War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Operations, and Issues for Congress

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Operations, and Issues for Congress War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Operations, and Issues for Congress Catherine Dale Specialist in International Security March 9, 2011 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R40156 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Operations, and Issues for Congress Summary In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States launched and led military operations in Afghanistan in order to end the ability of the Taliban regime to provide safe haven to al Qaeda and to put a stop to al Qaeda’s use of the territory of Afghanistan as a base of operations for terrorist activities. Many observers argue that in succeeding years, as U.S. and world attention shifted sharply to the war in Iraq, the Afghan war became the “other war” and suffered from neglect. The Obama Administration, however, has made the war in Afghanistan a higher priority, by giving it early attention, regularly conducting strategy reviews, and making significant additional commitments of civilian and military resources. By early 2011, senior leaders, including the Commander of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), General David Petraeus, were pointing to discrete progress on the ground, though noting that such progress was still “fragile and reversible.” In late 2010, NATO and the Afghan government agreed to pursue a key medium-term goal: the transition of lead responsibility for security to Afghans throughout the country by the end of 2014. The U.S. government has stated its intention to begin drawing down some U.S. forces from Afghanistan in July 2011, and also to maintain a long-term strategic partnership with Afghanistan beyond 2014. Strategic vision for Afghanistan is still, many would argue, a work in progress. President Karzai has consistently stressed the theme of “Afghan leadership, Afghan ownership.” President Obama has consistently stressed the core goals of the United States: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al- Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to prevent their return. Yet for the U.S. government, fundamental issues remain unresolved. These include • determining the minimum essential conditions required for Afghanistan itself to be able to sustain stability with relatively limited international support; • defining the appropriate combination of U.S. efforts, together with other international resources, over time, required to achieve those minimum conditions; and • balancing U.S. national security interests in Afghanistan and the region against other imperatives, in a constrained fiscal environment. This report, which will be updated as events warrant, describes and analyzes • the key players in the war in Afghanistan; • the strategic outlooks of the Afghan government, the U.S. government, and NATO; • the threats to the security and stability of the Afghan state and its people; • the major facets of the current effort: security, governance and anti-corruption, development, reconciliation and reintegration, and transition; • mechanisms in place to measure progress; and • critical issues that Congress may wish to consider further. Congressional Research Service War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Operations, and Issues for Congress Contents Overview ....................................................................................................................................1 Major Stakeholders ...............................................................................................................1 Current Dynamics .................................................................................................................1 Key Debates..........................................................................................................................2 Origins of the War.......................................................................................................................3 Prelude to War ......................................................................................................................3 Major Combat Operations .....................................................................................................4 Post-Taliban Developments.........................................................................................................5 Bonn Process ........................................................................................................................5 The Afghan People in Post-Taliban Afghanistan ....................................................................5 Strategy ......................................................................................................................................6 Afghan Strategy....................................................................................................................6 U.S. Strategy.........................................................................................................................7 Post-9/11 Aims................................................................................................................7 Bush Administration Strategy..........................................................................................7 Obama Administration Strategy.......................................................................................8 COMISAF Initial Assessment .........................................................................................8 Fall 2009 Strategy Review ..............................................................................................9 December 2010 Afghanistan Pakistan Annual Review...................................................10 U.S. Strategy in 2011 .................................................................................................... 