On Oct. 8, the US finally launched strikes against Afghanistan after nearly a month of diplomatic and military deployment. The next questions are: How will the war be executed? Will the US repeat the failure of the Soviet Union in Afghanistan? What impact will the war have on the global political and economic situation?
In the initial stage, the US military operations have been very similar to the US-led NATO bombings in Yugoslavia, as the US launched its attacks using air power, especially cruise missiles. This has enabled the US to minimize concerns about casualties. Long, extended supply lines and large numbers of overseas military bases are also unnecessary, and the operations are extremely flexible.
The current situation inside and outside Afghanistan is also fundamentally different from that which prevailed when the Soviets invaded the nation in the 1980s. The Soviets' strategic goal was to turn Afghanistan into a communist state. The move significantly threatened the religious and cultural beliefs of the Afghans and was therefore strongly resisted. The US' strategic goal, however, is relatively simple. Its primary goal is to eliminate Osama bin Laden and his terrorist network; removal of the Taliban would only be carried out if it became evident that it was a necessary prerequisite to that primary goal.
Next, the Soviets used regular forces to fight Afghanistan's guerilla troops. In combat, the Soviet troops cruelly oppressed and massacred local residents. They even used chemical weapons and landmines to kill civilians and thereby triggered the growth of a strong resistance movement. The Taliban regime now facing the US, however, is extremely unpopular. Hence, as the specter of war loomed, Afghans chose to swarm out of the country, instead of staying to wage a life-or-death battle. Meanwhile, the US' first priority is necessarily to support Afghanistan's opposition forces, such as the Northern Alliance, and it is unlikely to send troops directly into Afghanistan for military action similar to those of the Soviets.
In the 1980s, Afghanistan's opposition forces enjoyed continuous support from the US, Pakistan, Iran and China, and was backed by the entire Islamic world. This was the main reason why they were able to battle the Soviets for 10 years. Today's Taliban regime, however, does not enjoy such advantages. Not only are the world's leading powers unwilling to confront the US over the Taliban, but they are also isolating it -- ideologically and morally. Most Arab countries have never recognized the Taliban regime. Meanwhile, major anti-US countries, such as Iran and Iraq, have looked coldly from the sidelines at the war this time and have made little response. It is therefore far wide of the mark to interpret the war as a full-scale confrontation between the West and the Islamic world.
The war is unlikely to last for 10 years, as the Soviet-Afghan war did. A reasonable estimate of its length would be between six months and a year. We should therefore not worry too much about its impact on the global political and economic situation.
After the Taliban regime collapses, Afghanistan may follow the pattern that developed in Cambodia and form a complex coalition government consisting of a variety of forces. Although a chaotic political scene may be inevitable, the government will basically resume its normal external relations. As for the success of the coalition government, it lies in resources provided and efforts made by the US, the UN and the Islamic world as well. Its impact on global political and economic situations, however, will be relatively limited.
Bill Chang is deputy director of the DPP's Chinese Affairs Department.
Translated by Eddy Chang
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS