US Strategy in Afghanistan - Report Example

Running Head: US STRATEGY IN AFGHANISTAN US Strategy in Afghanistan Name Institution Professor Course Date US Strategy in Afghanistan Introduction U.S.A (United States of America), has been applying a lot of strategies in the Afghanistan war. Most of these strategies are aimed at achieving the best results. The end result of the war depends on the initial objective that US had when it initiated the war (Johnson, 2010). The strategies applied are in line with the elements of national power that include geography, resources, population, economic, political, military, psychological, and informational. The war in Afghanistan has mainly been targeting the extremists or terrorists who in many decades have vowed to fight American interests and allies. It is therefore the responsibility of the American governments to protect the interests of America and Americans at present and in the future. The extremists being fought in Afghanistan have attacked American interests in the past and so its not speculation. One of the best ways to disorganize the extremists is by ensuring that they are not in a comfortable so as to avoid them from regrouping or re-strategizing to attack the American interests. Civilian and military leaders in Afghanistan have reported that the situation has been worsening in the past. This calls for more strategies to be employed in order to win the war that was initiated after the terrorists’ attack that occurred in New York in the infamous September 11th attack (Williams, 2010). As a result of this attack, thousands of innocent Americans and people from other nationalities were killed causing tragic consequences to many innocent families. These attacks were also devastating to the American economy and their sense of security. America therefore has the responsibility to protect its citizens from such violence. The Taliban has been gaining momentum in Afghanistan and this backdrop called for a careful and thorough review of the US strategy in the Afghanistan War. American aim has therefore been to work with the Afghanistan government to get rid of all the safe havens of the extremists who have been plotting to attack the American interests and its allies. Part of the War’s objective was to establish a long-term and a more sustainable relationship with Afghanistan. To accomplish the US mission in Afghanistan and, ensure the safety of the Americans is not an easy task (Katzman, 2010). This will therefore mean sending more civilians, more troops and other assistance in Afghanistan. The people undertaking this mission have been doing that out of their extraordinary personal sacrifice for the sake of their country America. In June 2010, the U.S. special operations troops in Afghanistan stepped up their campaign to capture and kill insurgent leaders in Afghanistan. According to some senior US military officials the raids by special operation troops captured and killed more than 180 insurgents and detained an additional 900 lower level fighters in April and May 2010. These operations were particularly effective in the southern city of Kandahar and in the eastern Afghanistan. The success of this could be gauged by the decrease of the roadside bomb attacks and the weakening of the Taliban control. In December 2009, President Obama revealed a new counterinsurgency strategy for Afghanistan, a plan that was termed ambitious and optimistic. This strategy involved injecting 30,000 additional U.S. troops into Afghanistan to fight the Taliban and other insurgents. An army of civilians were also to be taken to Afghanistan to build the country’s infrastructure and the civil society. Republican Senator McCain of Arizona also backed Obama’s troop increase in Afghanistan. In implementing its strategies, U.S. has been trying to work closely with Afghan President Hamid Karzai. In the past, American military leaders have persuaded the Afghan President to visit Kandahar to negotiate with the tribal elders. Sometimes the Afghanistan President is counterproductive to U.S. efforts in implementing its strategy (Laurent, 2009). It has not been easy to deal with the Afghanistan President more so because U.S. lacks a strong and clear policy to handle the Afghanistan President. Since 2006, the Taliban and the extremists have made a dramatic comeback in Afghanistan after they had been driven out of the country in 2002. This has led to takeover of more territory by the Talibans. As a result a new strategic plan for Afghanistan was formulated by General Stanley McChrystal, Commander of US Forces in Afghanistan in December and Obama’s administration proceeded to approve this plan. Some of the important aspects of this strategy include political development, economic development, counter narcotics, and police justice system. In order to engage in the Afghanistan War effectively, the US military identified the three major groups that that posed security threat to Afghans. These included the Quetta Shura Taliban, the Haqqani Network, and the Hezb-i- Islami Gulbuddin. According to the information provided by the US military General McChrystal, these groups operate together although they don’t share a central command. They also have different operational plans as they execute violent attacks on the US force in Afghanistan, Afghan security forces as well as civilian population. These attacks are meant to weaken the Afghanistan government by demonstrating its inability to provide security to its citizens. In addition, the Talibans also instill fear and persuade to take control of the population. This explains why there are Taliban shadow governments in almost every