Unchecked Militancy In Afghanistan – OpEd

The situation in Afghanistan is making the world grow more concerned over the declining state of security in Afghanistan and the recent report by the Transatlantic Intelligence Consortium gives the situation a whole new turn. The Consortium, a non-governmental entity, a group of retired intelligence and military and other analytical experts of a broad spectrum of Western and non-Western countries, has long been the target of interest among the academic community and policy makers. Its reports, however, too informal, are by corruptions reflective or even anticipatory of tendencies subsequently followed by the institutions of the state. The most recent threat given by the group that there is still up to 44 terrorist groups active within the borders of Afghanistan, has therefore spread like wildfire, and this has been brought about by a growing sense that unchecked militancy is yet again establishing roots.

The results of the Consortium make the picture grim. Such organizations possess physical infrastructure as training grounds, family compounds where networks can regenerate, plan, as well as intergenerational socialization as the brief suggests. These conclusions are contrary to the square-rigged argument of the de facto government in Afghanistan that they have dislodged haven of terrorist and restored sanity. Instead, the report recounts a scenario in which fragmented militant ecologies can operate with an elevated level of latitude that experiences little control and lack of counterterrorism strain. The difference between the promises made by Kabul and independent considerations is now emerging as the focus in the diplomatic discussions.

Publication of the report is in concert with the warnings that have been issued in the United Nations, the final one that was issued by Russia through the ambassador Vassily Nebenzia. Nebenzia wrote to the Security Council that terror units in Afghanistan continue to reorganize and become stronger since he identified poor and inconsistent counteractions by the government of Kabul. The findings of the Consortium justify this account adequately, giving an analytical reality to what Moscow and the other capitals of the region have been saying all these months, not to mention that the threat is not only not subsiding but is growing more diversified. The short in these aspects validates the argument that the security vacuum in Afghanistan is not unique.

The findings of the Consortium validate the concerns of Pakistan too. Islamabad has on numerous occasions insisted that haven in Afghanistan has played major role in cross border militancy. The country has witnessed heightened assaults on its security agencies and citizens, particularly in the border districts, over the last few years that have left the authorities of the country warning its citizens that the internal laxity in Afghanistan is causing external instability. The latest analysis that indicates the presence of dozens of organized armed forces strengthens the diplomatic position of Pakistan and standard pressure on Kabul to take more than political rhetoric and implement steps of counterterrorism than can be verified.

Credibility of the membership is one of the factors that can enhance the power of the Consortium. Unofficial, yet with all the experience of those who had to study or fight against the same groups which spread currently in Afghanistan. Their joint experience of the information enables placing the current situation into the bigger picture of the history and it is more difficult to make Kabul disregard the warnings as politically preconditioned. It bases its case on cumulative analysis against isolated cases, the Consortium gives credence to the argument that Afghanistan is a permissive centre wherein the various militants groups operate, cooperate or always co-exist and are convenient as they find it.

Of note is the fact that this is a compounding trend. The forum had already highlighted such signs of militant unification, re-establishment of logistical networks and ideological cross-pollination between extremist networks. The most recent brief message suggests not only their persistence, but also aggravation: the militant groups are not merely living through, but in some cases appear to be taking root even further. These are some of the observations to the recurrent statements by the Afghan administration that terror threats have been eliminated. Instead, the report is rather indirect pointing to the regulatory and operational gaps that help these groups to regenerate, evolve and grow.

The conclusions of the Consortium exert the pressure on the Kabul diplomats by highlighting the scale and diversity of armed actors that are operational in Afghanistan. Regional and international stakeholders are under increasing pressure to undertake actions that are quantifiable and verifiable rather than acting generally and refuting others. It is shifting towards the realms of increased transparency and operation against known networks and cooperation with the neighbouring states. The lack of action will also make Afghanistan even more isolated as it is already weak economically and politically.

It is worth noting that the report also appeals to the concerns expressed by the regional powers, such as Russia and Pakistan, over time. They have all warned on numerous occasions that a threat of imminent danger is eminent not only to their security but also to the security of the entire region through the existence of unchecked militant sanctuaries that are in the Afghan territory. The analytical depth and world visibility to what was once considered one of the components of the geopolitical motives is added by the independent verification of these claims by the Consortium. Nowadays, when various actors reach several sources towards some common conclusions, the alarm is taking an even stronger control over the consciousness of the world actors.

Add all these together, the recent brief issued by the Consortium, the threat by Russia to the UN and the on-going concerns of Pakistan create a congruent picture of the problem of internal security of Afghanistan not lying within the boundaries of this nation. They seep into the neighbourhood, impacting the stability of the regions, destabilizing the counterterrorism structure and endangering decades of international gains. The international panic will not dissipate unless the Afghan government is willing to demonstrate that it is undertaking reasonable and sustained actions against the militant networks that are present on their soil. Instead, the pressure will accumulate, due to the group thinking attitude of believing that the cost of not acting could be much higher than the cost of action.