DOCSLIB.ORG

The NATO Campaign in Afghanistan Comparisons with the Experience in Colombia

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The NATO Campaign in Afghanistan Comparisons with the Experience in Colombia The NATO Campaign in Afghanistan Comparisons With the Experience in Colombia BY DICKIE DAVIS Just days after 9/11, Congress authorized the use of force against al Qaeda and those who harbored them – an authorization that continues to this day. The vote in the Senate was 98 to nothing. The vote in the House was 420 to 1. For the first time in its history, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization invoked Article 5 – the commitment that says an attack on one member nation is an attack on all. And the United Nations Security Council endorsed the use of all necessary steps to respond to the 9/11 attacks. America, our allies and the world were acting as one to destroy al-Qaeda’s terrorist network and to protect our common security. – President Barack Obama, West Point, December 1, 2009 n June 2014 I accompanied a field trip organised by the Brenthurst Foundation, a South African non-governmental organization, to Colombia. The aim of the trip was to look at what Ilessons could be learned from the Colombian Government’s successful campaign against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). Having developed, over the last 10 years, an in depth knowledge of the war in Afghanistan since 2001 I was struck by both some of the simi- larities and differences between the two countries, and the attempts by the international com- munity to help. This article looks at the campaign in Afghanistan as the NATO mission comes to a close, drawing comparisons with the Colombian experience as appropriate. It focuses on five areas: campaign goals and the linkages to values and culture; campaign ownership; corruption; troop numbers; and military capacity building. When the U.S.-led coalition launched Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in 2001, its aim was the defeat of terrorist elements operating from Afghanistan. It sought to achieve this by defeating Taliban military forces, removing their government from power and destroying those elements of al-Qaeda operating in Afghanistan. The longer-term aim of the coalition was to Major General Dickie Davis has recently retired from the British Army where he was Director General of Army Recruiting and Training, and is an associate of the, South African based, Brenthurst Foundation PRISM 5, NO. 3 FEATURES | 135 DAVIS create a stable, democratic Afghanistan that regarded the operation as a peacekeeping mis- would no longer be a safe haven for terrorists. sion. Thus, with OEF seeing Afghanistan as OEF started as a conventional warfighting being at the end of a conventional war and operation that used air power, Special Forces, ISAF initially viewing Afghanistan as a peace- and troops from the Northern Alliance to keeping operation, it was not until the comple- defeat the Taliban, and this phase was very suc- tion of ISAF expansion that the whole interna- cessful. However, many key Taliban govern- tional military effort could be put on a ment members and military commanders common doctrinal footing: that of counter- escaped. An end to combat operations was insurgency. declared by OEF in May 2003, and at this Throughout the period 2007 – 2009, the point the operation focused on stabilizing the Taliban-led insurgency grew in intensity, par- country. ticularly in the South and the East of the coun- While there had been tactical engage- try, and ISAF and Afghan commanders made ments with small numbers of the Taliban in repeated requests for more forces and an the south and east of the country ever since expansion in the planned size of the Afghan their fall, by 2005 the numbers and size of Army. President Obama agreed to a troop these engagements increased considerably. In increase in March 2009. In autumn, 2009 the effect, during the period from 2001 to the start President led a review of the Afghan mission, of 2005, the Taliban achieved strategic survival which resulted in an agreement to surge both and then began to run an offensive campaign U.S. and international forces for an 18-month in Afghanistan, which they hoped to grow period. Beyond this period there was a clearly- from guerrilla warfare to conventional war stated intent by the ISAF nations to disengage fighting. from combat operations, the date for which The International Security Assistance Force was subsequently set as the end of 2014. (ISAF), as approved in the Bonn Agreement of During the London Conference in January December 2001, deployed under a UN man- 2010 it was announced that the Afghan Army date as soon as the agreement was signed. would be increased in strength to 171,600 and Initially, ISAF was deployed to Kabul, thus the Police to 134,000 by October 2011, thus securing the new government’s seat of power. providing the scale of forces necessary to However, the mandate included assistance in enable an international troop drawdown. The the training of Afghanistan’s armed forces, hard fighting that followed over the course of assistance in reconstruction and, most impor- 2010 changed the dynamic of the campaign tantly, for expansion of ISAF throughout and another U.S. review in December of that Afghanistan. The ISAF mission was formally year confirmed the start of the drawdown as taken over by NATO in August 2003, and July 2011, with the end of 2014 set as the date expansion, initially to the north of the country, for the end of the NATO mission. The exit was started in December 2003 and completed strategy was confirmed at the Chicago NATO with the inclusion of the east of the country in summit of May 2012. October 2006. Until the expansion of the mis- The UN has been present in Afghanistan sion to southern Afghanistan in July 2006 the since October 1988 with a limited purpose of majority of NATO force-contributing nations assistance and co-ordination, and as a result its 136 | FROM THE FIELD PRISM 5, NO. 3 THE NATO CAMPAIGN IN AFGHANISTAN footprint has always been relatively small. Issue 1: The Linkage between the Goals Following the war in 2001, the UN role in of an Intervention and Values and Afghanistan remained one of assistance. In Culture particular, it was felt that the mission needed No longer is our existence as states under to operate with a light footprint, in order to threat. Now our actions are guided by a prevent it from being seen as yet another occu- more subtle blend of mutual self-interest pying power, and that an Afghan interim and moral purpose in defending the values administration should quickly take the lead. we cherish. In the end, values and interests President Karzai formed the Interim merge. If we can establish and spread the Afghan Administration after the signing of the values of liberty, the rule of law, human Bonn Agreement in December 2001. It was rights and an open society then that is in drawn from key members of the Northern our national interests too. The spread of Alliance and other important groups who had our values makes us safer. As John Kennedy been driven from power by the Taliban. put it, “Freedom is indivisible and when However, very few members of the interim one man is enslaved who is free?” administration and subsequent government had lengthy experience in running a country, – Prime Minister Tony Blair, Chicago, and the civil service, almost destroyed by over April 1999 20 years of war and limited formal govern- ment, was ineffective. Furthermore, a demo- When Prime Minister Blair made his Chicago cratically elected government had never gov- speech in April 1999, Europe was in the mid- erned Afghanistan; rather, traditional tribal dle of the Kosovo crisis. For the UK, this was structures had dominated, and these were followed by intervention in May 2000 in Sierra based on patronage rather than on a culture of Leone. In fact, the overseas interventions of the service provision to the electorate. As a result, 1990’s involving British Forces were relatively warlordism remained a feature of Afghan pol- short, self-contained, and largely successful. itics. Thus by 2001 the UK had a doctrine for inter- Given the broad international consensus vention and ten years of relatively successful behind the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan, there practice as the backdrop for the interventions was much support for the new government of of the first decade of the 21st century. As Rob the country from the international commu- Fry remarks: “Wars in defence of liberal values nity. Lead nations were appointed to help are what the British people fought throughout rebuild key elements of the state and support the twentieth century, and these wars were the government in difficult areas. Nations and wars of unnegotiable necessity. Wars in promo- international organizations offered donations, tion of liberal values are what the British although many did not want to pass their armed forces have fought for since 1991 and, money through the Government and thus by their very nature, they have been discretion- funded the projects directly. This approach ary.”1 Looking back it is clear that “Chicago gave the Government of Afghanistan some Doctrine” thinking had a huge