province in Afghanistan that always seek to displace and control the local government. The main challenge of the Talibans is that they are not supported by all the Afghans as some are largely opposed to their operations. The insurgency’s strength comes from the support that they receive from the locals without which their operations would be exposed to other forces that are always after them including the US military personnel. The new US military strategy had to put this fact into consideration. The McChrystal military plan’s main objective was to stop the progress of the Talibans. The first part of the strategy emphasizes the counterterrorism strategy and institutes a counterinsurgency strategy (Art, 2003). This strategy gives priority to the population’s security. US had an initial plan of gaining control in the main population centers in Afghanistan before the rest of the people gained confidence in the US security forces operating in Afghanistan. The Key areas that general McChrystal identified that need attention include the Helmand River Valley in Helmand province, Kandahar City, and the provinces of Paktika, Paktia, and Khost. The second part of the strategy included developing the Afghan national Security Force so that it can provide security to the Afghanistan country. This strategy is to take 18 months since its inception in December 2009 (Williams, 2009). In January 2009 President Bush had ordered more than 21,000 US troops to be deployed in Afghanistan and President Obama’s addition of about30, 000 US troops in Afghanistan was a continuation of the strategy. NATO also committed more non US troops numbering around 17,000. The total number of troops in Afghanistan had reached 150,000 by the summer of 2010. The Helmand River Valley constituted geographical aspect of the US military strategy in Afghanistan. It is a fertile agricultural area where the majority of the people in Helmand province reside. It is in this region that the Talibans carry out their drug operations. For instance sixty percent of opium produced in Afghanistan comes from this valley (Chouvy, 2010). The sale of these drugs provides a substantial source for finances necessary for the Taliban operations. Helmand is also the main line for the weapons from Pakistan and it is also known to have the main lines for Taliban communication. Narcotics en- route to Pakistan are store temporarily in this region. The hydroelectric dam that is present at Kajak in the northern end of the river valley can contribute to the development of Afghanistan if it’s put into proper use. The main threat in the Helmand region is the Quetta Shura Taliban (QST). This group is quite organized and has a firm base in this province. In the past the group has demonstrated its ability to organize formidable campaigns against foreign forces. From 2006 to 2009, British forces controlled the northern side on the Helmand River valley but they were too few to control such large population in the province (Lamb, 2009). The US long term strategy is to provide security in the entire region of Helmand River valley. US forces also have plans to push out all the Talibans out of the Helmand valley to reduce their influence on the population. Plans are also underway to reduce the cultivation of opium in the region and this will destabilize the Talibans financial strength. Part of the strategy in the region is also to develop Kajak hydroelectric dam so that it can distribute electricity in the whole of Helmand province. Kandahar City is considered to be the strategic center of Kandahar province. It is quite important to the Talibans as it serves as their spiritual center. It also serves as the logistics center for the route from Kabul to Helmand province. Jus like in Helmand the main threat in this city is the QST. To secure the city it is necessary to secure all the approaches to the city including Arghandab in the northern side, Zari-Panjwavi in the western side, and Dand in the south. It is in these districts that the insurgents have their havens where they carry out their operations. Part of US strategy is to come up with roads that join Helmand and Kandahar city. The provinces of Paktika, Paktia, and Khost are adjacent to the Taliban controlled areas of South Waziristan in Pakistan. The Haqqani Network group of Talibans that is said to be the best led and the most violent has its base in these provinces (McChrystal, 2010). It also home to other three Taliban groups that assist the Afghan insurgency and host the Al Qaeda fighters. General Chrystal’s plan is to secure this region and provide protection to all these cities and hence improve communication centers and transportation routes to enable the Afghan farmers to sell their crops in the city markets. Developing the Afghanistan National Security Forces (ANSF) is the most crucial strategic plan as everything that the US forces plan to implement in Afghanistan will in the long run be safeguarded by the ANSF upon recognition of the Afghanistan sovereignty. It is therefore of significance importance for the US forces to provide enough security in Afghanistan as they allow more time for ANSF to develop to be fully independent. If this is done effectively then the Obama administration will meets its target if starting to withdraw the US troops from Afghanistan by July 2011. By 2009 the ANSF troops were around 200, 000 and the strategic plan is to have more than 300,000 troops by October 2011. This is not an easy objective as it requires thorough changes in the original ANSF. US intend to delay the forces that re quire extensive training such as engineers and artillery. Training time for troops will also