A press report points out the US and its Nato allies have shifted their focus from Afghanistan to the so-called Islamic State. Nato ministers recently met in Brussels to discuss their strategy for 2015, ignoring Afghanistan altogether. And in his request for congressional authorisation for the use of military force against IS, Obama exhibited no enthusiasm to finish what his country started 13 years ago, saying the US had ended its combat mission in Afghanistan and now planned to maintain "a dramatically smaller force" there. This "smaller force" too is to leave by the end of 2016, when Obama completes his term in office allowing him to claim credit before the war-weary American people for finishing the country's longest war. By that time, however, the US would be more deeply involved in a different kind of war - resulting from US' own 2003 invasion and occupation of Iraq. As Obama averred, "we are leading over 60 partners in a global campaign to degrade and ultimately defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) in Iraq and Syria."
Given the magnitude and nature of the threat the IS poses to the people in the Middle East and beyond, US' focus on it is understandable. That though must not come at the cost of peace and stability in Afghanistan. Obama told Congress that the goal of the new strategy is to strengthen "a sovereign and stable partner in Afghanistan" capable of defending itself instead of depending on US-Nato ground forces. The Afghan National Army is still a long way away from achieving that capability while the Taliban remain strong. They have been waiting for the Nato combat troops' withdrawal and the harsh winter months to end, to launch a major offensive in spring. The Afghan Army's weakness, of course, is not lost on Washington, which raises serious concerns about things to come. American officials have repeatedly said that they see a big role for India in Afghanistan. If that is a hint about who might fill in some of the vacuum, that would be a recipe for a disastrous proxy war.
No neighbour of Afghanistan has been affected as badly by the war in Afghanistan as Pakistan. Blowback from it caused a raging insurgency and also brought in millions of Afghan refugees. It is in this country's own interest therefore to see a strong and stable government in Kabul. True, there has been mistrust between the two governments in the past, but relations have improved significantly during the recent months, especially after the launching of an indiscriminate military operation in North Waziristan and political change in Kabul. Because of its geographical location and a shared ethno-cultural affinity Pakistan has a lot to contribute towards transition-phase stability in Afghanistan. Any unsavoury Indian involvement in the situation can easily mar peace prospects, pushing the country again into an endless civil war. Unlike the way it finished the last war - when it simply walked away - the US should stay engaged until the Taliban are pacified while the Kabul-Islamabad do whatever is needed to return that war-devastated nation to normality through an Afghan-led and Afghan-owned peace process.