America was killing Taliban by the dozens, we just didn't have the balls to go full scorched earth and purge the country from end to end with brutality and "re-education" that would make Nazis and Soviets blush, which is the only way to completely exterminate the Taliban's backwardness from the region) but this time there's an actual plan on how to re-organize he country, Marshal Zhukov style.
The issue you raise is related to why America went to Afghanisan -
- to hunt down AQ and OBL consequent to the 9/11 event in which case Taliban are secondary. If so then you just spent 20 years bombing everything for no reason.
- to transform Afghanistan from a tribal and medieval society by dragging it into 21st century - meaning nation building project. If so why have you left after 20 years? It would take about 100 years to transform a society. That is time required to let 2-3 generations die out and let natural evolution take place. If so then America and you have taken nation building do please invade Africa, South America etc and 'fix' many countries there as well.
I notice people keep using 'savages' etc for Taliban and wider Afghan society. It;s important to first understand there there is lot of convergence between ethnic groups of Afghanistan and region around them such as Central Asia. So why the 'savages'? The real issue here is not even Islam. From sociological point of view it is patriarchy. This is the real source of the problem.
Tough tribal societies in this part of the world often having warrior instincts are patriarchal. This included Turkic peoples as well as the Iranics. Indeed Iranics were less tribal then Turkics historically. When Islam came along it was melded into these patriarchal, tribal societies.
In 1880s the Russian's came along to this part of the world as did the British. Both drew lines so as to avoid clashing with each other and left the region inbetween their zones to be what is now Afghanistan. This gave the divide which even exists today. The region on the south or what is today Pakistan came under the British rule by about 1850. The Russians had most of Central Asia by 1870s and the zone in between or Afghanistan became the 'buffer' or sort of no man's land.
What followed after 1870s is fascinating not only from political history but also from sociological evolution of the region. One region now was going to be a test lab -
1. Central Asia /modern 'Stans'. Under Russian rule this region went through forced change. Heavy handed tactics involving purges, mass killing, population transfers to Siberia were practiced all the way to Stalin's era. Under Soviets patriarchy was seen as a hurdle in preventing social revolution to a proper socialist society. Thus destruction of patriarchy and Islam was the chosen method to bring change., By undoing patriachy the femal half of society can be cultivated to give birth to a new generation who think differantly from their fathers and forefathers. The Chinese are doing something like this with the Uighurs. The net result of these aggresive Soviet policies was emergence of modern Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan. To demonstrate the result of this forced change all you have to do is look at the same kith/kin living across the Amu Darya border. Tajiks/Uzbeks in Afghanistan and their brothrers/sisters on north side of Amu Darya River. The differance is amazing.
Female, Samarqand, Uzbekistan 1915.
A
veil-burning ceremony in
Andijan on
International Women's Day in 1927
en.wikipedia.org
The British in the south of what became Pakistan adopted a very 'soft' approach. Instead of trying to reform or change society they went in for co-opting the ruling elites of the region. So tribal heads, local Khans, Maliks, landed gentry, royalty would be given British education including sending private schools, Oxford University etc and crateted a class of 'brown sahibs'. In addition they inducted the yeoman class into their civil and military serivice. By doing this they craftly bought a very cost effective handle on native societies by inducting the 10% into their club. That however left 90% mass entirely like they had lived for centuries.
You see the effects of this today in Pakistan. That 10% brown sahibs still control the state. This includes people like Imran Khan ,Bhuttos and the rest of the elite. They live a schizoid life. One foot in the west and one foot in the east. They are forced to have two faces. One face is to placate the mass of the population who still remain conservative the other face is living it good in the West. If you look at the personal lives of all these Khans, Bhuttos etc you will see this duality.
This is our Prime Minister's other face in 1990
The yeomanry that provided the British with military and civil officials today is the middle class and still forms the bulk of the manpower for government/military officials. This group today is about 30% of the country which leaves 50% belonging to the class still fodder for radical Islamic parties with mullahs holding sway.
Then we have Afghanistan which was left as buffer and asides from Kabul where some foreign influence permeatd but rest of the country of mountains/valley remained pretty well as it was. Tribal, patriarcal with mutation of Islam perfectly designed to provide sanction to those practices. Taliban are the military and political manifestation of that. So unless you decide to wipe them out and then re-configure the society which would take at least three generation nothing much will change right now. We will have to wait for evolution to take it's sweet time.
You might wonder why has the 50% tribal/conservative mass not followed the Afghan way. The reasons are -
100 years of British rule and raising of the elite class along with large middle class has now provided a large social anchor which means the state is firmly in hands of this group. Thus despite trouble it has stood solid and it will continue to stand solid particularly as with each year more of the population graduate into trappings of middle class.
The 50% mass still can be easily manipulated by the mullahs and cause trouble but most of the clergy have been bought out by the state. However large scale militarization of this class has been prevented. The various military operations against TTP etc were about wiping the radical armed groups that posed challange.
That said the state is aware that this group has to be reformed or it will be cause of much instabilty. Various policies ranging from using hard force, to education - for instance all madaris now will be registered and recieve money to teach normal subjects which might give the students a chance in a modern economy. Female education and huge social investment in basic female heathcare etc. This of course will take long time.
I hope this explains the underlying dynamic of te canvas of this region and help you understand the underlying reasons informing the events.