11 NATO Strategy ...................................................................................................................11 The Threat ................................................................................................................................12 The Insurgencies .................................................................................................................13 Current Security Conditions ..........................................................................................13 Taliban..........................................................................................................................14 Haqqani Network..........................................................................................................15 Hezb-i-Islami Gulbuddin (HiG).....................................................................................15 “Criminal Patronage Networks” ..........................................................................................16 Kabul Bank and National-Level Institutions ..................................................................16 Sub-National-Level Powerbrokers.................................................................................17 Ahmed Wali Karzai.................................................................................................17 General Abdul Razziq .............................................................................................18 Governor Gul Agha Sherzai ....................................................................................18 International Community Practices......................................................................................19 Structure of the International Effort...........................................................................................20 Leadership of the Effort ......................................................................................................20 Lead Nation Model .......................................................................................................20 Afghanistan Compact and UNAMA..............................................................................20 Kabul Process ...............................................................................................................21 NATO.................................................................................................................................22 ISAF Creation and Legal Basis for Presence .................................................................22 ISAF Mandate...............................................................................................................22 ISAF Geographic Expansion through Stages .................................................................23 ISAF Organization........................................................................................................23 ISAF Joint Command (IJC).....................................................................................23 Congressional Research Service War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Operations, and Issues for Congress NATO Training Mission-Afghanistan (NTM-A)......................................................24 Regional Commands...............................................................................................24 ISAF Troop Contributors...............................................................................................24 National Caveats...........................................................................................................25 Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs).......................................................................25 NATO Senior Civilian
Recommended publications
  • Civil Wars & Global Disorder
    on the horizon: Dædalus Ending Civil Wars: Constraints & Possibilities edited by Karl Eikenberry & Stephen D. Krasner Francis Fukuyama, Tanisha M. Fazal, Stathis N. Kalyvas, Steven Heydemann, Chuck Call & Susanna P. Campbell, Sumit Ganguly, Clare Lockhart, Thomas Risse & Eric Stollenwerk, Tanja A. Börzel & Sonja Grimm, Seyoum Mesfi n & Abdeta Beyene, Lyse Doucet, Nancy Lindborg & Joseph Hewitt, Richard Gowan & Stephen John Stedman, and Jean-Marie Guéhenno & Global Disorder: Threats Opportunities 2017 Civil Wars Fall Dædalus Native Americans & Academia Journal of the American Academy of Arts & Sciences edited by Ned Blackhawk, K. Tsianina Lomawaima, Bryan McKinley Jones Brayboy, Philip J. Deloria, Fall 2017 Loren Ghiglione, Douglas Medin, and Mark Trahant Anti-Corruption: Best Practices edited by Robert I. Rotberg Civil Wars & Global Disorder: Threats & Opportunities Karl Eikenberry & Stephen D. Krasner, guest editors with James D. Fearon Bruce D. Jones & Stephen John Stedman Stewart Patrick · Martha Crenshaw Paul H. Wise & Michele Barry Representing the intellectual community in its breadth Sarah Kenyon Lischer · Vanda Felbab-Brown and diversity, Dædalus explores the frontiers of Hendrik Spruyt · Stephen Biddle · William Reno knowledge and issues of public importance. Aila M. Matanock & Miguel García-Sánchez Barry R. Posen U.S. $15; www.amacad.org; @americanacad Civil War & the Current International System James D. Fearon Abstract: This essay sketches an explanation for the global spread of civil war up to the early 1990s and the partial
