Us National Security Strategy - Term Paper Example

US National Security Strategy September 11th 2001 effectively altered the of world history. The audacious attacks on New York’s World Trade Center were the most spectacular and deadly terrorist acts ever carried out on American soil. Accordingly, the ramifications of these deadly attacks reverberated around the globe and culminated in the invasion of Afghanistan and successful overthrow of the murderous Taliban regime in Kabul. Terrorism remains a real and dangerous threat to the United States. This country remains committed to the eradication of terror wherever it rears its ugly head, both at home and abroad. From a foreign policy standpoint, the United States has taken a variety of initiatives to ensure the security of this great nation. While the US military presence in Afghanistan is controversial, it remains quite important due to the unique economic and social situation in one of the most underdeveloped countries on the planet. Beset by warlordism, economic underdevelopment and violence over the course of the past century, Afghanistan remains one of the poorest and most underdeveloped countries on earth. The Afghan people deserve better and this is why the United States is committed to ensuring the peace, security and long-term development of this country. While poverty remains endemic, life expectancy is reported by the Central Intelligence Agency as only 45 years. This is indicative of the work that the United States must do in order to increase the livelihood of the people of Afghanistan (CIA, 2009). Barack Obama, newly anointed President of the United States of America, has entered the Presidency with a completely new and novel approach to the problems afflicting Afghanistan. Our new American policy approach includes the deployment of 17,000 additional soldiers in an attempt to stabilize country. Attempting to quell the return of the Taliban, more American troops are being deployed to the south where violence is endemic. Focusing on the joint tasks of stabilizing the country and reinvesting in reconstruction, the new regime in Washington is doing its best to make a break with the past and refocus on energies on uprooting the Taliban and stabilizing the country once and for all. According to David Loyn of the British Broadcasting Corporation, “the political system that is emerging in Afghanistan may not have the most rigorous democratic standards, but the Bush years of believing that countries could be fixed by imposing a voting system from outside are over.” (Loyn, 2009) President Barack Obama is working with his Afghan counterpart, Hamid Karzai, to dramatically improve security in the country, as well as in the region (Armstrong & Rubin, 2003). Does the new policy approach enhance the national interests and security of the nations most involved in the outcome in Afghanistan? The United States, under President Obama, is taking a much more proactive role in Afghanistan understanding that instability in this country has global ramification. Arguing that the "the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan demands urgent attention" (Gallacher 2009), President Obama understands that insecurity in Afghanistan undermines security in the region. Accordingly, rooting out the Taliban in Afghanistan will necessitate rooting out the Taliban forces stationed in Pakistan and neighboring tribal areas. Afghanistan is sure to improve its security situation with the added troops and the decision to send additional American reinforcements to the troubled southern region coincide with a United Nations report that civilian casualties have increased by 39% since 2008. Thus, the major actors in the Afghanistan saga, the United States and Afghanistan, plus the important supporting actors of Canada and the countries of the European Union, will certainly benefit from a renewed focus from Washington on the region. Security remains the most important issue and it is finally being addressed by Washington. Afghan Strategy II The United States is committed to developing a new Afghan strategy which aims to help develop what is arguably one of the poorest and most underdeveloped countries in the world. Promoting security in the region, combating religious extremism and finding solutions to the ever-present opium problem are the key pillars of the US-Afghan relationship in the post-Taliban era. Our relationship is complex but this complexity pre-dates the recent overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. Accordingly, the United States actively supported the plethora of mujahadeen fighters during the Soviet invasion thus contributing to the independence of this country from the Soviet sphere of influence during the height of the Cold War. Our support for the Afghan mujahadeen, both covert and overt, led to the withdrawal of USSR forces in 1989. President Obamas Revised Afghan Strategy represents a new commitment to rooting out extremism and providing stability through a massive US troop deployment. Additional goals include the curtailment of the production of opium, the following will analyze the main US aims in Afghanistan in a comparative foreign policy perspective. Under a new administration in Washington, the United States has reoriented and refocused its policy approach to Afghanistan. This includes the deployment of 17,000 additional soldiers and added troop deployment to the south to hinder the return of the Taliban. Attempting to stabilize the country and reinvest in reconstruction, Washington is refocusing its energies on eradicating the Taliban and finally stabilizing the country. The Afghan economy continues to improve since the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. While Afghanistan’s total GDP is estimated to be just $23 billion annually (large American corporations have larger sales than this country), Afghanistan has the 113 lowest index on the planet giving much room for positive growth. The link between poverty and extremism has been established by scholars around the world and the Taliban’s support for Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaeda demonstrated to the United States just how important Afghanistan’s insecurity can be for the safety and security of the United States. Furthermore, opium production in Afghanistan remains an oft-ignored concern for the United States. This National Security Strategy will now explore how attempts at eradicating opium production are at the forefront of the US strategy in Afghanistan (Cockburn, 1998). Five years after the overthrow of the Taliban, the Government of Afghanistan (GOA) developed an 8 pillar policy to combat the production of opium described the National Drug Control Strategy (NDCS). This multilayered policy tackled such diverse issues Alternative Livelihoods in the wake of opium curtailment, Criminal Justice, Demand Reduction, Eradication, Regional Cooperation, Public Information, Law Enforcement and Institutional Development. Although there were initial high hopes, the Government of Afghanistan needed additional international support in order to combat the production of opium in the country. The United States