So Who Exactly are We Fighting in Af-Pak?

by: Brandon Friedman

Wed Feb 25, 2009 at 20:37:59 PM EST

Two years into the Iraq war, moderately well read Westerners already knew that the insurgency there wasn't monolithic. Honest reporting repeatedly made clear that Al Qaeda, Sunni militant groups of various varieties and Sadrists didn't see eye to eye and often worked at cross purposes even while all were hostile to America and its allies.

Yet after seven years in Afghanistan, the same cannot be said about Western knowledge of militants in the region. There's a big, amorphous mass called "The Taliban" which is in cahoots with Al Qaeda - and that's about as fine grained as it usually gets.

That was sufficient back in 2001. The American-led coalition invaded to engage Osama bin Laden's group and the Taliban's organized fighters and on the battlefield itself Afghans quickly sorted into those who were either Al Qaeda or Taliban, or those who were against them.

But it doesn't cover the current complex situation at all well, which means the West's voters are at a disadvantage when it comes to understanding - and approving or disapproving - their leaders' plans.

For some reason--and maybe it's because I spent significantly more time living and working in Iraq--but even after being in Afghanistan and Pakistan, reading books about them, etc., I've never quite gotten a firm handle on who the fuck is who there.  I feel ignorant saying that, but the fact is, it's a much more fractured and broken place than Iraq, and it's much more difficult for the average Westerner to grasp, I think.  But in Steve's piece, he does a great job in trying to sort it all out.  

And if we're ever to have any modicum of success in Afghanistan at all, it's going to take a lot more people who can do that.

(And in case you wondering, yes, Steve's piece includes a quote from me with a Star Wars reference.)

UPDATE: Al Jazeera English aired this segment Tuesday on the same topic: