DESPITE ALL the current focus on Iraq and the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, crisis may be returning to Afghanistan - and the United States needs to do something about it fast. While the Karzai government is a vast improvement over its Taliban predecessors and communist stooges running the country two decades ago, it has only a tenuous grip on power. (AFP Photo)...

Little George leaves Afghanistan in chaos and goes after Iraq

The conditions in Afghanistan are deteriorating as a result of the United States' invasion and political destabilization there.

Now the political landscape is again in turmoil and people are again starving and living in fear.  And again there is more commitment by little George to chaos than to peace.

It is hard to understand how little George can create these problems and then refuse to solve them.  Afghanistan is not as important a country as Iraq.  The chaos that is going to come about after little George destabilizes Iraq is going to be felt for decades.

John WorldPeace
September 15, 2002

OPINION

In Afghanistan, a job half done

By Michael O' Hanlon and P.W. Singer, 9/15/2002

DESPITE ALL the current focus on Iraq and the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, crisis may be returning to Afghanistan - and the United States needs to do something about it fast.

While the Karzai government is a vast improvement over its Taliban predecessors and communist stooges running the country two decades ago, it has only a tenuous grip on power. It lacks control over the Afghan countryside and has only a minimal hold over its own capital. Indeed, Russian observers have noted that the United States is at roughly the same stage where they were in 1981, supporting a weak central government, faced with a bubbling opposition.

A coalition is now building, made up of Taliban remnants, Al Qaeda fighters, and extremist Pashtuns attached to the former warlord and radical Islamist Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. In a pointed reference to the war against the Soviets, they have entitled themselves ''the Sons of the Mujahideen,'' and are adapting many of the same tactics that eventually wore down the Red Army.

While little noticed in the American media, US garrisons in Afghanistan have come under rocket attacks on a near weekly basis, and US patrols increasingly face ambushes when they venture off base. There have also been a series of assassination attempts and bombings, which culminated in last week's deadly blast in Kabul and bore all the hallmarks of a planned terrorist strike.

A critical problem is that the Karzai regime and the limited military forces that it holds sway over are both underdeveloped and highly unrepresentative. A small group of former Northern Alliance commanders are the real power brokers, while the majority of the population is excluded. Indeed, President Hamid Karzai was so suspicious of these elements that he does not even trust them to supply his own security team - for likely good reason, as it took US-provided bodyguards to shoot down his most recent attacker, who was even wearing the uniform of the Afghan army.

At the same time, the Afghan economy remains broken after a quarter century of war. With far less international donor support arriving than expected, the fruits of peace are yet to be delivered to the Afghan people. Pockets of hunger still remain, and basic services, from health care to education, remain little improved in much of the country's vast territory. This state of affairs belies President Bush's promise last year of a ''new Marshall Plan'' to the Afghan people that would improve their lot once the Taliban were gone.

Therefore, the United States must rededicate itself to getting the Afghan operation right. If we are ever to establish a viable and representative Afghan state, able to prevent terrorists from using it as a base of operations, the Bush administration has to overcome its reluctance to ''nation-build.'' This requires three efforts, each to match rhetoric with real action.

First, the United States should stop throwing around suggestive rumors about how it would condone an expansion of the International Security Assistance Force, and actually lead the effort. Rather than the present 5,000 troops limited to Kabul, 20,000 international troops, deployed around the country, are needed to help restore a sense of stability. We should provide American military support, to handle such critical tasks as communications and logistics, and actively recruit more help from other countries. The United States should also consider contributing the backup of a rapid-reaction force of Marines or Army troops, perhaps one to two battalions strong (roughly 1,000 to 2,000 personnel), to be based in the western part of Afghanistan where foreign forces are now absent.

Second, the United States must take the lead in building an effective Afghan military partner that can solve its own problems, rather than conducting the limited and half-hearted training programs going on now. The present pace of training for the new Afghan army is generating only a few hundred troops every few months. The program needs to increase roughly tenfold, as well as seek to create a representative and competent officer corps. This need not require large numbers of active-duty American personnel; private contractors made up largely of retired military officers can do much of the job.

Finally, a civilian parallel is required to match our military efforts. Afghanistan is in desperate need of economic assistance and political support in rebuilding. The country deserves a similar infusion of civilian advisers, training programs, and aid funds that other war-torn states, such as Angola, Bosnia, and Kosovo have received. International aid programs must be expanded and donors pressed to live up to their promises.

Bush's ''list of 20'' top Al Qaeda leaders may have been put back in his desk in lieu of plans for Saddam, but bin Laden, Zawahiri, Mullah Omar, et al., are still on the loose. More important, they are apparently back in business. Afghanistan is where the war to stamp out terrorism was begun. It remains a job only half done.

Michael O'Hanlon is senior fellow in foreign policy studies at the Brookings Institution. P.W. Singer is Olin Fellow and coordinator of the Brookings Project on US Policy Towards the Islamic World.

This story ran on page C11 of the Boston Globe on 9/15/2002.

Associated Press Originally published September 14, 2002    The Boston Sun

WASHINGTON - The international community needs to provide an additional $300 million to help reconstruction in Afghanistan, particularly to help arriving refugees as winter sets in, a senior official in the United Nations Assistance Mission in the south Asian nation said yesterday.

The official, Mukesh Kapila, said Afghanistan's needs this year were underestimated when dozens of donor governments agreed in January to provide $1.2 billion this year.

Kapila held talks Thursday with lawmakers and met yesterday with officials of the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to brief them on how past funding has been spent and to stress the need for more resources.

"My message is so far, so good but there are no grounds for complacency," Kapila said.

"More is required and the crucial period is now so we can turn the corner and put Afghanistan on the road to looking after itself."

The Senate is preparing to vote on a bill that would provide more than $2.5 billion in aid to Afghanistan with an additional $1 billion for international forces. The vote could come as early as next week.

Kapila said a record 2 million refugees had returned to Afghanistan and more were arriving daily, "which is why humanitarian assistance is important, particularly with winter approaching."

Kapila said the rapid return of refugees from Pakistan and Iran demonstrated that Afghans have confidence there is a future for their country, although it is ravaged by war and drought.

Kapila said progress achieved so far this year has been remarkable, with 3 million children back in school since April and 2 million jobs created.

While much of the aid spent so far has been for humanitarian needs, he said, funds needed to go to President Hamid Karzai's government so it can be seen as providing goods and services to its people.

On the negative side, Kapila said security in the countryside has been deteriorating with threats and attacks on aid personnel, both local and international, increasing.

He welcomed the easing last week of the U.S. position on bolstering the international peacekeeping force in Afghanistan.

The Bush administration said it is "considering the possibility that ISAF [international peacekeepers] would play a role outside the capital if it could be enlarged."

Previously, U.S. officials generally said they preferred readying a new Afghan army and police force to take over security nationwide, rather than supporting an expanded international contingent.

But the training of the Afghan military has gone slowly.

How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone (all races, all nations, all religions, both sexes) in our vision of Peace?

The WorldPeace Sign

To the John WorldPeace Galleries Page

To the WorldPeace Peace Page