Persisting dilemmas of big power military

intervention

December 31, 2014, 12:00 pm

In this photograph taken on November 1, 2014, a US soldier looks on as
he rakes debris from demolished structures at Bagram Air Base, some 50
kms north of Kabul. NATO formally ended its war in Afghanistan on
December 28, 2014, holding a low-key ceremony in Kabul after 13 years of
conflict that have left the country in the grip of worsening insurgent
violence.The event was arranged in secret due to the threat of Taliban
strikes in the Afghan capital, which has been hit by repeated suicide
bombings and gun attacks over recent years. "Together... we have lifted
the Afghan people out of the darkness of despair and given them hope for
the future," NATO commander US General John Campbell told assembled
soldiers. "Youve made Afghanistan stronger and our countries safer." On
January 1, the US-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)
combat mission, which has suffered 3,485 military deaths since 2001, will
be replaced by a NATO "training and support" mission. AFP
However, it is nation-building which could win a measure
of peace and stability for Asias restive regions. States
are obliged to be voluntarily and proactively involved in
this undertaking because that is the only way to enduring
social peace and stability. They would do well to expect
nothing from the West in these efforts because the West
would not perceive it to be in their main interests to help developing
countries in the nation-building enterprise.
Big power military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and its costs will

time and again drive home the lesson that such intervention compounds
rather than resolves the issues that prompt these incursive initiatives. Are
these countries any nearer stability and peace now than they were prior to
Western military intervention?
The major interventionist powers and their backers would need to answer
this question honestly and forthrightly if the international community is to
deepen its understanding of the conflicts in question and evolve the most
effective ways of resolving them. The ongoing withdrawal of NATOs
International Security Assistance Force from Afghanistan, gives to this
question a special salience.
From what could be gathered, the times not at all appropriate for a NATO
withdrawal from Afghanistan. This is mainly on account of the fact that the
Taliban has not by any means been defeated in the battlefield. In fact, the
Taliban is showing more than ever before, that it is a military force to be
reckoned with. No less an organization than the International Crisis is
Group is on record as pointing out that the Overall trend is one of
escalating violence and insurgent attacks. Currently, the Taliban is said to
be having a sizeable presence in northeast Afghanistan.
Therefore, the NATO withdrawal could be said to be ill-timed and
premature because the Taliban is yet to be disposed of militarily. The
principal purpose for which the Western military incursion into Afghanistan
occurred, that is the elimination of the Taliban, is remaining to be
accomplished. In fact, it should not come as a surprise if the Taliban
proves more effective as a fighting force, now more than ever before.
It should be plain to see that one has a parallel situation in Iraq. The West
has departed from Iraq, leaving it in a state of veritable lawlessness and
mounting sectarian violence. Here too, Western military intervention has
accomplished nothing of substantial value. In fact, Iraq and sections of
Syria are wilting in the brutal violence unleashed by the Islamic State,
begging the question: how has Western military intervention helped Iraq?
As matters stand, the possibility is great that Iraq and Afghanistan would
be left to their devices on account of the US becoming relatively selfsufficient in oil and the price of the latter tumbling in the international
market as a consequence of OPEC price wars. South West Asia, therefore,
faces the prospect of being abandoned by the West, since it would be of
comparatively little interest to the West from now on.
On the other hand, given its increasing economic strength, it is South East

Asia and East Asia which would be of greater importance to the West
currently. In these regions, the US would not only intensify its military
presence but expect its allies to be in a state of military preparedness
against powers which are seen as expansionist in character, such as China.
Accordingly, it is in these regions that international military tensions would
be most intense in the unfolding days.
But is the situation one of hopelessness for the South West Asian and
South Asian regions? Do they face the prospect of chronic, wasting conflict
and war?
This could very well be the case if the countries of the mentioned regions
do not take-up the long postponed task of nation-building. Needless to say,
this is no easy challenge to meet. It is a long term project which involves
patient but insightful labour because nation-building basically boils down to
the establishment of ethnic unity. And the latter goal is reached by states
initiating growth plus equity, besides other measures. However, if the
states of the troubled regions in question are to achieve a measure of
peace and stability, they would be required to put in place the institutional
mechanisms that usher equity.
This is essentially the task faced by the West in both Iraq and Afghanistan,
but considering its premature decisions to abandon both theatres of
conflict, one could infer that nation-building, in the sense defined here,
was farthest from the intentions of the West. The West was propelled by
short term economic and strategic interests in South and South West Asia
and one would be nave in the extreme to expect the US and its allies to
engage substantially in nation-building in these regions.
However, it is nation-building which could win a measure of peace and
stability for Asias restive regions. States are obliged to be voluntarily and
proactively involved in this undertaking because that is the only way to
enduring social peace and stability. They would do well to expect nothing
from the West in these efforts because the West would not perceive it to
be in their main interests to help developing countries in the nationbuilding enterprise.
But we in Sri Lanka are no less lacking in these respects than most other
states of the Asian region that are in dire need of nation-building. Terror
is seen as having been wiped out from Sri Lanka in mid-2009, but there is
a curious tendency among some of our decision-makers and their
ideologues to persist in conjuring a threat to national security, which has
its roots in the tiger bogey. This could very well be part of a strategy

aimed at winning the sympathy and support of the voting public.

But such myopic approaches to governance would not deliver national
unity or internal domestic cohesion. The path to enduring internal
solidarity is nation-building, secured through the fostering of equity. A
tragedy of our times is the cynicism born of the belief that the people could
be easily led to espouse this or that slogan.
Evidently, then, powers big and small are not learning their lessons from
history with the desired quickness, if at all they are trying to do so. In the
face of security threats of any kind, strong law-and-order measures are
favoured, forgetting that these issues have their roots in a glaring lack of
national unity which could be fostered through equity.
One of the most urgent needs is peoples empowerment. If a countrys
social groups are equally empowered, there would be a measure of peace
which would obviate the need for an obsessive security awareness among
the rulers and the ruled. Thus, military budgets could be pruned, and more
financial resources diverted to social expenditure.
Posted by Thavam