Strike Up “The Internationale”
If you missed it, there’s a kick-ass comparison in the Sept. 7 Washington Post of the anti-U.S. Iraqi resistance and the anti-Soviet Afghan resistance.
Some highlights:
In both Soviet-occupied Afghanistan and American-occupied Iraq, efforts at rebuilding and development became favorite targets of militants. The attacks hurt the Soviets, and are hurting the Americans. Many aid workers are refusing to stay in Iraq, or even to go there in the first place. Oxfam, for instance, is pulling out its people because, said its Iraq program manager, Simon Springett, “the risk level was becoming unacceptable for us.” Even the International Committee for the Red Cross is cutting back.
Another unsettling similarity is the way in which Americans are increasingly being cast in the role of enemy in Iraq. Now that U.S. troops are under frequent attack, reports from Baghdad suggest that jittery soldiers are shooting back more quickly, and innocent Iraqis are sometimes paying the price — not a situation likely to endear the American forces to Iraqis. “You know you’re beginning to lose a guerrilla war when ‘force protection’ becomes the main concern of your military,” said Milt Bearden, who helped organize the massive CIA effort to support the Afghans in their war against the Soviets. “And we’re starting to hear that an awful lot now from top military in Baghdad.”
If the U.N. reduces its operations in Iraq, it becomes easier for the “guerrillas,” whoever they may be, to portray their battle as one against a singular enemy — America. This is precisely what happened to the Soviets in Afghanistan: The Soviet presence, rather than the Afghan government it was supporting, became the central issue of the war, and the Soviets’ departure became the unifying goal of the otherwise fractured opposition. Along the way, the Soviets became the original magnet for traveling, modern-day “holy warriors” out to defend Muslim lands. The U.S. commander in Baghdad, Gen. John Abizaid, recently said that at least 1,000 foreign Muslim fighters have now made their way to Iraq, site of their new jihad.
[…]Retired U.S. Brig. Gen. Theodore Mataxis, an expert in guerrilla war, described how bad things can get for occupying powers in a forward he wrote to the English translation of the Russian army’s review of its Afghan war. “What guerrillas do not need is military victory. Guerrillas need to survive and endure over the years or decades of the conflict,” he wrote. The winning side in such a war prevails “because of higher morale, greater obstinacy, stronger national will, and the determination to survive.”