and other international allies were actively involved in providing security to the GOA but more support was necessary in order to combat the cultivation of opium. Seeking to emulate the US strategy in Columbia with respect to the cultivation of opium, the United States and Afghan authorities have begun a concerted campaign to target on narcotic production based upon this model (Tomsen, 2001; Armstrong et al., 2003). It was estimated that following the US-led invasion of Afghanistan, the opium economy in Afghanistan remained an astonishing 60% of the country’s GDP in 2003 (Goodhand 2005). In addition, the production of opium remains a major challenge to both Afghan authorities and the United States in the joint War on Terror. While attempts have been made by Afghan authorities to curb the cultivation of opium, more support is needed. The political stability of Afghanistan is dependent upon it. American Aims in Afghanistan and the Global American Strategy As mentioned above, three important pillars of US goals in Afghanistan include regional security, quelling extremism and ending the illicit production of opium. These important pillars of the US-Afghan relationship have been at the forefront of US policy towards Afghanistan since the overthrow of the Taliban in 2001. While securing the country and maintaining much needed stability, American aims in Afghanistan are also part of a wider regional strategy with the aim of both maintain and increasing American influence over the strategically significant Caspian Sea region. The Caspian Sea home to the largest enclosed body of water on the planet and remains strategically significant. With borders on Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Russia and Iran, the Caspian Sea is endowed with natural wealth including recently discovered oil deposits. Estimated to be valued in the trillions of dollars and following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, numerous states from all over the globe, have sought access to the great wealth of the Caspian Sea region. Accordingly, former American Vice-President Dick Cheney famously remarked, "I cant think of a time when weve had a region emerge as suddenly to become as strategically significant as the Caspian" (Christian Science Monitor 2001). Additionally, access to oil in the region remains a important issue with actors aiming to reap the benefits of the exploitation of what is arguably one of the most geopolitically explosive regions of the globe. Following the implosion of the Soviet Union at the turn of the century, extensive oil deposits were discovered near Kazakhstan in the Caspian Sea region. Although seen by many as a positive event in a world in which petroleum is in constant short supply, the extraction and processing of oil in the Caspian region faces numerous challenges. Accordingly, an important obstacle in the Caspian Sea is the volatile neighborhood in which the Sea finds itself. Additionally, extracted oil must travel through pipeline in one of the most volatile regions of the world makes the exploitation of this region problematic. Accordingly, US hegemony is maintained through an positive and stabilizing presence in Afghanistan and the promotion of a secure country within the region (Paul 2005). It remains a sad fact that the entire economy of Afghanistan is almost entirely opium-based. Additionally the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) reports that for the second year in a row, narcotic production in this country is the highest ever recorded. For every 1/7 individuals, opium production is the primary source of income. Additionally, approximately 93% of the world opium supply originates from Afghanistan. President Barack Obama’s Administration understands the significance of an unstable Afghanistan and aims to provide stability to this important international actor. By increasing the military contingent to this country, we hope to quall the production and cultivation of illegal drugs to the United States as well as maintained stability and peace. Concrete goals will ensure that both the United States and Afghanistan benefit equally from the changes currently being implemented from Washington and Kabul. We now explore another recent US foreign policy initiative for comparative purposes (Paris 2008). The decision of the United States to invade Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein in 2003 was an important watershed moment in world history. Iraq is arguably one of the most dangerous and violent places on earth and the bulk of US military efforts in the region since the invasion have been focused on quelling the insurgency. With the election of a new President in the United States, American foreign policy is refocused on Afghanistan, representing a strategic shift away from Iraq. President Barack Obama thus many options with respect to the American-Afghan relationship but the three most important aspects of this relationship – maintaining security, securing US regional interests and curtailing the spread and cultivation of opium –remain at the forefront of his thinking with respect to this incredibly complex, yet timely, relationship. A new foreign policy in Afghanistan may hurt Iraq but will do much to provide stability to Afghanistan. As the attacks of September 11th 2001 emphatically demonstrated, an instable and fanatical Afghanistan is bad for America as well as the rest of the planet. Our national security strategy depends on a safe and defendable homeland, as well as a calm and pliant Afghanistan and Iraq. We should all know by now that our national security depends on it. references Armstrong, A., & Rubin, B. (2003). Regional Issues in the Reconstruction of Afghanistan. World Policy Journal. 2:3 12-69. Afghanistan. (200). CIA World Fact Book. Last Accessed August 23 2009 https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/AF.html Bram, J., Orr, J. and Rapaport, C. (2002), Measuring the Effects of the September 11 Attack on New York City. Economic Policy Review 8:2: 44-69. Cockburn, A. (1998). Whiteout: The CIA, Drugs and the Press. New York: Verso Publisher. Gallacher, A. Obamas new Afghan strategy. BBC News. Last Accessed August 23 2009. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7896173.stm Goodhand, J (2004). Frontiers and Wars: the Opium Economy in Afghanistan. Journal of Agrarian Change, 5:2, 191-216. Hobbes, T. (1994). Leviathan. London: Hackett Publishing. Loyn, D. (2009). Obama strategy focus of Afghan talks. BBC News. Last Accessed August 23 2009http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7973282.stm Malloch-Brown, M (2008). Opium production in Afghanistan. British Medical Journal, 336, 972-973. Paris, R (2006). NATOs Choice in Afghanistan: go big or go home. Policy Options, 35-43. Paul, T.V. (2005). Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy. International Security, 30(2), 5-41. The Great Gas Game: Who will run Caspian natural gas through Afghanistan? (2001). Christian Science Monitor. October 25, 2001. United States Government. (2008) EIA Development Report. Last Accessed August 23 2009. Available http://www.eia.doe.gov/cabs/Caspian/pdf.pdf Read More