    [Show full text]
  • Progress in Afghanistan Bucharest Summit2-4 April 2008 Progress in Afghanistan
    © MOD NL © MOD Canada © MOD Canada Progress in Afghanistan Progress in Bucharest Summit 2-4 April 2008 Bucharest Summit2-4 Progress in Afghanistan Contents page 1. Foreword by Assistant Secretary General for Public Diplomacy, ..........................1 Jean-François Bureau, and NATO Spokesman, James Appathurai 2. Executive summary .........................................................................................................................................2 3. Security ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4 • IED attacks and Counter-IED efforts 4 • Musa Qala 5 • Operations Medusa successes - Highlights Panjwayi and Zhari 6 • Afghan National Army 8 • Afghan National Police 10 • ISAF growth 10 4. Reconstruction and Development ............................................................................................... 12 • Snapshots of PRT activities 14 • Afghanistan’s aviation sector: taking off 16 • NATO-Japan Grant Assistance for Grassroots Projects 17 • ISAF Post-Operations Humanitarian Relief Fund 18 • Humanitarian Assistance - Winterisation 18 5. Governance ....................................................................................................................................................... 19 • Counter-Narcotics 20 © MOD Canada Foreword The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) mission is approaching five years of operations in Afghanistan. This report is a
    [Show full text]
  • Afghanistan, 1989-1996: Between the Soviets and the Taliban
    Afghanistan, 1989-1996: Between the Soviets and the Taliban A thesis submitted to the Miami University Honors Program in partial fulfillment of the Requirements for University Honors with Distinction by, Brandon Smith May 2005 Oxford, OH ABSTRACT AFGHANISTAN, 1989-1996: BETWEEN THE SOVIETS AND THE TALIBAN by, BRANDON SMITH This paper examines why the Afghan resistance fighters from the war against the Soviets, the mujahideen, were unable to establish a government in the time period between the withdrawal of the Soviet army from Afghanistan in 1989 and the consolidation of power by the Taliban in 1996. A number of conflicting explanations exist regarding Afghanistan’s instability during this time period. This paper argues that the developments in Afghanistan from 1989 to 1996 can be linked to the influence of actors outside Afghanistan, but not to the extent that the choices and actions of individual actors can be overlooked or ignored. Further, the choices and actions of individual actors need not be explained in terms of ancient animosities or historic tendencies, but rather were calculated moves to secure power. In support of this argument, international, national, and individual level factors are examined. ii Afghanistan, 1989-1996: Between the Soviets and the Taliban by, Brandon Smith Approved by: _________________________, Advisor Karen L. Dawisha _________________________, Reader John M. Rothgeb, Jr. _________________________, Reader Homayun Sidky Accepted by: ________________________, Director, University Honors Program iii Thanks to Karen Dawisha for her guidance and willingness to help on her year off, and to John Rothgeb and Homayun Sidky for taking the time to read the final draft and offer their feedback.
    [Show full text]
  • COIN in Afghanistan - Winning the Battles, Losing the War?
    COIN in Afghanistan - Winning the Battles, Losing the War? MAGNUS NORELL FOI, Swedish Defence Research Agency, is a mainly assignment-funded agency under the Ministry of Defence. The core activities are research, method and technology development, as well as studies conducted in the interests of Swedish defence and the safety and security of society. The organisation employs approximately 1000 personnel of whom about 800 are scientists. This makes FOI Sweden’s largest research institute. FOI gives its customers access to leading-edge expertise in a large number of fields such as security policy studies, defence and security related analyses, the assessment of various types of threat, systems for control and management of crises, protection against and management of hazardous substances, IT security and the potential offered by new sensors. FOI Swedish Defence Research Agency Phone: +46 8 555 030 00 www.foi.se FOI Memo 3123 Memo Defence Analysis Defence Analysis Fax: +46 8 555 031 00 ISSN 1650-1942 March 2010 SE-164 90 Stockholm Magnus Norell COIN in Afghanistan - Winning the Battles, Losing the War? “If you don’t know where you’re going. Any road will take you there” (From a song by George Harrison) FOI Memo 3123 Title COIN in Afghanistan – Winning the Battles, Losing the War? Rapportnr/Report no FOI Memo 3123 Rapporttyp/Report Type FOI Memo Månad/Month Mars/March Utgivningsår/Year 2010 Antal sidor/Pages 41 p ISSN ISSN 1650-1942 Kund/Customer Försvarsdepartementet Projektnr/Project no A12004 Godkänd av/Approved by Eva Mittermaier FOI, Totalförsvarets Forskningsinstitut FOI, Swedish Defence Research Agency Avdelningen för Försvarsanalys Department of Defence Analysis 164 90 Stockholm SE-164 90 Stockholm FOI Memo 3123 Programme managers remarks The Asia Security Studies programme at the Swedish Defence Research Agency’s Department of Defence Analysis conducts research and policy relevant analysis on defence and security related issues.