influence on considerable co-ordination challenges. the conduct of the international community in Afghanistan and on the early stages of the PRISM 5, NO. 3 FROM THE FIELD | 137 DAVIS campaign. After the initial defeat of the Taliban taxes to a central government or of that gov- in 2001, in an unstated way, it underpinned ernment delivering effective services.2 our plans to help put the country back on its This issue has been at the heart of the feet. Yet the culture of the population, the very debate between coalition members about fabric of the nation, and the nature of its tra- whether the campaign was just about the ditional systems of governance were so far defeat of al-Qaeda and the denial of safe removed from those of the Western countries havens, or whether it was about the much big- involved, and the timescales involved so short, ger task of nation-building in order to create a that there was bound to be disappointment stable Afghanistan that was resilient to the and recalibration.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Causes of the Second Anglo-Afghan War, a Probe Into the Reality of the International Relations in Central Asia in the Second Half of the 19Th Century1
    wbhr 01|2014 The Causes of the Second Anglo-Afghan War, a Probe into the Reality of the International Relations in Central Asia in the Second Half of the 19th Century1 JIŘÍ KÁRNÍK Institute of World History, Faculty of Arts, Charles University, Prague Nám. J. Palacha 2, 116 38 Praha, Czech Republic [email protected] Central Asia has always been a very important region. Already in the time of Alexander the Great the most important trade routes between Europe and Asia run through this region. This importance kept strengthening with the development of the trade which was particularly connected with the famous Silk Road. Cities through which this trade artery runs through were experiencing a real boom in the late Middle Ages and in the Early modern period. Over the wealth of the business oases of Khiva and Bukhara rose Samarkand, the capital city of the empire of the last Great Mongol conqueror Timur Lenk (Tamerlane).2 The golden age of the Silk Road did not last forever. The overseas discoveries and the rapid development of the transoceanic sailing was gradually weakening the influence of this ancient trade route and thus lessening the importance and wealth of the cities and areas it run through. The profits of the East India companies were so huge that it paid off for them to protect their business territories. In the name of the trade protection began also the political penetration of the European powers into the overseas areas and empires began to emerge. 1 This article was created under project British-Afghan relations in 19th century which is dealt with in 2014 at Faculty of Arts of Charles University in Prague with funds from Charles University Grant Agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Which Law Applies to the Afghan Conflict?
    WHICH LAW APPLIES TO THE AFGHAN CONFLICT? By W. Michael Reisman and James Silk* Soviet armed forces have been directly engaged in combat in Afghanistan for more than 8 years.1 The level of international protest, sanctions and media coverage diminished after the initial outcry over the large-scale So- viet intervention in December 1979. With the conclusion in many diplo- matic and professional quarters that the Soviet presence in Afghanistan would be of long duration, the focus of international disapproval shifted from the question whether the Soviet presence in Afghanistan was lawful or not to whether Soviet conduct in Afghanistan was lawful or not: fromjus ad bellum to jus in bello. Access to Afghanistan has been extremely limited, but various individ- uals, commissions and credible international organizations have reported extensive abuses of human rights by Soviet forces there; most of the reports are based largely on refugee testimony.2 While the practices of the Soviet occupation and campaign have emerged with increasing clarity, the ques- tion of which law these practices are to be tested against is still controversial. * W. Michael Reisman is Wesley Newcomb Hohfeld Professor of Jurisprudence, Yale Law School. James Silk expects to receive aJ.D. from Yale University in 1989. The authors gratefully acknowledge the comments and criticism of colleagues on the Board of Editors and of several scholars in Europe. The authors are, of course, solely responsible for the contents. I By the time this article is published, it is possible that the Soviet Union will, at least, have begun to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan.
