Krigets logik

Det finns något obehagligt i att se hur krigets logik tar makten, också i den svenska debatten. En ung svensk man dödas i Afghanistan och genast ställer de flesta upp för mer av krig.

Sverige hade klarat sig nästan 200 år utan krig och man hade kunnat hoppas att de gamla instinkterna var bearbetade. Men icke. Här ska krigas!

Från Sverige har man ibland moraliserat över att vapen kom till använding på Balkan, exempelvis. Som om vi skulle vara bättre.

Det är faktiskt relevant att relatera det som händer i Afghanistan till den svenska debatten. Vi borde ha en viss distans. Det finns ju en geografisk, historisk och kulturell distans.

Av Danmark kan vi lära att det som händer i Afghanistan är svårt att lösa med mer av militärt våld. Efter att ha förlorat ett 20-tal soldater överger Danmark en dal och koncentrerar sig i stället på att försvara en stad.

Det är ju inte så att den svenska instsen är det som Afghanistan står och faller med. Faller gör det ju under alla omständigheter.

I och med att Sverige deltar i FN-mandatet i Afghanistan står vi inför ett ständigt val: fortsätta eller avsluta de militära operationerna. I det valet har den militära logiken ett starkt övertag. Ändå är det svårt att hävda att det militära alternativet är bättre än att snabbstoppa.

Vad kan vi lära av konflikten så här långt? När Talibanerna hade jagats bort från hvudstaden Kabul trodde många inklusive den amerikanska statsledningen att slaget var vunnit. USA riktade sitt militära intresse mot Irak.

Men talibanerna kom tillbaka, och de har bitit sig fast. De behärskar stora områden nattetid, sägs det. På dagarna tar man vad man får från Nato-trupperna.

Om den militära logiken har sina brister, måste man också hävda att Talibanernas logik har sina brister. Om Talibanerna accepterade flickskolor skulle de kunna avsluta den väpnade verksamheten omedelbart. FN och Nato vill inget hellre än att lämna Afghanistan till Afghanerna. Problemet är säkerheten och kvinnornas rättigheter.

Krig är sannolikt en könsrollsförstärkande verksamhet, även om kvinnor och barn är de som drabbas värst. Men om det internationella samfundets faktiska uppgift i Afghanistan är att stimulera till en förutsättningslös debatt om kvinnors möjligheter är nog krig något av en omväg eller snarare återvändsgränd.

The Afghanistan solution

There is no military solution for Afghanistan. The only solution is on mind level.

The present mind set for Afghanistan is not good. How will the minds involved change?

In a practical situation like this, it is matter of minds and paradigms.

The basic model for the workings of a mind is that new information is related to old information and old experiences in the light of ambitions and intentions for the future.

The present situation is very messy. New information is very contradictory. On one side there is information from the outside world of peace and progress. On the other side it is a complex information from inside Afghanistan about violence, corruption, drug money and different religious ideas and also attempts to create a democratic, modern society with equal rights.

This mess is related to old knowledge and experiences, which are also very messy. There is a history of disrupted education, disrupted national structures, desperate religious fighting and very contradictory measures done now and then by foreign powers from Soviet to USA, from Pakistan to UN.

All this is related to an ideal about the future of prosperity and power, expressed in a way that fits history, family and the local community.

So the situation is impossible. It is much worse than it was for Germany and Japan after world war two. The countries were devastated, but they had a tradition of understanding and working that could be used effectively more or less immediately.

The basis for Afghanistan would be the same as for all other nations, a paradigm about the power structures. Within such a paradigm, the new society could develop.

These days it is a fight about the paradigm with weapons and suicide attacks, but the main factor is the understanding. If the democratic alternative is understood and anchored in the minds of the population, the violence becomes just hostile and without lasting effect.

So Afghanistan needs a new story, a story about how the activities of the many citizens is structured in a way that makes the foreign troops obsolete and where religion is integrated in a way that gives freedom also to women.

Projection 2

Violence and fighting is often about projections rather than realities. Vietnam and Afghanistan are two examples.
The Vietnam war was an effect of the projection of fear. The socialist North Vietnam was feared to defeat South Vietnam and start a domino process making the other countries in the region communist dictatorships.
The war was long, intense and meaningless. After the war, Vietnam has turned into an Asian liberal economy.
The situation in Afghanistan is much the same as it was in Vietnam. So there is hope.
The present war is caused by a projection of fear. It is a mirage, with many casualties. The real problem is to find a social order in Afghanistan and the whole region including Pakistan.
A war is likely to create new tensions, distrust and aversion between families and regions in Afghanistan.
At the same time, there is a profound will to have peace and order after decades of conflict.
The primary aim of any foreign "friendly" military campaign is to be able to leave the country. In Vietnam, the last foreign troops left rather hastily. In Afghanistan the withdrawal could be planned and conducted in a more systematic way.

Tensionless enjoyment 2

To defuse tension does not mean to accept the unacceptable, but to deal with reality in a rational way. Difficult and drastic conflicts seem to call for intense and drastic action. But it is the other way around. Cool analysis is in particular need in difficult and drastic situations.
One difficulty is that some minds only accept physical arguments. Hitler is the great example. He ignored international justice and claimed he had rights over the territories occupied by German forces.
The tensions caused by this were immense, and impossible to defend in the long run. The normal, good state is as tensionless as possible.
The present conflict in Afghanistan is difficult to solve, as the will to reach a tensionless state is so alien for many inhabitants. The problem is not military or even social but on mind level. Military action might make the problem more difficult.

Afghanistan

What is the difference between Afghanistan and most other nations in the world? Why this war in Afghanistan?
It has taken longer time to create peace in Afghanistan than in Iraq.
One reason is that focus has been elsewhere, not on Afghanistan. That would have been acceptable if the solution for Afghanistan had been obvious. But the situation is the opposite, Afghanistan remains an unresolved enigma.
So what is needed is more of analysis, not more of guns and bombs.
The basic need for Afghanistan is respect. That is what we have in all peaceful nations. To impose an alien tradition with weapons is the opposite of respect.
But without NATO soldiers in Afghanistan, the militant Islamists will use their weapons to get power.
In order to overshadow this, more of respect is needed.