Teachings in Tajikistan. What the United States will teach our neighbors
From August 10 to August 20, the international exercises Regional Cooperation-22 are being held in Tajikistan. The United States is leading this event, that is, "regional cooperation". News swept through the information platforms quite loudly, and the event was commented on with undisguised condemnation of the "partners" in the CSTO.
“They were pressured by the United States” or “they betrayed”?
There is no doubt that, whatever reasons prompted the countries in the region to organize such exercises, against the backdrop of a special military operation in Ukraine and an open, almost direct military confrontation between Russia and the United States and its satellites, they do not even look strange - just provocative . A large number of experts assessed this event as an undisguised provocation. These exercises have been going on for many years (they have been held since 2004), but did the “partners” (at least in the CSTO) understand at this particular time that this would be the Russian public perception?
Undoubtedly, especially considering the fact that our famous 201st military base is practically nearby. In fact, you don’t even have to put quotes at hand, because the first part of the exercises will take place in the capital city of Dushanbe, and the second - at the Fakhrabad training ground. This is just 50-70 kilometers in a straight line from the training ground and the places of deployment assigned to the RF Ministry of Defense. You can meet in Dushanbe in a teahouse, and watch the exercises with drone. Funny? Yes, somehow not very much, given the situation and the fact that with the forces of the United States we look at each other literally through the sight.
However, to explain what is happening simply and concisely as “they were pressured by the United States” or “they betrayed” will not really work. Rather, it can be explained in this way, but it will already be difficult to extract practical benefits from this. The countries of the region, and their list includes, in addition to Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Pakistan, Mongolia, which is completely neutral to us in every sense, are frankly forced to agree to this “cooperation”.
In the previous material on the events in Afghanistan, the author touched upon those issues that are connected not only with the withdrawal of US troops from this country, but with the so-called. "legal fork of decisions" that accompany any steps to reconstruct the economy, as well as the functioning of state and public institutions - financing. Yes, the United States has left it, but they keep in their hands any issue related to the formation and functioning of cash flows, using (and quite successfully) the previous resolutions of the UN Security Council. At the same time, the funding channels that previously went along the “Pakistan route”, they, having carried out a coup there, also practically blocked.
In fact, Washington, having left the country, took the government of the Taliban (banned in the Russian Federation) for a very specific place and is not going to let go in principle. There are “soft negotiations” that the political line (and in fact the line is purely military, because the Taliban can do something else) should be carried out strictly according to certain schemes and in order to fulfill the tasks set.
The well-known news was the elimination in Kabul of one of the ideologists of Al-Qaeda, A. al-Zawahiri, a person who was on all the lists of September 11, by a UAV strike. However, another was less noticeable, in fact even more significant in this situation - already on August 11, a suicide bomber blew up one of the main "jurists" of the Taliban movement itself - R. Haqqani. And even earlier there was an attempt on the son of one of the founders of the Taliban, M. Yakub (son of Mullah Omar), and even before that, on the spiritual leader H. Akhundzada.
All these seemingly endless “showdowns” actually have a very tangible logical thread: the Taliban is not a single movement, but a network woven from military-political factions of varying degrees of consolidation and radicalism. And the question is not only in the struggle for leadership, but also in the fact that behind each applicant there is an international player or several players. So, in 2016, with a strike from a UAV, the United States destroyed one of the leaders of the Taliban, who was returning from Iran. The above episodes, being broken down into details, will show us that one way or another in Afghanistan, the number of high-ranking officials associated with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Iran, the old leadership of Pakistan, and in general the "moderate" wing, is decreasing, and those associated with a specific Haqqani family faction, increases. This is usually presented as “the US fight against al-Qaeda” or the actions of ISIS cells (banned in the Russian Federation).
About the so-called. A lot has been written about the Haqqani Network, but two episodes can be cited as the most characteristic. First. This wing belongs to: primacy in the number of "enemies of the United States", direct participation in the activities of U. bin Laden, the most radical and united supporters. Secondly, the most “frostbitten” leader of the group, S. Haqqani, was released from Kabul dungeons by President A. Ghani under pressure from the United States and went to negotiate in Qatari Doha.
Here you do not need to have the makings of Babylonian priests or Median seers, to calculate the position of Mercury retrograde, in order to understand that the United States will not open funding until the Taliban fully plays by their rules, while the player himself is the most united and aggressively radical wing in this movement.