be reduced by around 25%. Use of heavy equipment will be reduced and replaced with light weapons that can readily handle insurgency forces in Afghanistan. Another aspect that needs to be considered is the economic aspect of the Afghanistan War and the strategy that US is applying to control economic depletion in Afghanistan. The Solution to the Afghanistan problem cannot be solved entirely by use of military. The US government also intends to use a strategy of developing the Afghanistan economy and this will highly reduce the chances of violence by the insurgencies. In connection with this a State Department in US prepared an Economic Growth Strategy for Afghanistan in September 2009. The strategy had four pillars namely; employment creation in the private sector, ensuring that Afghan people are provided with basic services, improvement of the infrastructure, and a notable progress in fiscal sustainability. When this economic strategy was being drafted job creation was considered to be the most important. By being busy it meant that the number of insurgencies would drastically be reduced as people would be busy working in the private sector. So far this economic strategy ahs been partially successful but it has not yet reached the level of curbing the insurgency in Afghanistan (Bowman, 2010). In the Regional Economic Cooperation Conference on Afghanistan (RECCA) that was held in Istanbul in November 2010, the Afghan government made its stand on the matter clear with President Karzai’s economic advisor Sham Bathija mentioning that a lot of effort need to be put in developing infrastructure in Afghanistan and this would highly boost economic growth through improved transport network. When General Petraceus was a commander he developed the Northern Distribution Network which was used by the US troops to transport some supplies via Central Asia into Afghanistan. The NDN is an example of how a good transport network can contribute in improving the economy as it could be used to connect Afghanistan with other places such as Europe, and Asia. Currently Afghanistan farmers lack proper means to transport their farm produce to the marketplaces located inside Afghanistan. This leads to a lot of farm produce going into waste and hence causing a huge economic blow to the farmers. If more roads and railways are built Afghan goods will be able to flow both from within country and even for export. Improving the infrastructure is a fundamental aspect of all the other pillars of the US economic strategy for Afghanistan. For instance developing infrastructure may lead to investors being attracted to invest in Afghanistan and hence creating jobs (Thompson, 2009). New jobs and businesses are bound to contribute greatly to high revenue collection in Afghanistan and eventually contributing in the provision of other basic amenities such as education and healthcare. Ability to collect revenue will assist the Afghanistan government in ensuring that it’s able to fund its own projects and so reducing economic dependency leading to a progress in fiscal sustainability. Improved lifestyle of the Afghans is likely to reduce chances of violence by providing alternatives to the insurgents. They would see that their government can be a source of hope unlike oppression and destruction that insurgents associate with their governments. A regional transport and trade network and is therefore a vital part of an elaborate counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan. United States has been working hard to ensure that appropriate political structures are put in place to make Afghanistan a real democracy. It is a difficult task to transform a nation like Afghanistan that has been shattered by long spells of war into an independent government that can run effectively without the interference of the insurgents. US hopes that the process of instilling real democratic principles in Afghanistan will start being experienced by the Afghans once US starts pulling its troops out of Afghanistan hopefully by July 2011. Currently afghan institutions are stronger and more effective than they were back in 2001. But there are still some amenities that should be available in a democratic state such as courts and health centers, which seem not to be very well established in Afghanistan. Many Afghans still have not developed enough trust in their few local courts available. It is mandatory for any democratic states to be governed by rule of law and this r4equires an appropriate constitution to be enacted and strong judiciary formed to oversee the implementation of the laws of the land. Security assurance especially in the eastern and southern Afghanistan is necessary in the establishment of the basic structures for a democratic state with political stability. US is also influencing the local Afghan leaders on the importance of eradicating corruption in the public sector. Efforts by the US government to oversee practice of democracy in Afghanistan have at times been hindered by the Afghan President, Karzai who could interpret US involved as trying to undermine his authority. In the recent presidential and parliamentary polls, there were reports on fraud and this made US to even put more effort so as to meet their target of letting the Afghans to run their country by the year 2014. A cooperative government will be significant in overseeing a peaceful transition especially when US will be pulling its troops out of Afghanistan. In an effort to end the war in Afghanistan, the US government has been pushing for negotiations between President Karzai government and the Talibans a process that has not been very successful. US has