    [Show full text]
  • 2011 Kurt Schork Memorial Awards Winners Are Named Brave Reporting
    News release from Kurt Schork Memorial Fund, London 14 October 2011 2011 Kurt Schork Memorial Awards winners are named Brave reporting from Libya, Afghanistan and Zimbabwe stood out for judges assessing entries for this year’s Kurt Schork Memorial Awards in International Journalism, the results of which are announced today (Friday, 14 October, 2011). Naming British journalist Jerome Starkey as the 2011 winner of the category for freelance journalist covering foreign news, the judges said he had clearly taken high risks to get his stories in Afghanistan and Libya. This year’s winner in the local reporter category is Gertrude Fadziso Pswarayi who wrote about raped and exploited women in Zimbabwe, a country with “zero tolerance for the journalism of revelation”, the judges noted. Almost 90 journalists from around the world submitted entries for the 2011 Kurt Schork Memorial Awards which are the only ones that specifically honour the contributions of freelance journalists covering foreign news and reporters living and working in the developing world and countries in transition. Each entrant can provide up to three articles for consideration and the winner of each category receives a US $5,000 monetary award, presented at a ceremony in London. This year’s ceremony will be held on November 17, hosted by Thomson Reuters Foundation at Canary Wharf. Jerome Starkey’s winning entries were two reports from Afghanistan and one from Libya. A story from Helmand province published in The Times (UK) in October last year described being present during a mine blast that claimed a British soldier’s life; another published in The Scotsman in March this year told of the aftermath of a Taleban roadside bombing.
    [Show full text]
  • Taliban Fragmentation FACT, FICTION, and FUTURE by Andrew Watkins
    PEACEWORKS Taliban Fragmentation FACT, FICTION, AND FUTURE By Andrew Watkins NO. 160 | MARCH 2020 Making Peace Possible NO. 160 | MARCH 2020 ABOUT THE REPORT This report examines the phenomenon of insurgent fragmentation within Afghanistan’s Tali- ban and implications for the Afghan peace process. This study, which the author undertook PEACE PROCESSES as an independent researcher supported by the Asia Center at the US Institute of Peace, is based on a survey of the academic literature on insurgency, civil war, and negotiated peace, as well as on interviews the author conducted in Afghanistan in 2019 and 2020. ABOUT THE AUTHOR Andrew Watkins has worked in more than ten provinces of Afghanistan, most recently as a political affairs officer with the United Nations. He has also worked as an indepen- dent researcher, a conflict analyst and adviser to the humanitarian community, and a liaison based with Afghan security forces. Cover photo: A soldier walks among a group of alleged Taliban fighters at a National Directorate of Security facility in Faizabad in September 2019. The status of prisoners will be a critical issue in future negotiations with the Taliban. (Photo by Jim Huylebroek/New York Times) The views expressed in this report are those of the author alone. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Institute of Peace. An online edition of this and related reports can be found on our website (www.usip.org), together with additional information on the subject. © 2020 by the United States Institute of Peace United States Institute of Peace 2301 Constitution Avenue NW Washington, DC 20037 Phone: 202.457.1700 Fax: 202.429.6063 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.usip.org Peaceworks No.
    [Show full text]
  • HD in 2020: Peacemaking in Perspective → Page 10 About HD → Page 6 HD Governance: the Board → Page 30
    June 2021 EN About HD in 2020: HD governance: HD → page 6 Peacemaking in perspective → page 10 The Board → page 30 Annual Report 2020 mediation for peace www.hdcentre.org Trusted. Neutral. Independent. Connected. Effective. The Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (HD) mediates between governments, non-state armed groups and opposition parties to reduce conflict, limit the human suffering caused by war and develop opportunities for peaceful settlements. As a non-profit based in Switzerland, HD helps to build the path to stability and development for people, communities and countries through more than 50 peacemaking projects around the world. → Table of contents HD in 2020: Peacemaking in perspective → page 10 COVID in conflict zones → page 12 Social media and cyberspace → page 12 Supporting peace and inclusion → page 14 Middle East and North Africa → page 18 Francophone Africa → page 20 The Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (HD) is a private diplomacy organisation founded on the principles of humanity, Anglophone and Lusophone Africa → page 22 impartiality, neutrality and independence. Its mission is to help prevent, mitigate and resolve armed conflict through dialogue and mediation. Eurasia → page 24 Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue (HD) Asia → page 26 114 rue de Lausanne, 1202 – Geneva, Switzerland Tel: +41 (0)22 908 11 30 Email: [email protected] Latin America → page 28 Website: www.hdcentre.org Follow HD on Twitter and Linkedin: https://twitter.com/hdcentre https://www.linkedin.com/company/centreforhumanitariandialogue Design and layout: Hafenkrone © 2021 – Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue About HD governance: Investing Reproduction of all or part of this publication may be authorised only with written consent or acknowledgement of the source.
    [Show full text]
  • The Afghanistan-Pakistan Wars, 2008–2009: Micro-Geographies, Conflict Diffusion, and Clusters of Violence
    The Afghanistan-Pakistan Wars, 2008–2009: Micro-geographies, Conflict Diffusion, and Clusters of Violence John O’Loughlin, Frank D. W. Witmer, and Andrew M. Linke1 Abstract: A team of political geographers analyzes over 5,000 violent events collected from media reports for the Afghanistan and Pakistan conflicts during 2008 and 2009. The violent events are geocoded to precise locations and the authors employ an exploratory spatial data analysis approach to examine the recent dynamics of the wars. By mapping the violence and examining its temporal dimensions, the authors explain its diffusion from traditional foci along the border between the two countries. While violence is still overwhelmingly concentrated in the Pashtun regions in both countries, recent policy shifts by the American and Pakistani gov- ernments in the conduct of the war are reflected in a sizeable increase in overall violence and its geographic spread to key cities. The authors identify and map the clusters (hotspots) of con- flict where the violence is significantly higher than expected and examine their shifts over the two-year period. Special attention is paid to the targeting strategy of drone missile strikes and the increase in their number and geographic extent by the Obama administration. Journal of Economic Literature, Classification Numbers: H560, H770, O180. 15 figures, 1 table, 113 ref- erences. Key words: Afghanistan, Pakistan, Taliban, ­­Al- Qaeda, insurgency, Islamic terrorism, U.S. military, International Security Assistance Forces, Durand Line, Tribal Areas, Northwest Frontier Province, ACLED, NATO. merica’s “longest war” is now (August 2010) nearing its ninth anniversary. It was Alaunched in October 2001 as a “war of necessity” (Barack Obama, August 17, 2009) to remove the Taliban from power in Afghanistan, and thus remove the support of this regime for Al-Qaeda, the terrorist organization that carried out the September 2001 attacks in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • “TELLING the STORY” Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: a Regional Perspective (2011-2016)
    “TELLING THE STORY” Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: A Regional Perspective (2011-2016) Emma Hooper (ed.) This monograph has been produced with the financial assistance of the Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the position of the Ministry. © 2016 CIDOB This monograph has been produced with the financial assistance of the Norway Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not reflect the position of the Ministry. CIDOB edicions Elisabets, 12 08001 Barcelona Tel.: 933 026 495 www.cidob.org [email protected] D.L.: B 17561 - 2016 Barcelona, September 2016 CONTENTS CONTRIBUTOR BIOGRAPHIES 5 FOREWORD 11 Tine Mørch Smith INTRODUCTION 13 Emma Hooper CHAPTER ONE: MAPPING THE SOURCES OF TENSION WITH REGIONAL DIMENSIONS 17 Sources of Tension in Afghanistan & Pakistan: A Regional Perspective .......... 19 Zahid Hussain Mapping the Sources of Tension and the Interests of Regional Powers in Afghanistan and Pakistan ............................................................................................. 35 Emma Hooper & Juan Garrigues CHAPTER TWO: KEY PHENOMENA: THE TALIBAN, REFUGEES , & THE BRAIN DRAIN, GOVERNANCE 57 THE TALIBAN Preamble: Third Party Roles and Insurgencies in South Asia ............................... 61 Moeed Yusuf The Pakistan Taliban Movement: An Appraisal ......................................................... 65 Michael Semple The Taliban Movement in Afghanistan .......................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Old Habits, New Consequences Old Habits, New Khalid Homayun Consequences Nadiri Pakistan’S Posture Toward Afghanistan Since 2001