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Intelligence in Covert Operatives
    OVERT ACCEPTANCE: CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE IN COVERT OPERATIVES CHIP MICHAEL BUCKLEY A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Mercyhurst University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN APPLIED INTELLIGENCE RIDGE SCHOOL FOR INTELLIGENCE STUDIES AND INFORMATION SCIENCE MERCYHURST UNIVERSITY ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA JANUARY 2015 RIDGE SCHOOL FOR INTELLIGENCE STUDIES AND INFORMATION SCIENCE MERCYHURST UNIVERSITY ERIE, PENNSYLVANIA OVERT ACCEPTANCE: CULTURAL INTELLIGENCE IN COVERT OPERATIVES A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Mercyhurst University In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for The Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN APPLIED INTELLIGENCE Submitted By: CHIP MICHAEL BUCKLEY Certificate of Approval: ___________________________________ Stephen Zidek, M.A. Assistant Professor The Ridge School of Intelligence Studies and Information Science ___________________________________ James G. Breckenridge, Ph.D. Associate Professor The Ridge School of Intelligence Studies and Information Science ___________________________________ Phillip J. Belfiore, Ph.D. Vice President Office of Academic Affairs January 2015 Copyright © 2015 by Chip Michael Buckley All rights reserved. iii DEDICATION To my father. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge a number of important individuals who have provided an extraordinary amount of support throughout this process. The faculty at Mercyhurst University, particularly Professor Stephen Zidek, provided invaluable guidance when researching and developing this thesis. My friends and classmates also volunteered important ideas and guidance throughout this time. Lastly, my family’s support, patience, and persistent inquiries regarding my progress cannot be overlooked. v ABSTRACT OF THE THESIS Overt Acceptance: Cultural Intelligence in Covert Operatives A Critical Examination By Chip Michael Buckley Master of Science in Applied Intelligence Mercyhurst University, 2014 Professor S.
    [Show full text]
  • Law of War Issues in Ground Hostilities in Afghanistan
    IX Law of War Issues in Ground Hostilities in Afghanistan Gary D. Solis· Introduction ritish soldiers first came to Afghanistan in 1839, hoping to extend the Em­ Bpire and counter growing Russian influence there. That four-year conflia ended in the massacre of most of the retreating British force of 16,500. demonstrat­ ing that, while Afghanistan could be conquered, holding it was another thing. In 1878, again fearing Russian influence in the region, England once more invaded Afghanistan from its base in India. Britain's early vietol)' and regime change nearly proved Pyrrhic. With their occupation unexpectedly costly in men and treasure, the English gained control of Afghan foreign policy, then withdrew most of their forces to India. In 1919, when remaining British units were attacked by Afghan forces, the British initiated a third foray into Afghanistan, this one more successfu] than the prior two adventures. Afghanistan nevertheless gained its independence in 1921. Reminiscent of the British incursions into Afghanistan. from 1978 to 1992 the Soviet Union sponsored an armed conflict between the communist Afghan gov­ ernment and anti-communist Muslim guerrillas. For their trouble, the Russians learned the grim lesson of the Kipling poem, "Young British Soldier": "When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains. And the women come out to cut up what remains, Jest roll to your rifle and blowout your brains, An' go to your Gawd like a soldier .. .." • Adjunct Professor of Law, Georgetown University Law Center. Law of War Issues in Ground Hostilities in Afghanistan Now, prepared to overcome history with modern weapons and new tactics, the United States is in the seventh year of its war in Afghanistan.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rise and Stall of the Islamic State in Afghanistan
    UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org SPECIAL REPORT 2301 Constitution Ave., NW • Washington, DC 20037 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063 ABOUT THE REPORT Casey Garret Johnson This report details the structure, composition, and growth of the Islamic State’s so-called Khorasan province, particularly in the eastern Afghan province of Nangarhar, and outlines considerations for international policymakers. More than sixty interviews with residents of Nangarhar and provincial and The Rise and Stall of national Afghan security officials carried out by The Liaison Office, an Afghan research and peacebuilding organization, in Nangarhar and Kabul in the spring and summer of 2016 informed this report. the Islamic State in ABOUT THE AUTHOR Afghanistan Casey Garret Johnson is an independent researcher focusing on violent extremism and local politics in Afghanistan. Summary • The Islamic State’s Khorasan province (IS-K) is led by a core of former Tehrik-e-Taliban Paki- stan commanders from Orakzai and Khyber Agencies of Pakistan; the majority of mid-level commanders are former Taliban from Nangarhar, with the rank and file a mixture of local Afghans, Pakistanis, and foreign jihadists mostly from Central Asia. • IS-K receives funding from the Islamic State’s Central Command and is in contact with lead- ership in Iraq and Syria, but the setup and day-to-day operations of the Khorasan province have been less closely controlled than other Islamic State branches such as that in Libya. • IS-K emerged in two separate locations in Afghanistan in 2014—the far eastern reaches of Nangarhar province along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and Kajaki district of southern Helmand province.
