SOCIETY 354 /2010

DIPLOMATIE
USBEKISTAN
The Afghan issue in light of the geopolitical interests of
Uzbekistan
Barack Obama’s decision to send 30,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan clearly confirms
the fact that the Afghan dilemma comes to the fore in world politics. By GULNARA KARIMOVA
Its global status is due not only to the fact
that the resurgent activity of Taliban
and Al-Qaeda once again makes the
country become a zone with high destabilizing
potential, but also the fact that the
Afghan conflict directly affects the vital
interests of virtually all major global centers
of power.
This in turn creates a fairly unique situation
where often divergent interests of leading
global and regional factors are beginning
to converge at a common point – the
need for joint action to accelerate the blokkade
of unwanted developments in Afghanistan
and work out new measures of stabilization
and recovery of this country.
In the expert community it has become
a kind of axiomatic assertion that Afghanistan
and Central Asia represent a rivalry
space between the United States in conjunction
with NATO, Russia and China, as
well as regional-level players – Iran, Pakistan,
India. It is difficult to deny that each
of them has its own range of interests. However,
at the same time the strengthening
position of those who believe that the
geopolitical rivalry in the classical notion
as a “Great Game” in contemporary conditions
is counterproductive, because its outcome
can be a loss for all parties involved.
From the view of Eurasian geopolitics in
its traditional understanding of Hartland,
the current situation around Afghanistan
seems to be very unique. If the traditional
view of competition provides at least two
key states involved in control of the Heartland,
then at the present time all the key
players are faced with a force that opposes
all at the same time and has no distinct local
structure. That force acts as a “Network
organism”, consisting of numerous terrorist
and religious groups and movements
united around the Al-Qaeda, the Taliban,
Hizb-i Islami, the Islamic Movement of
Turkestan, and many other groups.
If the network organism copes to establish
control over Afghanistan, then the
spread of its influence in the neighboring
regions can be more probable. The security
and stability of many countries will be
jeopardized.
GULNARA KARIMOVA
Uzbekistan already faced a similar course
of events, when the Taliban was taking
a control over the northern regions of Afghanistan
provoked the invasion of Islamists
in 1999-2000.
It is possible that the return of the Islamists
will threaten China, which has problems
in the western territories inhabited
by Muslims. Furthermore, the increase of
activity of Islamists in the North Caucasian
regions of Russia is quite predictable, as
they will receive a significant inflow of foreign
manpower, material and militarytechnical
assistance. Pakistan will face a direct
threat to its stability, where entire
neighborhoods, such as South Waziristan,
have already turned into a base area for
major groups “Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan”,
as well as India, with its troubled Kashmir.
Iran, traditionally having complicated relationship
with the Taliban, who in 1999
murdered several Iranian diplomats in Mazar-e
Sharif, could not avoid problems either.
This issue put the region under the
threat of full-scale conflict between Tehran
and the Taliban.
As for the U.S. and Europe, this problem
once again could outline real prospects of
clashes with acts of terrorism against civilians
and civilian infrastructure. And now
if the West has the ability to deter terrorist
groups due to being in Afghanistan, the
withdrawal from that country would limit
its ability to prevent the transformation of
Afghan territory to the center of planning
and execution of terrorist operations. Here
it is necessary to point out the probability
of further growth of the drug trafficking,
which has already covered many regions of
the world.
Based on the pragmatic thoughts, only
the possibility of such threats should push
all concerned parties to full scale cooperation.
In principle, we have recently observed
positive movement in this direction, as
evidenced by the fairly rapid agreement on
the opening of the Northern Supply Route
of non-military goods for the NATO group
in Afghanistan, through Central Asia (primarily
Uzbekistan).
Meanwhile, the agreement on transit of
cargo may ideally be the starting point also
for kick-off of the closer consideration
process by all concerned parties of prospects
for solving the Afghan problem and
rehabilitation of the country.
Henry Kissinger in his article “Deployments
and Diplomacy” points out to the timeliness
of establishing such a dialogue
(1). However, American expert is still somewhat
pessimistic about the willingness
of the regional countries to take on this dialogue.
According to him “each of mentioned
powers (China, Russia, Iran, India, and
Pakistan) has considerable potential to defend
its interests. Nevertheless all of them
to some degree prefer to take on the Afghan
conflict bystander”.
What is the reason for such passivity?
Judging by the ideas reflected in the article,
a restraining influence, of course, has
logic of “Great Game”. Kissinger, in principle,
admits its existence, pointing out that
in the relations between the countries
62 | SOCIETY 2_10