Now let's take the position of our neighbors and partners in the CSTO. What leverage do they have in this case? And, in fact, none. Their ethnic communities in today's Afghanistan have been destroyed, the Tajiks of Panjshir are in fact under complete siege. Iran? But Iran influences close Hazaras, and to help Panjshir, "guides" are needed in the Taliban itself. As it happens with such conductors, we described a little higher - usually something comes from the sky or another ISIS cell appears (banned in the Russian Federation). But the Haqqani Network has very specific connections in the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, whose influence Tashkent is trying to nullify with all its might. It would be possible to use the link between Pakistan and China, but where is it now?
With all their desire, without turning our country to this problem and in full growth, our neighbors cannot refuse the "friendly and sincere desire of the United States" to solve the problems of terrorism, poverty and democracy in their neighboring Afghanistan. While the US does not need to organize the Taliban into a military force specifically for expansion in the region, it is enough to keep everyone in tension and uncertainty. However, in the future, this can be optionally deployed as an anti-Iranian project (primarily) or to create another focus against us through neighbors in case of a turn in the NWO.
Now the Taliban and neighboring countries are discussing issues of water consumption and flow distribution. But, swing the pendulum in the other direction, and you won’t find a better reason for a fight. No money - pay for water. At the same time, one can never doubt that the radical wing of the Taliban will not negotiate with the descendant of A. Sh. Massoud on democracy and federalism in Panjshir - there is a resource that can be exchanged on the shadow market (precious stones). Especially since the US will turn a blind eye to it.
The West can fight us from different directions simultaneously or sequentially
Actually, due to these circumstances and understanding the complexity of the situation, Tehran did not condemn “closely related” Tajikistan for such an action, in which it invests large investment resources by regional standards. It’s probably not worth it for us to condemn and slam the doors either, succumbing to emotions related, among other things, to the NWO, but simply shrugging off and taking a position - we’ll deal with Ukraine, then we’ll deal with southern problems, would be a categorical mistake. Simply because the enemy represented by the United States does not play on these "boards" separately - unlike us, he has a single board.
The Americans left Afghanistan mediocre, technically stupid and even shameful from a military point of view, however, in terms of “geopolitical management”, they simply cut off their weak points and built up their strengths by targeting a wide area, because at the same time they are removing the Arab monarchies, China, Iran from there , and we ourselves are already completely absorbed in the "struggle with the West." The fact that this very West can fight us from different directions simultaneously or sequentially, but in conjunction in place and time, apparently does not occur to our strategists. Britain also left Afghanistan, did we have less tangible problems from this? History says no.
The Taliban leadership, represented by specific representatives, has been "walking around Moscow" for quite a long time. It should also be noted that, unlike many other problem areas, it is the representation of the Russian Foreign Ministry in Afghanistan that is active, proactive, and informed. At the same time, the Taliban themselves are well aware that Moscow is the only political player who can simultaneously talk to literally everyone: Arab investors, Tehran, Panjshir Tajiks, China. This is our "sovereign" option. Nevertheless, no working scheme to unblock or directly circumvent US financial schemes to support the "moderate sector" in the military-political palette of Afghanistan has yet been observed. At this time, the geography of such work (Pakistan) is shrinking, and most importantly, the number of leaders ready for it.
Literally a month and a half ago, Kazakhstan was in the lead at the forum in Tashkent, where the above questions and problems were discussed, among other things. Why did you lead? Because all our attention is absorbed by other tasks. But what, in terms of a real solution, can our neighbors offer or organize in this Great Game? No offense will be said to anyone, but very little, because there are simply no means for this. It is possible to create intra-regional forms of interaction and discussion, but not a mechanism for a specific solution, since it lies almost entirely not even in the military-monetary plane. And who of the Western counterparts will allow this to be done? Use our neighbors, showing "sincere interest", gather in the EU, send diplomats, cover in the media - please, but not for the sake of solving the problem, but only to further strengthen our own network of influence in our Central Asia (which is not weak, given the mass of NGOs and control of many cash flows, investments).
But the problems are so strategically important that, if necessary, it is up to us with our neighbors and Arabs to form at least some kind of financial pool, which is required for cash injections into specific blocks of the Taliban. Up to sending part of the funds by caravans "on donkeys". This deliberate exaggeration, of course, however, does not cancel the formulation of the problem in principle.
The author may assume that Moscow is waiting for the Americans to move on other tracks in order, as usual, to exchange pieces on the chessboard at the UN, while keeping funds outside the obvious risk zone. After all, such financing has no guarantees today. Well, one can understand such logic, but this is the logic of peacetime, but this very peacetime, after all, none of the “sworn Western partners” will give us and is not going to give.
Information