also been persuading Pakistan to cooperate in the fight against the Talibans many of whom are believed to be in hiding in Pakistan where they emerge from when they want to attack the American interests in Afghanistan or just by attacking innocents civilians. Utilization of resources in the Afghanistan war has been a major concern with White House Press Secretary admitting that the Afghan War has been under-resourced politically, militarily, and politically (Barker & Filkins, 2009). However Gen. MacChrystal has been very keen in ensuring that all the resources allocate to him are fully utilized. US Army is also evaluating whether it is necessary to continue hiring contracted guards to offer security in some bases. Over the eight years that US has been participating in the Afghanistan War. It has become quite vivid that this war cannot be worn entirely by use of military alone. With the prospect of withdrawing its troops from Afghanistan, US must be thinking of using communication strategy to end the war in Afghanistan. It is almost impossible for the Armed forces to destroy ideas. This can only be achieved by people through effective communication strategies. One way that the US government intends to use the communication strategy is by using the Afghans cultural values to its benefit. This can be achieved by adopting their way of life which is very different from the Americans’ but very crucial in winning the war in Afghanistan. Communication strategy might not be very effective especially when dealing with brutal Talibans whoa re always ready to kill Americans with the slightest opportunity. It has emerged that the more US continues to negotiate with them the more US soldiers are killed by the Talibans. The preconditions that the Talibans impose in the US Army should be considered and only followed if there is certainty that they will also respect the conditions. One major condition that the Talibans have been imposing on US is it must withdraw all its troops from Afghanistan for there to be peace. But is not certain as Talibans in the past have also been attacking their own people regardless of whether they are Afghans or not. This trend is likely to continue even after US withdraws its troops from Afghanistan. If this will be the case then the US government needs to be very cautious on how the withdrawal of troops shall be done in Afghanistan without jeopardizing the lives of the Afghans. The Talibans don’t seem to entertain negotiations ether with the US troops or even with the current Afghanistan government. President Karzai, who became president of Afghanistan in the year 2002, has been targeted many times by Talibans. This is because most of the Talibans view him as a US agent who is in that position to push for American interests. He was once attacked when talking to tribal elders in the Andar district of Ghazni province where more than ten rockets exploded near the venue where he was addressing the elders. The assassination attempt on the Afghanistan president has been a very big blow in the communication strategy that US has been trying to use in a bid to end the Afghanistan War. The US government seems to have been using the president to communicate to the tribal elders who may in turn negotiate with the Talibans on behalf of the US government on what they require to stop the habit of attacking innocent civilians Conclusion In conclusion once the political environment in Afghanistan is stable and democracy is in existence, then the US government should think of using the Afghan government officials to probably communicate with the Talibans by holding quality negotiations that are aimed at understanding views from both sides in order to strike a balance. The various strategies that US ahs been using in Afghanistan cannot be considered to be final as strategies come up as per the emergent situations. It is therefore significant for US to listen keenly to the demands that Talibans bring forward and weigh out the best options that are likely to benefit the majority of the Afghans with an aim of establishing a stable Afghanistan government that is devoid of corruption and promotes democracy. References Baker, P., & Filkins, D. "Groundwork Is Laid For New Troops In Afghanistan" — New York Times, August 31, 2009. Thompson, M. "Turning Point Looms for the U.S. in Afghanistan" — Time Magazine, August 31, 2009. "U.S. Commander Says Afghan War Winnable, New Strategy Needed" — CNN, September 1, 2009. Bowman, S. (2010). War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Military Operations, and Issues for Congress. New York: DIANE Publishing. McChrystal, S. (2010). Initial United States- Afghanistan Assessment. New York: DIANE Publishing. Lamb, C. (2009). Unity of effort: key to success in Afghanistan. London: DIANE Publishing. Williams, J. (2009). Iraq and Afghanistan: Security, Economic, and Governance Challenges to rebuilding efforts should be addressed in U.S Strategies. Boston: Routledge. Laurent, J. (2009). Iraq and Afghanistan: Availability of Forces, Equipment, and infrastructure should be considered in developing U.S. strategy and plans. New York: Diane Publishing. Johnson, C. (2010).Strategic Framework for U.S. efforts in Afghanistan. California: DIANE Publishing. Katzman, K. (2010). Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy. New York: DIANE Publishing. Chouvy, P. (2010). Opium: Uncovering the politics of the poppy. New York: Harvard University Press. Williams, J. (2010). Afghanistan and Pakistan: Oversight of U.S. interagency efforts. New York: DIANE Publishing. Art, R. (2003). A grand strategy for America. Princeton: Cornell University Press. Read More