Replies

From the very start, every element of government in Afghanistan should have been replaced. Their existing government was a basket case, so any “cultural sensitivity” excuse is nonsense. They need the efficiency of proven systems, not a pretense of continuity.

Almost half of Afghanistan’s border is shared with Pakistan, and Afghanistan cannot be settled until this border is sealed. While the Pakistanis generously offered to seal some of the border at one point, which was rejected by the Afghans, the fact remains that Pakistan acts as Afghanistan’s evil twin.

However, in exchange for sealing that border, because of Afghanistan’s bottom of the barrel economy, the US could have employed every unemployed male in the southern half of the country, for as little as $1B a year. This would effectively remove them from the grasp of the Taliban and the drug gangs. And we could have put them to use rebuilding Afghan infrastructure with labor intensive projects.

These projects could include rebuilding entire towns, preparing land for commercial projects (like road building, which do exist in country), water projects, agricultural improvements, etc. And with each project, a portion of the workers would be put in charge of exploiting the new improvements, like the creation of agricultural co-ops.

Authoritarianism, while objectionable here, would provide Afghanistan with the structure it needed to modernize. For example, all citizens could be provided identity cards with detailed information on them; all children could be removed to safe and secure government public education; and women could be organized into small business cooperatives and micro banks.

Every government worker would be trained from scratch. Sharia would not be an issue, as the secular courts would completely be in charge of the law. Literacy would be required of as many citizens as possible.

In doing things this way, the few rogues in the countryside would denied any support, cut off from Pakistan, easily identified, and otherwise denied the ability to resist.

The eventual goal would be to make Afghanistan so different from Pakistan, that there would be no return to the way things had been.

By being a controlled state for a few years, with serious modernization, there would be an utter rejection of going back to the old ways.

Almost half of Afghanistan’s border is shared with Pakistan, and Afghanistan cannot be settled until this border is sealed.

Part of the problem is that the Pashtuns who live there haven't quite reconciled themselves to the notion that the border there should be where the 19th century British colonial office said it was.

I know that does not really address your point, which is a good one.

From the very start, every element of government in Afghanistan should have been replaced. Their existing government was a basket case, so any “cultural sensitivity” excuse is nonsense.

Umm, it was. The Taliban was the government. Now it's not, and only controls the border region with Pakistan, and makes occasional guerrilla/martyrdom operations outside that area.