? Especially w/o a full and legitimate partner in Kabul through which to conduct COIN?

MAJ K

Major Mehar Omar Khan has provided a fresh perspective about a complex issue. Some of his ideas especially concentrating on improving daily life of average Afghan, rethinking about counterinsurgency operations and humility are worth pursuing which can bring some tactical respite. Every conflict has a life of its own and we need to constantly improve and innovate to adjust to changing battle space.

We simplify problems for better understanding but current winds of chaos in the region are the result of a long drawn process and it will take a while before we get a grip on the problem let alone finding a solution. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, citizens of these countries will decide about their own future. Our presence will help in some areas and exacerbate problems in other areas. Local players in both countries will use our military and economic resources for their own power struggles. Even now, we are essentially in a situation where we are supporting one group against the other and hence seen as partisans.

Some of our ill thought policies directly contributed to pushing instability right into Pakistan and for that we can only apologize to Major Khan. First round of Pushtun civil war was fought on Afghanistan field and I fear that second round will be on the killing fields of Pakistan. Those who are familiar with the region are already seeing the signs of coming painful times with battle lines becoming clearer everyday. What will be the role of U.S. is anybody's guess? This can be averted only by the people of the region.

It is a pleasant surprise to see Pakistani officers seriously discussing military affairs at forums like SWJ and if there are more like Major Khan in Pakistan army then we can hope for a better outcome. People like Major Khan will guide their countrymen about the best course and we wish him all the best. Once he finishes his course, he will get his next promotion of Lieutenant Colonel rank. He will likely get the command of a battalion and operate in troubled areas of N.W.F.P. If I had a choice, I’ll give him command of a PIFFER battalion and deploy him in Waziristan area because he will be likely more successful in that battle space. I'll then bring him back as instructor at Staff College and then send him back to command a wing of Frontier Corps. In the meantime, hopefully we will learn something from his sound ideas.

Hamid Hussain
coeusconsultant@optonline.net

I have wondered for years why the State Department and country team have such a fixation on Political Science 101 when the issues are Anthropology 101. Just how does an Afghani of any of the various ethnic groups define "central government" or "women's rights".

These are all noble sentiments IN THE WEST. They are not noble sentiments IN AFGHANISTAN. Like the man said, give them LOCAL improvements in security and welfare without pushing our values on them. Show them respect for their values if you want to win the day. Build local forces and quite worrying about warlords... They already exist and have the real power.

If you don't want them to grow opium then give them something ELSE to grow before you destroy what little they have.

Maybe they will grow one day into a nice little Western Democracy but that day is far from tomorrow. Blue fingers and ballots do not a democracy make, especially in a country that has no clue what anyone is talking about.

Deal with reality and leave liberal dreams for the future.

Or just get out.