Thread: alternate events in Afganistan

He would have been killed in 2002.

Originally Posted by wellman

How do you think the war in Afganistan would be going if Ahmad Shah Massoud had not been killed in 2001? Not sure if this had been covered yet so thought I would ask.

Would reliance on one particlar warlord have made that much of a difference?

Certainly Karzai has had significant impact on the state of Afghanistan and it's safe to assume Massoud would have had just as great, in fact far greater impact, given his obviously superior intelligence.

Massoud surviving and aligning with NATO might have produced a dramatically different outcome for Karzai's ascendance. Massoud, however, was unlikely ever to generate reconciliation with the Pashtuns. OTOH, it's easily argued that Karzai has largely failed to do the same.

I do believe Massoud to be the more astute warfighter. Compared to Karzai that's not saying much, if also not a disparagement. How Massoud would have thrived in the post-2001/2002 Afghan political milieu would be speculative. I don't believe we can draw effective conclusions going forward from that point based upon his past but he'd hardly be widely perceived as a unifying figure.

Massoud was well educated, moderate in comparison to his peers and came from a military family. I don't think he needed to unify Afghanistan but simply control it. Put him and Karzai, a failure as a 'resistance fighter' together, and I'd point to Massoud every time

And the again, he would get killed. Again.

Originally Posted by Doktor

And the again, he would get killed. Again.

If it was that easy, Karzai would be long gone.