Political Fractures and Geographic Realities in Afghanistan Teaser: Afghan authorities and the United States are both

facing the challenges posed by Afghanistan's geography and fractured political landscape. Afghanistan will hold a runoff election o!. " after the country's #ndependent $lection %o&&ission deter&ined that Afghan President 'a&id (ar)ai got fewer than the re*uired +, percent of the !ote in the Aug. -, election. which was plagued by fraud. Under hea!y pressure fro& the United States and $uropean allies. (ar)ai publicly agreed to the runoff between hi&self and his &ain ri!al. for&er Afghan Foreign /inister Abdullah Abdullah. 0ith 1ust a little &ore than two wee2s before the runoff. howe!er. it re&ains unclear what the United States. United ations or anyone else can do to ensure that this election is &ore free and fair than the last. The first election was an enor&ous logistical challenge. and a runoff on short notice is li2ely to be 1ust as challenging. if not &ore so. #f the runoff is an atte&pt to restore credibility in (abul. the chances of that are not loo2ing good. /any Afghans are already highly disillusioned by the widespread fraud that too2 place in the first election 3the United ations esti&ates that one in three !otes for (ar)ai were fraudulent4. %on!incing Afghans to co&e out and !ote en &asse when the harsh winter is approaching and when the Taliban are lying in wait to inti&idate !oters through attac2s will not be easy. The turnout for the Aug. -, election was also &uch lower than pre!iously esti&ated. According to the #ndependent $lection %o&&ission. the turnout was about 56 percent 77 &uch lower than the 8,7", percent widely touted at the ti&e of the election. #t appears unli2ely that Afghanistan will achie!e e!en a 56 percent turnout this ne9t ti&e around. The results of the runoff are unli2ely to &atter &uch in the end. The a!erage Afghan will be far less concerned about who beco&es president than about whether the tribal leaders or elected officials 77 whoe!er they &ay be 77 can actually deli!er on pro&ises to pro!ide security. go!ernance and econo&ic welfare. Any go!ern&ent cobbled together in (abul will be hea!ily influenced by warlords. se!erely fractured along ethno7sectarian lines and inherently corrupt. A change in faces si&ply will not alter this. :ut Afghanistan's election dispute is also sy&pto&atic of a broader geographic proble&: Afghanistan is a &ountainous 2not sliced up by a slew of narrow !alleys and surrounded by wide swath of arid land and an e!en wider ring of desert and &ore forbidding &ountains. The first ring 3the arid land4 is not capable of supporting a large population in any particular spot. so any force that has so&e creati!ity can sweep around the &ountain 2not relati!ely easily. #n contrast. the &ountainous region is perfect for sustaining large nu&bers of dissidents and rebels. and because it is in the &iddle of the country it is ne9t

to i&possible for Afghanistan to consolidate into a coherent. functional country. #n both the So!iet and A&erican in!asion e9periences. the initial ;con*uering; of Afghanistan too2 &ere wee2s. The occupation bled on for years. :ut it is the second ring that is the real 2iss of death 77 it separates Afghanistan fro& the rest of the world. li&iting its contact with any &ilitary force that could 3theoretically at least4 use its superior resources and nu&bers to i&pose stability on the territory. The botto& line is that Afghanistan is. rather than a coherent country. a buffer territory in the heart of Asia surrounded by &ore buffer territory. which &a2es it e9traordinarily difficult to pacify in a &eaningful way. /eanwhile. the Afghan election struggle has e9posed the battle lines in 0ashington o!er the United States' ne9t steps in the war in Afghanistan. As discussed in this wee2's Geopolitical Weekly http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20091019_u_s_challenge_afghanistan. there are a nu&ber of funda&ental inconsistencies in top U.S. co&&ander in Afghanistan Gen. Stanley /c%hrystal's counterinsurgency strategy that cannot be ignored. So&e who are in the thic2 of this debate. such as 0hite 'ouse %hief of Staff Rah& $&&anuel. can see the ris2 in attaching this U.S. ad&inistration to a war that has sli& chances of success. $&anuel said <ct. =6 that the United States &ust as2 itself whether a credible Afghan go!ern&ent to help pro!ide security and go!ern&ent will e!en e&erge if the United States 77 with &ore troops and resources 77 &anages to &a2e sufficient progress against the Taliban. #n other words. e!en if the United States &a2es the in!est&ent now. will the Afghans be able to sustain those potential gains> <n the other side of the debate. U.S. principals 77 li2e U.S. ?efense Secretary Robert Gates. who appears to ha!e recently aligned hi&self &ore closely with the /c%hrystal ca&p 77 are leaning toward the idea that it &ight be &ore politically e9pedient for U.S. President :arac2 <ba&a to appro!e /c%hrystal's troop re*uest now and at least de&onstrate that the ad&inistration ga!e the strategy a chance before &a2ing the 3li2ely ine!itable4 decision to draw down. ?eparting fro& $&anuel's line. Gates said that the United States would wor2 with whate!er Afghan go!ern&ent e&erges and essentially dis&issed the idea that the Afghan election dispute would stall U.S. counterinsurgency efforts in the country. The debate is ongoing 3and you can bet that the Taliban is listening closely4. :ut the politicians ca&paigning for a seat in (abul and officials drafting &ilitary plans in U.S. %entral %o&&and head*uarters &ust both face an inescapable geographic fate in Afghanistan.