Should Iraqis look to Afghanistan for an image of their future, or is it the other way round? Peter Willems, in Kabul, writes Last week United States President George W Bush declared Afghanistan a role model for Iraq even as the country sinks further into violence and instability. At a news conference in Washington on 15 June after talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Bush insisted that development in Afghanistan was an indication it had risen "from the ashes of the decades of war and oppression". But many in Afghanistan are convinced their country sets anything but a good example for Iraq. The prospects for future prosperity seemed good after the ousting of the Taliban regime in 2001, but security has been steadily decreasing and numerous factions have been fighting for power in the country. "Our problems are not as big as they are in Iraq. But if we don't do something soon, Afghanistan will be the same as Iraq," said Lutfullah Mashal, special assistant to the minister of interior in Afghanistan. "We are getting closer and closer to chaos." The battle between US forces and the remnants of the Taliban in the south rages on. In the last few months the US government increased its presence from 11,000 to 20,000 troops in an effort to wipe out the remaining Taliban militants and hunt down the mastermind of Al-Qaeda, Osama Bin Laden, along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border. But the Taliban has managed to regroup and team up with Islamic militias and has launched a counter offensive. More than 700 Afghans have been killed in the last 11 months in Taliban hit-and-run operations. In the last few weeks violence has spread to northern provinces which were once peaceful, and dozens of aid workers and civilians have been killed or seriously injured in terrorist attacks, including 11 Chinese railway workers who were killed when their camp was attacked on 9 June. Although the Afghani interim government, headed by President Hamid Karzai, had been able to control the capital, Kabul, there were attacks inside the city in June during which the NATO headquarters came under missile fire. "The central government cannot even control Kabul," said Azizullah Lodin, president of General Administration of Anti-Bribery and Corruption. "If there were no foreign troops in Kabul, you wouldn't be able to walk on the streets tomorrow." Some blame the attacks on the Taliban who may have moved their operations northward. Others place the blame elsewhere. "Extremists, the Taliban and drug dealers all have an interest in destabilising Afghanistan," said Mashal. "Factions and irresponsible armed people have also created a lot of problems, not only for aid workers but for the central government and the international community as well." Opium production has skyrocketed since the end of the Taliban regime. In 2003 over 80,000 hectares of land were used for poppy cultivation; 75 per cent of the opium sold on the international market now comes from Afghanistan. The proceeds of the trade support warring factions ruled by warlords, the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Afghanistan, once an exporter of raw opium, is now involved in the production of heroin. The government has initiated a programme to destroy poppy fields, but between the organised crime cartels and the warlords fighting to maintain a stranglehold on their fiefdoms, fighting the drug business will be more difficult than expected. "What we are concerned about are the complexities that come from the involvement of organised crime activities dealing with heroin," said Alexander Schmidt, crime prevention expert at the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. "It is a much more profitable product and more difficult to deal with." The US has so far failed to develop a plan for becoming involved in the crackdown on the drug market in Afghanistan. In order to provide stability in the country, the Afghan government has started to disarm the mujahedin, the soldiers who fought against the Soviet Union and the Taliban and who are loyal to their warlords. The Disarmament, Demobilisation and Reintegration (DDR) programme aims to collect 40,000 weapons by the end of this month. Until now only 6,000 arms have been collected in a few provinces, and the greatest challenge will be to convince the powerful warlords to persuade their militias to hand over their arms. But according to Lodin, many of the terrorists are probably linked to the warlords, who fear that programmes implemented by the central government may affect their positions of power. These warlords are also considered a threat to the elections scheduled for September this year. Mashal fears the warlords will manage to infiltrate government by intimidating voters. "Representatives from their areas will be their own men who will work for the warlords and work in the interests of the warlords," he said. Many Afghans are beginning to wonder if the US has lost interest in helping their country back on its feet. "The United States promised to rebuild our country, but where are the businesses? Jobs? Security?" asked Abdul- Rahman Tutakhail, a vendor in Kabul. "It did not fulfil its promise to make this a better place." Analysts have accused the Bush administration of using military and financial funds earmarked for Afghanistan to pay for the war in Iraq. In order to rebuild both countries, the US will have to come up with $2.2 billion for Afghanistan and $18.6 billion for Iraq, and a substantial portion of the funding for Afghanistan will go towards military projects and emergency relief and not long-term development. There have been some infrastructural changes since the ousting of the Taliban regime: health care services and education have improved, and a new road has been built between the country's two largest cities, Kabul and Kandahar. But more than 90 per cent of the population is still without running water and electricity and most roads are still in shambles. The Afghan economy is in need of a boost, jobs are scarce and there has been very little foreign investment. Some are concerned that many Afghans in the south have become sympathetic to Taliban resistance. Southern provinces are conservative and the Pashtouns, the ethnic group that was the backbone of the Taliban's leadership, make up the majority of the population. "The Taliban brought us law and order," said Ahmad Ahmadzai in Zabul, a southern region which is currently the scene of heavy fighting between US forces and the Taliban. "Not everybody liked them, but there was security under the Taliban. The United States has brought us nothing but violence." The Afghan government is planning to increase the size of the Afghan National Army (ANA), which has currently only 8,300 troops. According to Umer Daudzai, President Karzai's chief of staff, the government is aiming to double the amount of soldiers this year, while the US intends training 10,000 to 12,000 combatants each year to create an army of 70,000 troops by 2011. Had this been undertaken sooner, says Lodin, the warlords and drug trade would have been kept in check. The NATO-headed International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), which was sanctioned by the UN Security Council in December 2001 and whose aim it is to help the interim government develop security structures in the country, has 6,500 troops stationed in Afghanistan. The Afghan government has asked NATO to send more soldiers, but NATO member states have shown reluctance to comply, placing restrictions on the number of troops deployed there, as well as where they can be stationed and for how long. Uncertainty about security also raises questions ahead of the elections in September. "I don't think Afghanistan is ready for elections," said an Afghan political analyst. "It's probably better to secure a country before holding elections." Bush wants these elections despite lack of security, he says, in order to show positive results ahead of the US presidential elections in November. Violence is expected to increase as the elections get closer, "and it will probably increase even more as the elections draw near," said Schmidt.