    Old Habits, New Consequences Old Habits, New Khalid Homayun Consequences Nadiri Pakistan’s Posture toward Afghanistan since 2001 Since the terrorist at- tacks of September 11, 2001, Pakistan has pursued a seemingly incongruous course of action in Afghanistan. It has participated in the U.S. and interna- tional intervention in Afghanistan both by allying itself with the military cam- paign against the Afghan Taliban and al-Qaida and by serving as the primary transit route for international military forces and matériel into Afghanistan.1 At the same time, the Pakistani security establishment has permitted much of the Afghan Taliban’s political leadership and many of its military command- ers to visit or reside in Pakistani urban centers. Why has Pakistan adopted this posture of Afghan Taliban accommodation despite its nominal participa- tion in the Afghanistan intervention and its public commitment to peace and stability in Afghanistan?2 This incongruence is all the more puzzling in light of the expansion of insurgent violence directed against Islamabad by the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), a coalition of militant organizations that are independent of the Afghan Taliban but that nonetheless possess social and po- litical links with Afghan cadres of the Taliban movement. With violence against Pakistan growing increasingly indiscriminate and costly, it remains un- clear why Islamabad has opted to accommodate the Afghan Taliban through- out the post-2001 period. Despite a considerable body of academic and journalistic literature on Pakistan’s relationship with Afghanistan since 2001, the subject of Pakistani accommodation of the Afghan Taliban remains largely unaddressed. Much of the existing literature identiªes Pakistan’s security competition with India as the exclusive or predominant driver of Pakistani policy vis-à-vis the Afghan Khalid Homayun Nadiri is a Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • The High Stakes Battle for the Future of Musa Qala
    JULY 2008 . VOL 1 . ISSUE 8 The High Stakes Battle for district. This created the standard and treated their presumed supporters in of small landlords farming small, the south better,5 this time there would the Future of Musa Qala well-irrigated holdings. While tribal be no mercy shown to “collaborators.” structure, economy and population alike This included executing, along with By David C. Isby have been badly damaged by decades of alleged criminals, several “spies,” which warfare, Musa Qala has a situation that included Afghans who had taken part in since its reoccupation by NATO and is more likely to yield internal stability work-for-food programs.6 Afghan forces in December 2007, the by building on what is left of traditional remote Musa Qala district of northern Afghanistan. The Alizai are also hoping to get more Helmand Province in Afghanistan from the new security situation. They has become important to the future Before the well-publicized October 2006 have requested that Kabul make Musa course of the insurgency but also to the “truce” that Alizai leaders concluded Qala a separate province.7 This proposal future of a Pashtun tribe (the Alizai), with the Taliban, Musa Qala had has been supported by current and a republic (the Islamic Republic of experienced a broad range of approaches former Helmand provincial governors. Afghanistan) and even a kingdom (the to countering the insurgency. In addition This would provide opportunities for United Kingdom). The changes that to their dissatisfaction with British patronage and give them a legally- take place at Musa Qala will influence operations in 2006, local inhabitants recognized base that competing tribal the future of all of them.
    [Show full text]
  • Security Force Assistance in Afghanistan Identifying Lessons for Future Efforts
    CHILDREN AND FAMILIES The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that EDUCATION AND THE ARTS helps improve policy and decisionmaking through ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT research and analysis. HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE This electronic document was made available from INFRASTRUCTURE AND www.rand.org as a public service of the RAND TRANSPORTATION Corporation. INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS LAW AND BUSINESS NATIONAL SECURITY Skip all front matter: Jump to Page 16 POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY Support RAND Purchase this document TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY Browse Reports & Bookstore Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore the RAND Arroyo Center View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND electronic documents to a non-RAND website is prohibited. RAND electronic documents are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND mono- graphs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Security Force Assistance in Afghanistan Identifying Lessons for Future Efforts Terrence K. Kelly, Nora Bensahel, Olga Oliker ARROYO CENTER The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Army under Contract No.
    [Show full text]