Afghanistan in Transition

Abstract

In December 2010, President Obama issued his review of the US strategy in Afghanistan following the significant increase in military forces and a renewed counterinsurgency effort. Nearly a year ago, the US Commander in Chief decided to send an additional 30,000 US forces to Afghanistan as part of a strategy to reverse the Taliban's momentum and build the Afghan government's capacity, allowing the United States to begin drawing down its forces in July 2011. (1) The ensuing military surge, which raised the level of the US-led International Security Assistant Force (ISAF) to over 140,000 (including 100,000 US service members), and a new population-centered stabilization strategy may be the first serious counterinsurgency effort in the nine-year war. During the past nine years, poorly resourced and ill-coordinated state building and stabilization efforts failed to check the growing insecurity and violence that peaked this year at the highest level since the removal of the Taliban from power in 2001. The ever-increasing complexity of the strategic and operational environment has perplexed the Afghan government and contributing nations and stymied the development of any unified, long-term vision for the nation and its people. All parties have approached the emerging issues in divergent, uncoordinated ways, with operations on every front being fragmented reactions to events rather than strategic undertakings designed to support long-term goals. An American warrior of the Vietnam War famously once said that America had not been fighting the war in Vietnam for 12 years, but for one year 12 times. (2) The same can be said in Afghanistan today where the international forces have fought nine, one-year wars. The December review came amid growing doubts over a war that has dragged on for almost a decade with no clear prospects for winning. The extension of Taliban influence into once stable areas in the West and North of the country, rising casualties among US-NATO forces and Afghan civilians, the weakening of Afghan government control, and waivering belief in President Karzai's commitment to eliminate official corruption and improve governance have ebbed public support in America and NATO capitals to its lowest level. These trends increasingly find reflection in policy-making circles in the United States and the European nations that are providing forces. There are calls for a major change in the US commitment in Afghanistan as there are warnings that an unrealistic drawdown of international forces and a minimalist approach will lead to greater instability in the region. So the real challenge is how to deal with this conflict in a way that averts an everlasting US-military entanglement and curbs transnational security threats emanating from the region. The mainstream strategic approach includes building Afghanistan's local capacity for security responsibilities and shaping a strategic environment that is conducive to regional peace and stability. This article looks at the short-term prospects of a sustainable transition of security responsibility under a renewed US-ISAF strategy and the transition's long-term impact on peace and stability in and around Afghanistan. Challenges and Opportunities The main challenge facing Afghanistan is how to deal with a growing insurgency while the government is weakening and its foreign support is wavering. Responding to these challenges requires measures to lower the threat level and Afghanistan's capacity to respond to threats. These measures are directly linked. No amount of military power, foreign or domestic, will gain much unless the Afghan government improves its capacity to control its territory, win the trust of the people, and prevent infiltration and subversion from abroad. The success of a US-led counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan is closely linked to a partnership with an effective Afghan government. Afghanistan has made notable achievements in rebuilding its state institutions, adopting a modern constitution, holding peaceful elections, creating national security institutions, improving women's rights, and expanding educational institutions. …