The United States cannot win in Afghanistan while ignoring Central Asia.
On
May 26, unknown assailants attacked a border post in Uzbekistan's
volatile Fergana Valley. Less than 24 hours later, a suicide bomber
blew himself up in the nearby city of Andijan, killing a policeman.
Both attacks were claimed by a shadowy group of Islamist militants with
ties to the Taliban and al Qaeda.
Although post-Soviet Central
Asia has seen little terrorism in recent years, the attacks are a
reminder that the conflicts underway in Afghanistan and Pakistan have a
regional dimension -- and that the stepped-up U.S. involvement in the
region carries the risk that instability will spread to other
countries. While the fight against Islamist extremism may already seem
dauntingly wide-ranging and complex, the Obama administration's
thinking is not complicated enough. It's time to stop ignoring the
Central Asian dimension of this conflict.
The U.S. presence in
the region has already begun to expand. In the face of mounting
instability in Pakistan, the U.S. military has increasingly turned to
post-Soviet Central Asia as an alternative route for shipping supplies
to Afghanistan. Kyrgyzstan is currently Washington's major transit
point, but, under pressure from Moscow, the Kyrgyz government has
ordered U.S. troops to abandon their air base at Manas by August. The
Kyrgyz might still experience a change of heart, but the United States
has recently reached out to Uzbekistan as a possible alternative.
The
most religiously conservative region of Central Asia, the Fergana
Valley (a region that, thanks to Stalinist gerrymandering, encompasses
parts of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan as well as Uzbekistan) has long been
a center of opposition to the repressive regime of Uzbek President
Islam Karimov. Although most opposition is peaceful, the valley has
nurtured militants in the past, notably the Islamic Movement of
Uzbekistan (IMU), which conducted a series of large-scale attacks
against the government in the late 1990s. In the ensuing crackdown, IMU
sympathizers fled to neighboring states. Several went to Tajikistan,
where they were protected by the Tajik authorities and Russian security
personnel as a means of exerting leverage against Karimov.
Others
ended up in Afghanistan, where they forged close ties with both the
Taliban and al Qaeda before their ranks were decimated by U.S. bombing
during the invasion of Afghanistan. The survivors fled once again, many
to Pakistan's volatile tribal regions, where they were sheltered by the
Pakistani Taliban. These Uzbek refugees have played a central role in
the recent unrest engulfing Swat and neighboring regions of Pakistan.
Now there is evidence that Islamabad's offensive is forcing the Uzbeks
back into Central Asia. Analysts in the region fear that the recent
attacks in the Fergana Valley are the work of fighters fleeing Pakistan.
The
militants' displacement from Pakistan would be a boon to Islamabad's
effort to assert its sovereignty over the entirety of its territory. At
the same time, it risks opening a dangerous new phase in the war,
especially as Central Asian governments distrust one another and are
ill-prepared to deal with an influx of battle-hardened Islamist
militants. For the United States, the decision to increase troop levels
in Afghanistan makes the Central Asian supply route increasingly vital
and increases the risk that the war effort could be hamstrung by the
spread of instability.
U.S. President Barack Obama is right that
the conflict in Afghanistan cannot be won without addressing the
problems of Pakistan. However, his "Af-Pak" strategy is incomplete. It
requires a fuller appreciation of how the conflict's tentacles reach
into post-Soviet Central Asia and a strategy for checking the spread of
Taliban-style militancy to Uzbekistan and its neighbors.
Washington
is shipping some supplies through Russia, but cannot risk complete
dependence on Moscow for transit to Afghanistan. For now, the
administration has little choice but to rely on Central Asia, but it
must do more to help the region address its own problems with
extremism. Rather than just forging military alliances, Washington
needs to engage more deeply to address the social problems that feed
militancy, especially in the Fergana Valley. Unemployment and lack of
opportunity are the biggest sources of frustration.
In addition
to military facilities, the United States should provide money for
schools and job training. To the extent possible, it should also
cooperate with regional governments to improve the investment climate
and encourage foreign companies to move into the region. It should also
work with the governments of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan to
resolve their border disputes in the Fergana Valley and address the
mistrust that prevents them from adopting a united front against the
militants.
The Uzbek militants' apparent flight from Pakistan
represents progress in one phase of the struggle against extremism. To
succeed in the next phase, the United States needs a regional strategy
that recognizes how Central Asia is inextricably linked to the problems
of "Af-Pak."
Jeffrey Mankoff is associate director of
International Security Studies at Yale University and adjunct fellow
for Russia studies at the Council on Foreign Relations.
FOREIGN POLICY welcomes letters to the editor. Readers should address their comments to Letters@ForeignPolicy.com.