Can Bulgaria Really Fight Its Own War in Afghanistan?

A crucial recent announcement of Bulgarian Defense Minister Anyu Angelov went largely unnoticed by the Bulgarian media and society even though it made clear two critical points: first, the war in Afghanistan is increasingly becoming Bulgaria's war (in many ways), and, second, it is largely unclear if Bulgaria will be up to the task to fight this war.

The Defense Minister's announcement was that Bulgaria will start training its first ever combat battalion to be sent in Afghanistan. The 700-strong unit will be trained until 2012, and may then be sent to Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led ISAF troops “if there is the respective political decision.”

This announcement is a notable shift of Bulgarian policies with respect to military missions abroad. Bulgaria has had troops in Iraq as part of Bush Administration's “Coalition of the Willing”, for example, in Kosovo, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and a number of other hot spots under international – UN, NATO or EU – mandate – but those were always peacekeepers patrolling or guarding important objects and routes. They were never meant to go out and fight.

The some 530 ISAF Bulgarian troops and medical staff stationed in Kabul, Kandahar, and Herat at present (scheduled to become 600 by 2011) are doing precisely that – guarding airport perimeters.

If the sending of Bulgarian soldiers into battle in Afghanistan materializes – and there are all reasons to believe that it will – this will be the first time Bulgarian troops will be fighting outside their region since 1945 when the truce found the forward Bulgarian forces deployed on Austrian soil aiding the anti-Nazi advance of the Soviet Army; this will be the first time Bulgarian soldiers will go into battle on Asian soil since the Middle Ages; and the first time they will fight in Central Asia since before founding of the Danubian Bulgarian state in the 7th century, going back to the time when the Ancient Bulgarians or Bulgars were still a nomadic horse people warring through the Eurasian steppe.

Angelov's announcement – which interestingly coincided with the pulling out of the Dutch contingent from Afghanistan – has really signaled a departure from the present situation of using Bulgarian troops only as peacekeepers. What is more, however, it has clearly indicated that the war in Afghanistan has clearly become Bulgaria's war in the sense that even such a nation of relatively negligible international proportions has a high stake in the success or failure of the NATO-led coalition against the Taliban.

For a small Eastern European nation whose people are by now used to thinking that their country is in a state of constant crisis, and that they are poor and cheated, and need to be helped by the good people of the West, this situation practically amounts to a revolutionary paradigm shift. But the various forces of globalization are knocking on everybody's door.

For one thing, Bulgaria is literally obliged to contribute accordingly to the US-led war effort in Afghanistan because of its alliance with the United States.

This doctrine has been clear for quite a while – some dirtbag nation – take Bulgaria as an example – is 100% dependent on the United States for its national security (read: territorial integrity, existence, etc). What it does in return is contribute troops to the war efforts of the global hyperpower in order legitimize them internationally.

One could be tempted to say that such a nation would be also relieving some of the burden of these efforts but in the case of Bulgaria, with the capacities of its armed forces and state administration it is rather doubtful whether it is a military and operational asset or a liability – despite what senior US officials would have us believe.

So if Bulgaria is indeed benefiting from the US guarantee for its security and existence, it is only fair that it should provide something in return (even though “fair” is a very flexible term when it comes to (international) politics). If it presents itself as a staunch US ally, it is only fair that it should share the burden. One way to do that could be to provide money but that is clearly not within Bulgaria's opportunities so apparently it has come down to providing combat troops.

The second major point here goes far beyond paying back to the US for their protection. It has to do with the potential effects that an unstable Afghanistan or an Afghanistan succumbing back to Taliban rule would have for a country such as Bulgaria.

Afghanistan is actually not that far away geographically, and if one takes a cursory look at the interpretations of some leading American geopolitical thinkers – both Bulgaria – a EU-member state with all the trappings of a Western-style democracy and a consumer, capitalist society – and Afghanistan – a formerly failed state-turned-client-of-a Western coalition - fall within the so called “Global Balkans”, the 21-century arch of instability in Eurasia.

Much of the drugs trafficked through Bulgaria come from Afghanistan as it is, fueling the tentacles of Bulgarian organized crime. A boost of that inflow of narcotics from Afghanistan can only serve to better the situation of the Bulgarian mafia.

Furthermore, Afghanistan's status has a profound impact on Central Asia, an energy rich region to which Bulgaria and Europe are looking forward to as the energy source of the future, an area to promote democracy and economic development, and possibly the new Silk Road for trade with China.

But drugs – and the peril for the stability of the entire Central Asia are probably the lesser evil. The big problem would, of course, be the rise of radical Islamist groups that is bound to happen if the NATO-led coalition fails in Afghanistan. Such a scenario will likely open a Pandora's box for many regions including the Balkans.

