President Hamid Karzai has stated his support for signing a military pact with the US that guarantees it bases in the country in return for peace in Afghanistan and ensuring the interests of Afghans.
President Hamid Karzai has stated his support for signing a military pact with the US that guarantees it bases in the country in return for peace in Afghanistan and ensuring the interests of Afghans. There are fears, too, that granting the US requested immunity to foreign forces would compromise Afghan independence.The president brought up the issue of the pending military pact with the US at a meeting with the Ulema Council. He said he had read the draft and has expressed his views.
He feels that any benefit for Afghanistan should be the only yardstick for the continued presence of US Special forces beyond their 2014 withdrawal deadline.
He reiterated that “Pakistan and no other country” could ensure that the US military has a long-term presence in Afghanistan. In his words, “Now I will tell America and other western countries that no force or neighbouring country can guarantee your presence in Afghanistan – except the Afghan nation.”
The US government has been lobbying hard to sign a security agreement with the Afghan government. Both sides are driving a hard bargain.
Sayed Mohammad Ali Rezwani, editor-in-chief of Eqtedar-e-Millie, believes that both sides have a stake in maintaining a US military presence. The Americans want Afghanistan to grant foreign forces immunity from prosecution among other terms.
Rezwani argues, “The fact is that Karzai is strongly interested in signing the agreement. Karzai thinks he has turned a new chapter in Afghanistan’s history. He sees himself as one of the main players in this turning point … among the big leaders in history who are remembered as great men. He calls himself the saviour of Afghanistan.”
The security deal has been delayed because of concerns raised by American strategists and political experts about who would succeed Karzai. Afghanistan is headed for presidential polls in 2014. Karzai will not be allowed to contest a third term under constitutional rules.
Costs of foreign security
Military experts believe the presence of US forces would support and strengthen Afghan security forces. Earlier Afghan experts had thought it would be sufficient to equip and train Afghan security forces. It was used as a condition for the continued presence of US military after the pullout.
General Helaluddin Helal, military analyst, believes “our forces would not be able to respond to the situation. So there is need for guarantees until we become self-sufficient and self-defendant. And the destiny of terrorism becomes clear in the south of Afghanistan.”
Military expert General Atiqullah Amarkhail would like to see the US equip the Afghan army to the level of countries in the region. He fears an unconditional pact with the US guaranteeing a military presence would be disastrous for stability in the region. He warns that Afghan independence must not be compromised and a promise extracted from the US that there will be no interference in our internal matters. According to him, the main precondition to signing should be an agreement by the US to provide military assistance in the event of external or internal threats to Afghan sovereignty.
A US presence will both provide economic and political stability, critical for the growth of industries like mining, and jeopardise economic independence.
Saifuddin Saihoon in the Economics Faculty of Kabul University believes, “Considering the vast natural resources, an American base will be effective in establishing national sovereignty …”. But he warns, “America is trying to make Afghanistan economically dependent through its long-term presence.”
He says it was the lure of Afghanistan’s vast resources that brought the US to the region. Its long-term interests in Afghanistan are to marshal political, military and economic control in Afghanistan.
Untapped wealth
A pact with the US must ensure Afghanistan’s untapped mineral wealth is protected, and used for the benefits of the Afghan people and government. The funding of critical infrastructural projects such as hydropower projects, agricultural development and industry should be written into the agreement.
US military bases have been built on land leased from the government. The money has been deposited in government coffers, explains Dr Sana Nikpai, legal expert. “America is obliged to lease the lands that it establishes its bases on, for three, five or ten years and pay the money to the Afghan government. It should neither expand the base nor misuse the lease.”
There has been no relenting on US demands that foreign soldiers should not be tried in Afghanistan for crimes committed. This has created an uproar in Afghanistan. The president has suggested the decision should be handed over to the nation: a loya jirga should take the final decision.
There are fears that granting immunity to foreign forces would seriously compromise Afghan independence.
Enayatullah Babur Farahmand, MP from Jawzjan says, “The external forces have frequently perpetrated murder of innocent Afghan people but no court has convicted them. By approving the claim for immunity the murder of Afghan people by American soldiers would increase as well.”
Farahmand does not see the condition being sanctioned by elected representatives of the people. “Even if the president accept the request of America, we the representatives of people respect the requests of people and would not agree to judicial immunity of external forces,” he told Killid.