    [Show full text]
  • Afghanistan ICRC Worldwide Consultation on the Rules of War
    PEOPLE ON WAR Country report Afghanistan ICRC worldwide consultation on the rules of war Report by Greenberg Research, Inc. EVEN WARS HAVE LIMITS EVEN WARS HAVE LIMITS EVEN WARS HAVE LIMITS EVEN WARS HAVE INTERNATIONAL COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS About the People on War project To mark the 50th anniversary of the modern Geneva Conventions (on 12 August 1999), the ICRC launched its People on War project with the aim of building greater respect for fundamental humanitarian principles. At centre stage is a worldwide consultation giving the general public a chance to air their views on the many facets of war. The idea was that civilians and combatants alike would be able to share their experiences, express their opinions on what basic rules should apply in war, discuss why those rules sometimes break down and look at what the future holds. With this in mind, the ICRC commissioned Greenberg Research, Inc. to design a research programme that would enable people to be heard in the most effective way possible. Under the guidance of Greenberg Research, ICRC staff and Red Cross and Red Crescent volunteers carried out this consultation in 12 countries (Afghanistan, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Cambodia, Colombia, El Salvador, Georgia/ Abkhazia, Israel, the occupied territories and the autonomous territories, Lebanon, Nigeria, Philippines, Somalia and South Africa), conducting in-depth, face-to-face interviews, group discussions and national public opinion surveys. Surveys on the basis of a questionnaire only were conducted in a further five countries (France, Russian Federation, Switzerland, United Kingdom and United States) in order to reflect these people’s perceptions of war.
    [Show full text]
  • Counterinsurgency, Local Militias, and Statebuilding in Afghanistan
    [PEACEW RKS [ COUNTERINSURGENCY, LOCAL MILITIAS, AND STATEBUILDING IN AFGHANISTAN Jonathan Goodhand and Aziz Hakimi ABOUT THE REPORT Much international effort and funding have focused on building and bureaucratizing the means of violence in Afghanistan. At the same time, parallel government and NATO experiments have armed local defense forces, including local militias, under the Afghan Local Police (ALP) program to fight the insurgency and provide security at the local level. This report—which is based on a year’s research in Kabul and the provinces of Wardak, Baghlan, and Kunduz—seeks to understand the role and impact of the ALP on security and political dynamics in the context of ongoing counterinsurgency and stabilization operations and the projected drawdown of international troops in 2014 . ABOUT THE AUTHORS Jonathan Goodhand is a professor of conflict and development studies in the Development Studies department at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) at the University of London. His research interests include the political economy of aid, conflict, and postwar reconstruction, with a particular focus on Afghanistan and Sri Lanka. Aziz Hakimi is a PhD candidate at SOAS. His dissertation focuses on the ALP in relation to Afghan statebuilding. Cover photo: Afghan Local Police candidates, Daykundi Province, by Petty Officer 2nd Class David Brandenburg, supplied by DVIDS The views expressed in this report are those of the authors alone. They do not necessarily reflect the views of the United States Institute of Peace. United States Institute of Peace 2301 Constitution Ave., 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]
  • Afghanistan Lessons Identified 2001-2014
    1 AFGHANISTAN LESSONS IDENTIFIED 2001-2014 PART III Danish Lessons from Stabilisation & CIMIC Projects 2 Lieutenant Colonel Steen Bornholdt Andersen Project Researcher Niels Klingenberg Vistisen Student Researcher Anna Sofie Schøning 3 AFGHANISTAN LESSONS IDENTIFIED 2001-2014 PART III Danish Lessons from Stabilisation & CIMIC Projects 4 Layout: Lone Ravnkilde & Viki Rachlitz Coverphoto: Christian Munk & Stig Schmidt Knudsen ISBN 978-87-7605-813-5 (pdf) © Copenhagen 2016, the authors & The Royal Danish Defence College TABLE OF CONTENTS 5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9 Introduction 9 Methodology and sources used in the collection of lessons 9 The basis for Danish operations in Afghanistan 10 Lessons regarding the utilisation of integrated stabilisation funds 11 Lessons from