So, clearly, despite the fact that the Bulgarian society has very little appreciation of this fact, the situation in Afghanistan is extremely important for Bulgaria's future of a (hopefully) peaceful, stable, and wealthy democracy. It is probably as important as the situation in Kosovo, and even more important than the situation in Bosnia.

The big question is – does Bulgaria have the means and the determination to fight that kind of war?

Both of these points would cast serious doubts on the Bulgarian war effort. Sure, US and NATO officials keep praising Bulgaria for providing peacekeepers, doctors, and instructors for Afghanistan and for its security forces, and that counts for something. But at the end of the day, what will happen when Bulgarian forces have to do some of the fighting?

Bulgarians might be brave as soldiers but that is not all that matters. One should go back again to the announcement of the Bulgarian Defense Minister that the future Bulgarian combat battalion for Afghanistan will be ready for action by the end of 2012.

This means one of two things – either the Bulgarian government is finding excuses before the US to delay as much as possible its sending of combat troops, or the Bulgarian forces do need a lot of training before they can be sent into battle.

Probably both of these are true, but the second one the more so. Given the condition of the Bulgarian mercenaries at the moment, one might be better off sending into battle 45-year-old reservists that got some training in the last days of the Cold War. (Even though even this is also disputable as the major thing Bulgarian soldiers were taught back then was to resist a NATO (i.e. Greek and Turkish attack) for 24 hours until the arrival of the Soviet military avalanche from the north.

What is more, training is not everything. What about the army logistics and procurement that is a direct function of the condition of the state bureaucracy?

For example, there have been a number of reports that a corruption scheme left the first Bulgarian troops in Iraq without bullet proof vests. As a result, an attack on the Bulgarian base in Iraq's Kerbala left 5 Bulgarian soldiers dead.

One does not even want to think of the equipment (or lack thereof) of the Bulgarian military and the huge mess with the arms deals that former Bulgarian government officials seem to have made as if their paychecks came directly from the respective defense manufacturer.

It is also unclear how much Bulgaria can really contribute to the economic and social recovery of Afghanistan. Recovery is perhaps too strong a word as Afghanistan was never very advanced economically and socially. Bulgarian declarations and civic and military initiatives of various kinds might be helpful but they can hardly be decisive.  

Having the determination and morale is probably even more important than having the proper arms and training.

One of the major strategies of the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan against the US is based on the fact that a democratic society may oppose having to suffer a large number of casualties in a geographically remote war. The US administrations have held their ground in both Iraq and Afghanistan but this strategy did work with Spain, for example, which pulled out of Iraq right after the terrorist attacks in Madrid in the spring of 2004.

What is going to happen if several Bulgarian soldiers get killed in battle in Afghanistan? How much war damage can the society of a minor power such as Bulgaria sustain for the sake of globalization-based national security arguments that are vaguely understandable to the average Bulgarian? My guess is – not much.

Bulgaria lost a total of 13 men in Iraq between 2003 and 2009, and that brought substantial pressure on the Bulgarian governments in that period. A clear recognition of that was the fact that the US allowed Bulgaria to withdraw its forces from the more volatile parts of Iraq, and to station them as guards of a refugee camp.

Only recently the Bulgarian troops guarding the Kandahar Airport took part in fending off a Taliban attack. In January, an attack on the same military base left 4 Bulgarian soldiers seriously wounded. One of them happened to be a classmate of mine with whom I went to elementary school. Keeping in mind all the rational arguments for having Bulgarian forces in Afghanistan, my convictions were nonetheless seriously shaken when I visited my classmate in the military hospital in Sofia and saw him lying all in stitches and scars...

The fact of the matter is that Bulgaria as a society can “absorb” very little war damage at the present moment. The only way this country can really do any good for the war effort in Afghanistan is by being really smart and cautious about the structuring of its contribution – because getting back, God forbid, 100 coffins out of a 700-strong detachment would in no way help defeat the Taliban. This can be achieved through both careful planning and substantially increasing the awareness of the Bulgarian public about the importance of the war in Afghanistan for this nation's future.

But even the best effort on part of the Bulgarian authorities won't do much. Proper arrangements between the US, NATO, and the EU – i.e. within the wider Euro-Atlantic network – are the best way to make sure that minor powers such as Bulgaria can contribute positively to the war effort rather than risk too much and thus lead to the crumbling of the Western coalition's morale.

Because the struggle in Afghanistan is clearly going to be a protracted one. The situation there is much worse than it ever was in Iraq, which is a lot more modern society, sociologically speaking.

The deadline set by the Bulgarian Defense Minister for sending in the combat battalion is 2013. I've heard some commentators joke with the typical Bulgarian self-irony that if the Taliban survive till then, our forces will then help crush them.

But this is little of a joking matter. All the more so because the problems with Bulgaria fighting its own war in Afghanistan are exacerbated by the fact that only a handful of Bulgarians have an idea of how high the stakes are for their own country.

We need your support so Novinite.com can keep delivering news and information about Bulgaria! Thank you!