"US troops in Afghanistan important for survival of interim administration"
on Thursday, December 27 @ 16:16:51 EST

By Erich Marquardt
Editor and Publisher of YellowTimes.ORG

(YellowTimes.ORG) – In the past couple months Afghanistan has been cleansed of the oppressive Taliban regime and international troops have begun to roll into the capital of Kabul to begin a peacekeeping mission; however, although many countries have offered their support in peacekeeping Afghanistan, the United States military is needed in order to provide a constant threat to radical groups threatening the new interim administration led by Hamid Karzai.

With the destruction of the Taliban, it may seem that the country is safe from terrorism and that the goals of the United States have largely been reached.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Many organized militant elements in Afghanistan, some who have received recent aid from the United States, are disillusioned at the peace accords reached in Bonn, Germany.

The Uzbek warlord Abdul Rashid Dostum, freshly armed and financed by the United States, is threatening to boycott the new Kabul government if he does not receive the share of power he demands. Dostum has committed various human rights’ offenses in the past and could very easily become a military threat to the new interim administration.

Hezbi-i-Islami, a predominately Pashtun group now divided into several factions, is also upset at the new interim government. In the past this faction rained rockets into the center of Kabul because of political disagreements, killing scores of civilians.

Hizb-i-Wahdat, a dangerous Hazara faction, feels excluded by the new interim administration. They also may decide to fire mortars into the city center or move on the administration.

Besides the groups and leaders mentioned above, Burhanuddin Rabbani and Pir Syed Ahmed Gilani are also angered over the new interim administration.

These groups and leaders have remained relatively silent because of the massive air and land power of the United States military operating in the country. An attack against the new interim administration or US forces would lead to the destruction of the attacking party.

But once the United States leaves Afghanistan, the situation will be very different and much more volatile.

This explains why the interim leader Hamid Karzai has called for US troops to stay in the country to help retain stability. Mr. Karzai pleaded that his administration needed the presence of US troops roaming the countryside hunting Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar.

Many voices, including those leading the Bush administration, oppose the deployment of peacekeepers, citing the disaster in Somalia that led to the deaths of US servicemen. They believe that Afghan civilians and leaders do not want the presence of international forces in Afghanistan and want to handle the reconstruction on their own.

But these voices inside Afghanistan seem to be only coming from the militant opposition groups.

Mr. Karzai himself has repeatedly called for the deployment of peacekeepers and the presence of the United States military. Just recently Mr. Karzai stated that peacekeepers should stay “as long as is necessary.”

In addition, many reports coming from journalists on the ground say that Afghani civilians are longing for international peacekeepers to patrol their cities. It was not even a decade ago that many of these same factions in power of Afghanistan killed thousands of civilians. Some were caught in gunfire between warring factions and others were the victims of revenge killings.

A strong US presence in the reconstruction of Afghanistan would also send a strong signal to other governments who knowingly overlook militants in their own countries.

Oppressive regimes such as that of Saudi Arabia would realize that the US could very possibly topple their regime and install a new more democratic government friendly to the United States and the rest of the international community.

This signal could force these regimes to become less oppressive and to crack down on militant groups. Failure to do this would mean the end of their regime, and the result would lead to a shift in power, putting a more democratic, international friendly opposition group in control.

This signal truly would be a “War on Terrorism.”

Erich Marquardt encourages your comments:  marquardt@YellowTimes.ORG

YellowTimes.ORG urges its material to be reproduced, broadcasted, or rewritten as long as a link to YellowTimes.ORG is included.