Afghanistan
Good mornin' duck fans! Let's start the week by revisiting last week's firestorm in ...
Afghanistan
- Hamid Karzai has become a bewildering enigma for many Americans as he launched yet another verbal tirade against the US last week. This time he recklessly accused the US of colluding with the Taliban. The NY Times speculates that Karzai is keen to shape his legacy given the ultimate fate of Mohammed Najibullah and many other Afghan leaders who came before him. This is certainly plausible, but hardly the whole story. Unfortunately, the article also condescendingly implies that the Afghan head of state simply "does not understand" that his government is totally dependent on international funding. Karzai understands; everyone in Afghanistan knows who is paying the bills.
- President Karzai's accusation that the Americans are currently colluding with the Taliban is extremely implausible and completely unsubstantiated. However, me thinks some Americans doth protest too much. Beneath all of the American outrage and bluster, it is important to remember that the US engaged and supported the Taliban regime after they took Kabul in 1996. Both Bill Clinton and George W. Bush sought to work with the Taliban. Bush even invited the Taliban to his Texas ranch in 1997. The US was perfectly aware of the Taliban's treatment of women and their general abuse of human rights from early 1996. Moreover, in recent years the US has negotiated with representatives of "the" Taliban (as if the Taliban were still just one organization) without involving Karzai - although there is no evidence that the US is currently negotiating with Taliban members as Karzai claims.
US "combat operations" in Afghanistan are officially scheduled to wind down in 2014. And media attention is now turning toward speculating (i.e. relaying contending institutional preferences between the White House and the Pentagon) on the level of US troop presence in Afghanistan after 2014. Current estimates, in case you still care, are that US troop levels will be roughly around 10,000 assisted by a couple thousand NATO troops -- assuming, of course, that President Karzai agrees to prolong the suspension of his country's full sovereignty. For next year, however, it is likely that at least 60,000 US troops will remain through the fighting season.
The notion that "combat operations" will be wrapped up by 2014 while US forces shift toward an advisory "support role" reflects a typically deceptive use of an innocuous sounding phrase like "support role" that the public has come to accept uncritically from our military leaders and policymakers. Regardless of what US troops actually do in their "support" capacity, it is clear that the narrative arc -- despite the salacious demise of one of the story's chief architects and protagonists -- is still oriented toward reassuring Americans that the decade long war is nearly over and that Afghanistan has been miraculously stabilized. This noble lie may be necessary for extricating the bulk of US/NATO/ISAF forces from this war, but it is also dangerous given the way that myths about the successful use of force create their own reality over time.
Continue reading
Another Sunday, another military puff-piece from the NY Times. Yesterday's issue promoted the idea that America is threatened by a drug trafficker-terrorist network emanating from
Continue reading
I have never really paid attention to shoes, my own or those of the opposite sex. But the past year has taught me that one
Continue reading
Why should academics and policymakers prioritize a state's acquistion of "... the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory"? Obviously,
Continue reading
Like the ancient Greco-Buddhist colossi of Bamiyan, the High-Modernist era Kajaki dam is a product of foreign influences and has been a mute witness as well
Continue reading
The second phase of the transition of security responsibility from ISAF/NATO to Afghan Security Forces has begun (the first phase began in July 2011). This means that
Continue reading
In the fifth book of the Game of Thrones series, it seems like every character at some point says: "Words are Wind." This means that
Continue reading
President Hamid Karzai has called another jirga (assembly) to attempt to gain support for the creation of a long-term defensive pact with the United States.
Continue reading
Colonel Gian Gentle, a confirmed counterinsurgency [COIN] skeptic, raises questions for Col. Paul Yingling about the role of generals as COIN seems to be falling
Continue reading
In addition to filling an open faculty line in international relations (IR), I was hired in 1991 by the University of Louisville with the idea
Continue reading
Is it crazy to think that "the situation in Kyrgyzstan has a critical bearing on US national security?" Steve Walt thinks so:The first sentence of
Continue reading
How is it that time and time again we are persuaded to hang on for another year in Afghanistan with the mantra that counterinsurgency (a.k.a.
Continue reading
I took part in a panel on Peacebuilding yesterday at the Center for International Governance Innovation [CIGI], which was part of the larger Canadian Political
Continue reading
(Written with Alister Miskimmon) Following the death of Osama bin Laden, political pressure is mounting for an early scaling down of British military troops presence in
Continue reading
I am trying to find examples of humanitarian organizations that spoke out against the use of landmines by the Soviet Union during its invasion of
Continue reading
I would like to be as snarky as Brian, but paying attention to Afghanistan is pretty darned depressing. In the aftermath of the second (yes,
Continue reading
India appears to be continuing to shift its West Asia policy away from a once budding partnership with Iran, which aimed among other things to
Continue reading
Steve Metz concludes a sharp piece on NATO thusly:It is time for this debate over NATO’s viability to take place. While NATO may serve as
Continue reading
Recent comments