Recent Lessons of History, Anyone?

In response to the recent violence in India, most likely perpetrated by Pakistani terrorist, Robert Kagan argues that an international force should invade the Kashmir/Federally Administered Tribal Area (FATA) to halt the terrorist problems in the region. But this argument reflects a deliberate avoidance of the lessons of the last seven years, specifically the lessons of Afghanistan, but also those from across the international relations scene.

First, the situation in Pakistan is very similar that that faced in Afghanistan. Both are marked by extremely remote, rugged areas, ruled by local tribal lords where the government is able to exert very little influence and terrorist organizations are able to operate almost unhindered. These are the same ails that the international coalition is struggling to diagnose and treat in Afghanistan. What makes Kagan suppose that the same actors would have any more success with what is essentially the same problem, one state to the east?

Second, Kagan foresees that this international force will help the Pakistani government save face. Yes, the Pakistani government's inability to halt the international terrorist organizations operating within their borders and the almost autonomous Afghan border region de-legitimizes President Zandari's control over the state. But, an internationalized response with boots on the ground, welcome or not, would severely undermine Zandari, far worse that the status quo. The presence of foreign forces in these regions would be perceived as an confession of inability to govern. Such an admittance would be far worse than the questions about the current span and power of the government. Increases in the perception that the government is weak and unable to govern effectively would only fuel terrorist and other non-state actors as they believe the government powerless against them.

Finally, it is highly unlikely that the international community would support such a venture, especially if it was spear-headed by the United States. Kagan himself admits that China and Russia, two kingpins on the United Nation's security council, would be unlikely to vote for such an venture. The U.S. sacrificed a significant amount of soft power with it's almost unilateral invasion of Iraq and it's multilateral, but less than successful, operations in Afghanistan. The international community is going to be unwilling, in the foreseeable future, to join the U.S. in the invasion of sovereign nations.

In the last seven years, the United State has learned many hard lessons about national building and the complications therein. We would be wise to study the recent lessons of history before embarking on, or even recommending, another similar venture.