CIMIC operations in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2014 12 From lessons captured to institutional learning 13 TASK DESCRIPTION 15 METHODOLOGY AND SOURCES USED IN THE COLLECTION OF LESSONS 17 Lessons 17 Source material and access to archives 18 Interviews and roundtable discussions 19 The structure of the report 20 THE BASIS FOR DANISH OPERATIONS IN AFGHANISTAN 23 The Danish stabilisation effort was integrated 23 The Danish stabilisation effort was internationally anchored 25 The overall Danish military engagement in Afghanistan 25 CIMIC – doctrine, directives and practice 27 The impact of the multinational framework on the Danish integrated effort 28 LESSONS REGARDING THE UTILISATION OF INTEGRATED STABILISATION 31 FUNDS IN AFGHANISTAN FROM 2001 TO 2014 The Helmand plans 32 Indicators
    [Show full text]
  • Operation Enduring Freedom
    Operation Enduring Freedom The War in Afghanistan (Operation Enduring Freedom) began in October, 2001 in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States. Following the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan in 1989 and the fall of the Afghan Communist government in 1992, a protracted civil war raged on between the various factions of anti-Communist Afghan fighters, who called themselves the Mujahadeen. Mullah Mohammed Omar, a Mullah (Islamic religious leader) and a member of the Pashtun ethnic group led a new armed group called the Taliban. The word Taliban means "student", and they attracted the support of Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaida organization. In 1994, the Taliban attacked and defeated local warlords and acquired a reputation for order and military success. From that point onward, until they seized Kabul in September, 1996, the Taliban fought against several militias and warlords, eventually defeating them all. Moscow feared the Taliban as a source of aid and support for the rebels it has fought in Chechnya and Tajikistan. Iran, dominated by Shiite Islamic fundamentalists, was at odds with the Sunni Muslim Taliban, largely over the treatment of the Afghan Shiite minority called the Hazaris. Pakistan's role in the Taliban success is controversial, as it is generally believed that several Taliban military victories are directly attributable to armed Pakistani intervention. After seizing Mazar-i Sharif, the Taliban provoked the hostility of the area's Shiite Hazari minority, and the warlord, General Malik, ended his relationship with the Taliban. The result was the execution of at least 3,000 captured Taliban soldiers by Malik and the Hazaris.
    [Show full text]
  • Prism Vol 5 No 3.Pdf
    PRISM VOL. 5, NO. 3 2015 A JOURNAL OF THE CENTER FOR COMPLEX OPERATIONS PRISM About VOL. 5, NO. 3 2015 PRISM is published by the Center for Complex Operations. PRISM is a security studies journal chartered to inform members of U.S. Federal agencies, allies, and other partners on complex EDITOR and integrated national security operations; reconstruction and state-building; relevant policy Michael Miklaucic and strategy; lessons learned; and developments in training and education to transform America’s security and development EDITORIAL ASSISTANTS Connor Christenson Talley Lattimore Jeffrey Listerman Communications Giorgio Rajao Constructive comments and contributions are important to us. Direct Hiram Reynolds communications to: COPY EDITORS Editor, PRISM Dale Erickson 260 Fifth Avenue (Building 64, Room 3605) Rebecca Harper Fort Lesley J. McNair Christoff Luehrs Washington, DC 20319 Nathan White Telephone: (202) 685-3442 DESIGN DIRecTOR FAX: Carib Mendez (202) 685-3581 Email: [email protected] ADVISORY BOARD Dr. Gordon Adams Dr. Pauline H. Baker Ambassador Rick Barton Contributions Professor Alain Bauer PRISM welcomes submission of scholarly, independent research from security policymakers Dr. Joseph J. Collins (ex officio) and shapers, security analysts, academic specialists, and civilians from the United States and Ambassador James F. Dobbins abroad. Submit articles for consideration to the address above or by email to [email protected] Ambassador John E. Herbst (ex officio) with “Attention Submissions Editor” in the subject line. Dr. David Kilcullen Ambassador Jacques Paul Klein Dr. Roger B. Myerson This is the authoritative, official U.S. Department of Defense edition of PRISM. Dr. Moisés Naím Any copyrighted portions of this journal may not be reproduced or extracted MG William L.
