ICG report warns that Afghanistan may collapse after 2014

[hellheaven1987]

Oh crap those evil NGOs...

A new report on Afghanistan warns that the departure of Nato forces in 2014 could be followed by the government's collapse and even civil war, unless steps are taken now.

The International Crisis Group (ICG) says the Afghan police and army are unprepared for security responsibility.

It added that polls in two years' time would be "plagued" by fraud unless the state acted to ensure a clean vote.

The Afghan government labelled the predictions "nonsense and garbage".

"Our nation was not born in 2002. We have a history of 5,000 years. We have fought against superpowers in the past. Our national police and army are ready to defend the country's soul and sovereignty," a statement said.

The government spokesman added that if the international community fulfilled its pledges of future support, Nato's withdrawal in 2014 would not make any difference.

Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said he did not share the ICG's negative assessment.

He told the BBC he was confident the Afghan security forces would be able to take charge after 2014.

Source

Original piece here.

Before you start crying Taliban would never retake Kabul, no, the report is not about Taliban launch its D-Day on Afghanistan after 2014. What it suggests is that the current distrust status of Afghan central government due to its inefficiency, corruption and an unfair election system may set up a stage for violent power struggle within Afghanistan, ultimately leads to a civil war between various factions. Of course, that is "worst scenario" as the report says, but it did point out the chance this scenario happens is rather high, and with further economical pressure after 2014 and Pakistan pulling the string behind it may blow up soon or later - of course, that is if Afghan government remains in its current way.

But of course I hope Afghanistan would stay in peace, I mean it.

[Enzo]

But its already collapsed. I don't even know at what point of history it would have been uncollapsed.

[Vanoi]

But its already collapsed. I don't even know at what point of history it would have been uncollapsed.

Try mid 1970s and before that.

[s.rwitt]

But of course I hope Afghanistan would stay in peace, I mean it.

Yeah, of course you do...

[saglam2000]

Let it, supporting failed states with most of the populace living in the 1800s is not efficient at all. Let them grow up a bit before treating it like a country.

[mrmouth]

Conventional wisdom would suggest that a 'growing up' period would have already occurred after being given significant quality of life improvements over the last decade. This is all relative, though. They/we didn't have much to work with from the beginning.

What's clear is that enough Afghans have not embraced a logical path forward. Various reasons for that. One of the largest is clinging to their religion and out-of-date customs, instead of rationality and progress. It's the Insha'Allah syndrome.

They never experienced the level of Muslim on Muslim violence that occurred in Iraq, perhaps to their overall determent. Although the level of interconnectedness at all levels, is not the same as in Iraq, so it likely wouldn't have led to aha moment in watching their country slowly die. For Afghanistan their country is slowly slipping back into what it was. Alive but dead, to begin with.

At the very fundamental level, life was sustainable with the Taliban and the foreign Arabs unless you were one of the unlucky few. Very much the same as now.

They were given the best chance at making something, and they haven't grasped it. People can make excuses for them all they want. Now we have to hope they are forced into doing what they have not to this point. It isn't likely, but possible. There are various reality shifts once NATO 'leaves'. Maybe not having us as a factor allows for something positive to happen.

People who bled there certainly wish for that. Unlike most people who would profess to care.

[hellheaven1987]

Let it, supporting failed states with most of the populace living in the 1800s is not efficient at all. Let them grow up a bit before treating it like a country.

But how about the billions of funds, ten years of time and 2000 lives of foreign troops waste over there?

[Heinz Guderian]

I wouldnt go up any tall buildings after 2014 Americans.

Might give the Tube a miss as welll.

[Jaketh]

I wouldnt go up any tall buildings after 2014 Americans.

Might give the Tube a miss as welll.

If it happens again we will probably just snap and perform Exterminatus and bring the rest of Holy Terra down with us.

[Arch]

I wouldnt go up any tall buildings after 2014 Americans.

It's ok just bring a parachute and perhaps a Quran.

[ivan_the_terrible]

I think the best Afghanistan can hope for is the level of Uzbekistan or Tajikistan -- that is to say intact as a country.

I don't think a properly civil society can evolve there in the foreseeable future, and I don't think a liberal democracy will ever function the way western policy-makers hope and envision it in the best-case scenario, because corruption (or, more accurately, what in the West is seen as corruption) is unfortunately part of central Asian cultures. I would even say Asian in general, based on what I've seen in South-East Asia personally.

It's just a different mentality, and one that I really don't think can be changed in only a few generations. Besides, it's no one's responsibility to carry out a 'civilising mission' there (and is even condescending, arguably). So I really don't see why NATO doesn't just wash its hands of the whole mess and move on.

[fkizz]

After so much war there, it's bound to be a hole for many decades.

[Nutsack]

Of course it's going to fail, heroin money will inundate the whole system from top to bottom. Corruption will run rampant.

[Col. Tartleton]

If Afghanistan goes to hell we're going to see another Yugoslavia.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Surprise surprise. Gee, and it only cost half a trillion (1.5 trillion counting Iraq) in counting and at least 12,000 killed and wounded (50,000 counting Iraq). I honestly wonder how the scum in Washington sleep at night, between this and the generally abysmal state of the US fiscally, domestically and internationally. If DC doesn't become more accountable within the next two election cycles, I wouldn't rule out collapse and revolution. Vale ad Rempublicam.

[Slaytaninc]

Surprise surprise. Gee, and it only cost half a trillion (1.5 trillion counting Iraq) in counting and at least 12,000 killed and wounded (50,000 counting Iraq). I honestly wonder how the scum in Washington sleep at night, between this and the generally abysmal state of the US fiscally, domestically and internationally. If DC doesn't become more accountable within the next two election cycles, I wouldn't rule out collapse and revolution. Vale ad Rempublicam.

Yeah. Get out of here with that.

Those who are smart enough to lead a revolution already hold comfortable positions in academia or business.

This "revolution" crap looks like far-right theories of an impending revolution against "that Socialist Obama."

[Armenum]

Not really surprising. Though if the government is able to firmly control the capital and important structures within its borders, it won't be a total disaster.

[hellheaven1987]

Not really surprising. Though if the government is able to firmly control the capital and important structures within its borders, it won't be a total disaster.

That depends what Pakistan wants, though.

[Moorish guy]

Wow, why cant the U.S get these things done? failure failure failure they will have more practice soon though.

[nein]

the afghan lion always shakes off the chains of its oppressors... then goes back to oppressing itself. As it should