On doit signaler l’analyse abondante et tr\u00e8s fournie de l’analyste ind\u00e9pendant Josh Mull, sur Huffington.Post<\/em> le 18 juin 2010<\/a>, sur ce que Mull lui-m\u00eame identifie comme la d\u00e9sint\u00e9gration de la guerre en Afghanistan, avec sa pr\u00e9vision que le Congr\u00e8s ne votera peut-\u00eatre pas les cr\u00e9dits de la guerre, que les alli\u00e9s des USA commencent \u00e0 se d\u00e9bander, que la strat\u00e9gie McChrystal est un \u00e9chec Egalement, avec des pr\u00e9cisions sur Karza\u00ef qui, selon Mull, n’est pas en train de n\u00e9gocier avec les talibans mais a d’ores et d\u00e9j\u00e0 sign\u00e9 un accord avec eux, avec le soutien du Pakistan et pr\u00e9pare d’ores et d\u00e9j\u00e0 l’apr\u00e8s-guerre, apr\u00e8s le d\u00e9part des forces de l’OTAN.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00abThe war in Afghanistan is disintegrating before our very eyes. Our counterinsurgency strategy is broken, and the Pentagon knows it. The so-called emergency funding requested months ago by the Obama administration now seems destined to die a slow, bureaucratic death in congress due to overwhelming pressure by citizens. Our allies in NATO have either reached their peak of military involvement, as with the UK, or have already begun to dismantle their troop presence, as with Canada and so many others. Other countries in the region are already vying for power after the US leaves, even as the Pentagon insists its July 2011 withdrawal date will only be the beginning of a process.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbBut what about Afghanistan itself? What about President Hamid Karzai, our ally and head of the Host Nation\u00a0\u00bb government? The theory put forward by the pundit class is usually some variation of the \u00ab\u00a0bloodbath\u00a0\u00bb theme. That is, our allies in Kabul like Karzai would be overrun and annihilated by the Taliban. This appears to be more media myth-making, however, as we see from Karzai’s political maneuvering that not only is he threatening to join the Taliban, but he may have already done just that.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tApr\u00e8s un long d\u00e9veloppement sur la complexit\u00e9 des situations int\u00e9rieures, Mull conclut sur les perspectives qu’il juge d\u00e9sormais irr\u00e9versibles, sinon d\u00e9j\u00e0 en marche : \u00abThat is what will become of Afghanistan when then US withdrawal is over: A Taliban-Karzai coalition government, and a client state for Pakistan.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbIt’s worth noting, however, that this is not a reasoning for more war in Afghanistan. This maneuvering is happening now, in the middle of a massive US escalation. Our military involvement does nothing but exacerbate these effects on Afghanistan. Our violent war against the Taliban legitimizes them as freedom fighters. Our support of the crooked Karzai regime gives him credibility to run a sovereign state, as well as assuming all of the economic responsibilities that entails. And our support for Pakistan’s military dictatorship, at the expense of their democratically elected civilian government, enables the Pakistani national security strategy of perpetual war against India, whether through terrorism, trade, or conventional means.<\/em> []<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbAs domestic pressure finally chokes off support for the war in Washington, it’s helpful to keep a close eye on these machinations by Karzai and the Taliban. Supporters of the war in the US will make claims about an impending bloodbath, but clearly Karzai’s regime will survive our absence. War supporters will also claim that these problems which were created by our war can only be fixed by…more war. It’s simply not true<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n