    [Show full text]
  • Mobilizing Nato for Afghanistan and Pakistan an Assessment of Alliance Capabilities
    !"#$%$&$'()'*+"),"-) *,(.*'$/+*')0)1*2$/+*' /#1/))"))2"#$1'& /33./#!"1!/-/4.3.$.") !"#$"% &'% $(" )$*+, '& $(" -%").+"#!, /#+ !'#0%")) MOBILIZING NATO FOR AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN AN ASSESSMENT OF ALLIANCE CAPABILITIES Mobilizing NATO for Afghanistan and Pakistan: Ensuring the Alliance’s Future A Project of the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress Co-Directors David M. Abshire W. Bruce Weinrod Project Senior Advisor General John Craddock, U.S. Army (Ret.) CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF THE PRESIDENCY AND CONGRESS THE CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF THE PRESIDENCY AND CONGRESS The Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress, founded in 1965, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan 501(c)(3) organization. The Center’s mission is to: promote leadership in the Presidency and the Congress to generate innovative solutions to current national challenges; preserve the historic memory of the Presidency by identifying lessons from the successes and failures of such leadership; draw on a wide range of talent to offer ways to better organize an increasingly compartmentalized federal government; and educate and inspire the next generation of America’s leaders to incorporate civility, inclusiveness, and character into their public and private lives and discourse. MOBILIZING NATO FOR AFGHANISTAN AND PAKISTAN: AN ASSESSMENT OF ALLIANCE CAPABILITIES Copyright © 2010 CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF THE PRESIDENCY AND CONGRESS All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, by any process or technique, without the express written consent of the publisher. Published in the United States of America. Cover photos from NATO and ISAF. The use of international organization symbols and national flags is purely illustrative, and does not indicate any official endorsement of this report or its findings by those organizations, their member nations, or national governments.
    [Show full text]
  • NEW EVIDENCE on the WAR in AFGHANISTAN Introduction
    COLD WAR INTERNATIONAL HISTORY PROJECT BULLETIN, ISSUE 14/15 NEW EVIDENCE ON THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN Introduction By Christian Friedrich Ostermann hat was behind the Soviet decision in December a substitute foothold in Afghanistan and worried about main- 1979 to invade Afghanistan? And when and why taining its credibility with communist world allies. Soviet lead- Wdid Mikhail Gorbachev decide to pull out Soviet ers were genuinely concerned that Afghan strongman troops nearly ten years later? What was the role of the US Hafizullah Amin was either a US agent or prepared to sell out covert assistance program, in particular the Stinger missiles? to the United States. At the CWIHP conference, former US What role did CIA intelligence play? How did the Afghan Charge d’Affaires J. Bruce Amstutz as well as other partici- War’s history, a key step in the rise of militant Islam, intersect pants forcefully refuted allegations of Agency links to Amin. with the history of the final decade of the Cold War? These In his five conversations with Amin in the fall of 1979, Amstutz were among the questions addressed at a major international remembered, the Afghan leader did not in any way suggest conference, “Towards an International History of the War in that he was interested in allying himself with the United States. Afghanistan,” organized in April 2002 by the Cold War Inter- US relations with successive communist regimes in Af- national History Project (CWIHP) in cooperation with the ghanistan had been volatile since the April 1978 communist Woodrow Wilson
    [Show full text]