Mr. Karzai’s Neighborhood

It’ll take a village to stabilize Afghanistan.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

afghanistan has been a playing field for larger geopolitical forces pretty much ever since Alexander the Great invaded in 330 BC. And now, perhaps more than ever, its stability hinges on cooperation from the neighborhood and beyond. The Sunni Saudis have religious and financial clout with the Taliban, much of whose support comes from wealthy Gulf businessmen. Shiite Iran is friendly with the warlords of the erstwhile Northern Alliance; Tehran cooperated with Washington to battle the Taliban until January 2002, when President Bush tarred Iran as part of his “axis of evil.” Like Iran, the Russians want to limit United States and NATO presence in Central Asia. They remain hostile to the Taliban, heirs to the Pashtun warlords who battled them in the ’80s. Like their old satellites, the ‘Stans, they also fear Islamist radicalism spilling over the borders and worry that Afghan instability complicates efforts to export oil and gas from Central Asia. China, for its part, has a voracious appetite for those resources; it also has the cash to help underwrite aid in the region. So does India, which, unbeknownst to most Westerners, is deeply involved in Afghanistan, providing aid, building roads, and opening consulates all over the country. (Its intelligence service, too, is said to be very active there.)

Then, of course, there’s the toughest part of the puzzle—Pakistan, the besieged nuclear powder keg that views Afghanistan as a front in its bitter feud with India. “India is the core of everything that Pakistan security people think about,” explains Rafiq Dossani, a Stanford University scholar who is working on a book about South Asian security. Beginning in 1994, Pakistan’s military intelligence service, Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), began building up the Taliban to counterbalance the Northern Alliance (backed by India, Russia, and Iran). But even after the Taliban begat an Islamist insurgency in Pakistan, the Pakistani army has been reluctant to crack down on its monster. Despite more than $10 billion in United States funding, the army has let Pakistan’s ungoverned tribal areas (see Pakistan’s Pashtun Reservation) devolve into a haven for Al Qaeda and insurgents of all stripes; last July’s truck bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul is thought to have been carried out by pro-Taliban Afghan warlord Jalaluddin Haqqani on orders from Pakistani intelligence. “The bomb went off as India’s military attaché was coming to work, so it wasn’t just a bomb. It was an assassination,” says Boston University professor Thomas Barfield, who studies the region. “The Indians saw that as a calling card from ISI saying, ‘Get out. This is our territory.’ And they responded by saying, ‘We’re going to give Afghanistan another $400 million.'”

% AFGHANS VIEWING THESE PLAYERS…

% AFGHANS VIEWING THESE PLAYERS...

Source: BBC/ABC/ARD poll, Feb. 2009

Indeed, while Afghans hold Pakistan responsible for their troubles, India is viewed with favor. (See chart.) Tensions between the two countries have existed since the postcolonial era, and the Pakistani-Afghan border is still contentious—a relic of the 19th-century Great Game, in which England and Russia vied for regional influence. If Pakistan and India reach a deal, it will be a lot easier for Pakistan’s civilian leaders to shift the army’s support away from the Taliban. America’s task is to convince the Pakistani brass that their biggest threat comes not from India, but from their own insurgents, whose conquest of the scenic Swat Valley in February brought them perilously close to the capital. (“This is like rebels taking Fredericksburg,” notes Barfield.)

Even if President Obama can untangle this Gordian knot, Afghanistan will be hopelessly dependent on the largesse of outsiders. It remains to be seen whether the world steps up to help, or turns its back. Again.

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

AN IMPORTANT UPDATE ON MOTHER JONES' FINANCES

We need to start being more upfront about how hard it is keeping a newsroom like Mother Jones afloat these days.

Because it is, and because we're fresh off finishing a fiscal year, on June 30, that came up a bit short of where we needed to be. And this next one simply has to be a year of growth—particularly for donations from online readers to help counter the brutal economics of journalism right now.

Straight up: We need this pitch, what you're reading right now, to start earning significantly more donations than normal. We need people who care enough about Mother Jones’ journalism to be reading a blurb like this to decide to pitch in and support it if you can right now.

Urgent, for sure. But it's not all doom and gloom!

Because over the challenging last year, and thanks to feedback from readers, we've started to see a better way to go about asking you to support our work: Level-headedly communicating the urgency of hitting our fundraising goals, being transparent about our finances, challenges, and opportunities, and explaining how being funded primarily by donations big and small, from ordinary (and extraordinary!) people like you, is the thing that lets us do the type of journalism you look to Mother Jones for—that is so very much needed right now.

And it's really been resonating with folks! Thankfully. Because corporations, powerful people with deep pockets, and market forces will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. Only people like you will.

There's more about our finances in "News Never Pays," or "It's Not a Crisis. This Is the New Normal," and we'll have details about the year ahead for you soon. But we already know this: The fundraising for our next deadline, $350,000 by the time September 30 rolls around, has to start now, and it has to be stronger than normal so that we don't fall behind and risk coming up short again.

Please consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

—Monika Bauerlein, CEO, and Brian Hiatt, Online Membership Director

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate