DOCSLIB.ORG

Afghanistan After the Drawdown Council Special Report No

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Afghanistan After the Drawdown Council Special Report No Afghanistan After the Drawdown Cover Photo: An Afghan Army soldier fires a rocket-propelled grenade at suspected Taliban militants as U.S. Army soldiers crouch down at Combat Outpost Nolen in the Arghandab Valley north of Kandahar on July 27, 2010. (Bob Strong/Courtesy Reuters) Council on Foreign Relations Council Special Report No. 67 November 2013 58 East 68th Street New York, NY 10065 tel 212.434.9400 Council No. 67 Special Report Seth G. Jones and Keith Crane fax 212.434.9800 1777 F Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 tel 202.509.8400 Afghanistan After fax 202.509.8490 www.cfr.org the Drawdown Afghanistan After the Drawdown Council Special Report No. 67 November 2013 Seth G. Jones and Keith Crane Afghanistan After the Drawdown The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business execu- tives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. Founded in 1921, CFR carries out its mission by maintaining a diverse membership, with special programs to promote interest and develop expertise in the next generation of foreign policy leaders; con- vening meetings at its headquarters in New York and in Washington, DC, and other cities where senior government officials, members of Congress, global leaders, and prominent thinkers come together with Council members to discuss and debate major international issues; supporting a Studies Program that fos- ters independent research, enabling CFR scholars to produce articles, reports, and books and hold round- tables that analyze foreign policy issues and make concrete policy recommendations; publishing Foreign Affairs, the preeminent journal on international affairs and U.S. foreign policy; sponsoring Independent Task Forces that produce reports with both findings and policy prescriptions on the most important foreign policy topics; and providing up-to-date information and analysis about world events and American foreign policy on its website, CFR.org. The Council on Foreign Relations takes no institutional positions on policy issues and has no affiliation with the U.S. government. All views expressed in its publications and on its website are the sole responsibil- ity of the author or authors. Council Special Reports (CSRs) are concise policy briefs, produced to provide a rapid response to a devel- oping crisis or contribute to the public’s understanding of current policy dilemmas. CSRs are written by individual authors—who may be CFR fellows or acknowledged experts from outside the institution—in consultation with an advisory committee, and are intended to take sixty days from inception to publication. The committee serves as a sounding board and provides feedback on a draft report. It usually meets twice— once before a draft is written and once again when there is a draft for review; however, advisory committee members, unlike Task Force members, are not asked to sign off on the report or to otherwise endorse it. Once published, CSRs are posted on www.cfr.org. For further information about CFR or this Special Report, please write to the Council on Foreign Rela- tions, 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10065, or call the Communications office at 212.434.9888. Visit our website, CFR.org. Copyright © 2013 by the Council on Foreign Relations ® Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. This report may not be reproduced in whole or in part, in any form beyond the reproduction permitted by Sections 107 and 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law Act (17 U.S.C. Sections 107 and 108) and excerpts by reviewers for the public press, without express written permission from the Council on Foreign Relations. To submit a letter in response to a Council Special Report for publication on our website, CFR.org, you may send an email to [email protected]. Alternatively, letters may be mailed to us at: Publications Depart- ment, Council on Foreign Relations, 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10065. Letters should include the writer’s name, postal address, and daytime phone number. Letters may be edited for length and clarity, and may be published online. Please do not send attachments. All letters become the property of the Council on Foreign Relations and will not be returned. We regret that, owing to the volume of correspondence, we cannot respond to every letter. This report is printed on paper that is FSC® certified by Rainforest Alliance, which promotes environmen- tally responsible, socially beneficial, and economically viable management of the world’s forests. Contents Foreword vii Acknowledgments ix Council Special Report 1 Introduction 3 Afghanistan’s Transitions: 2014 and Beyond 7 Policy Choices 13 Recommendations for U.S. Policy 22 Endnotes 29 About the Authors 33 Advisory Committee 35 CPA Advisory Committee 36 CPA Mission Statement 37 Foreword The United States has now been at war in Afghanistan for more than a decade. The sacrifice in blood and treasure has been substantial. Some 2,300 American servicemen and women have lost their lives, more than 19,000 have been injured, and nearly $650 billion has been spent over the course of the United States’ longest war. The results, however, can only be described as inconclusive. The reach and effectiveness of the Afghan central government remain circumscribed, challenged by vari- ous armed groups and undermined by pervasive corruption. The econ- omy has grown rapidly, albeit from a low starting place, but remains largely dependent on international aid flows that will certainly shrink. The combination of high costs and middling returns has left the American public increasingly skeptical of the utility of the U.S. commit- ment to Afghanistan. The 2011 death of Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the 9/11 attacks that brought the American military to Afghanistan in 2001, only reinforced that perception. Yet the United States retains interests in Afghanistan, including preventing the reemergence of a ter- rorist safe haven and promoting stability in the region, which could be further undermined by a total withdrawal of American military forces. As this Council Special Report explains, 2014 will be a pivotal year for Afghanistan. An election will, presumably, bring a new president to Kabul. The U.S. military will complete its transfer of responsibility to the Afghan National Security Forces, making the war effort Afghan- led. And, as donor financing begins to come down, the Afghan econ- omy will need to find sustainable, internal sources of growth. Authors Seth G. Jones and Keith Crane recommend a number of steps the United States can and should take to advance its interests during this transition. During the presidential elections, they write, Washington should encourage multiethnic political coalitions to increase the representativeness of (and decrease divisions within) the Afghan government. The United States should also help the Afghan vii viii Foreword National Security Forces and other relevant authorities secure election sites and improve the quality and transparency of the election itself. They further recommend a continued military presence in Afghanistan of eight thousand to twelve thousand U.S. soldiers pursuing a “foreign internal defense mission.” These troops, ideally with further support from NATO and other allies, would conduct strikes against terrorists and train, advise, and assist Afghan national and local forces; as is obvi- ous, all this depends on the willingness of the Afghan government to agree. The authors also encourage the United States and other donors to continue their civilian aid pledges, provided that Afghanistan meets its commitments to good governance and transparency, and suggest small-scale economic initiatives to help improve relationships among countries in the region. Finally, they acknowledge that there is unlikely to be a major change in the troubled U.S.-Pakistan relationship, in no small part because Islamabad continues to provide a sanctuary to the Afghan Taliban. As a result, the authors recommend that Washington seeks ways to reduce its dependence on Islamabad for what the United States does in Afghanistan and tightly calibrates its military assistance to the Pakistani government. Afghanistan After the Drawdown is a sober, thoughtful assessment of Afghanistan’s prospects in the coming year and beyond. It offers U.S. policymakers a realistic set of options in the political, security, and economic realms that are consistent with the scope of American inter- ests, the resources the United States can reasonably bring to bear, and Afghan realities. Despite the many challenges facing Afghanistan in the years ahead, this report argues persuasively that the United States still can, and should, seek a role in its future. Richard N. Haass President Council on Foreign Relations November 2013 Acknowledgments We would like to thank CFR President Richard N. Haass and Direc- tor of Studies James M. Lindsay for their support of this project. We owe a special debt of gratitude to members of our advisory committee, in particular Ambassador Marc Grossman, who provided several sets of comments over the course of the project. Peter Ackerman, General John Allen, Steven D. Biddle, John A. Gastright, Frederick W. Kagan, Clare Lockhart, Steve Mann, Daniel S. Markey, Paul D. Miller, Ronald E. Neumann, David E. Sanger, Ashley J. Tellis, Andrew Wilder, and Micah Zenko provided helpful critiques, which greatly improved the quality of the report. We are also deeply grateful to those U.S. officials from the White House, State Department, Defense Department, U.S. Agency for Inter- national Development, and intelligence community who took time out of their busy schedules to speak with us—including on trips to Afghani- stan in September and October 2013. Outside of the U.S. government, we thank the government officials, academics, and other civilians from Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Russia, and NATO countries for their thoughtful comments and willingness to discuss Afghanistan after the U.S.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Intelligence Community in Counterinsurgency
    The Intelligence Community in Counterinsurgency: Historical Lessons and Best Practices A Report of the Bush School of Government & Public Service for the RAND Corporation’s Intelligence Policy Center (IPC) The Intelligence Community in Andrew C. Albers Samuel G. Binkley Counterinsurgency: Mariam F. Chaudhry Historical Lessons and Kimberly Craswell Jordan S. Freeman Best Practices Carrie E. Lytle Tristan L. Myers Rami Naser Peter T. Sloan The recently updated counterinsurgency (COIN) doctrine for the U.S. Army (FM 3-24) includes a lengthy discussion of the role of intelligence in COIN, but does not give the U.S. intelligence community useful guidelines for operations.1 Instead, the field manual provides an all-inclusive laundry list of information to be collected without any useful guidance on priorities and methods. The manual acknowledges the crucial role of the intelligence community in COIN, but leaves out an actionable set of standards to guide its operations. To lay the groundwork for an intelligence doctrine, or a set of best practices, for COIN, this report reviews the literature on both the role of intelligence and how counterinsurgency operations are fought and won. We use this literature to create a framework outlining how For helpful comments on this project the authors would like to thank William Rosenau, Kathi Webb, Michael Spirtas, Michael Hix, Roger Molander, and the other RAND researchers who engaged the research team, as well as the faculty and students of the Bush School of Government and Public Service at Texas A&M University. The authors would also like to thank John Parachini for his helpful suggestions, comments, and, especially, his generous support and sponsorship of this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Congressional Record—House H4644
    H4644 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE June 21, 2004 GREENWOOD) came running up to me months he had in power before 9/11, Saudis or the Pakistanis or anyone else when he saw me and said, ‘‘How did you was, along with a few others, in a high to provide the leadership. It is up to know? How did you know?’’ Well, the level position to argue against, if not the people of the United States and our question is why did any of us not to change, the grotesquely mistaken leaders here to lead the way, and I have know? Why did we not know? Why did policies of the eighties and nineties, every confidence that our President those whom we have hired to protect but he failed to do so. In fact, we know will do and is doing just that. us not know? a few of the things that he did were ex- f It is time for those who made pos- actly in the wrong direction. sible the rise of the Taliban, the rise of If another 9/11 is to be avoided, we LEAVE OF ABSENCE bin Laden, and, yes, the tragedy of 9–11 need accountability. We do not need By unanimous consent, leave of ab- to be held personally accountable and the rearranging of a bureaucratic orga- sence was granted to: for us to understand the policies and nizational chart. There is nothing Mr. BECERRA (at the request of Ms. the people that caused 9–11. It was not wrong with our system that brought on PELOSI) for today on account of per- something that was ordained by God to 9/11, and there is nothing wrong with sonal reasons.
    [Show full text]
  • The Virtues and Vices of Advocacy Strategies in the War on Terror
    Roger Williams University DOCS@RWU Law Faculty Scholarship Law Faculty Scholarship 4-2009 The etD ainees' Dilemma: The irV tues and Vices of Advocacy Strategies in the War on Terror Peter Margulies Roger Williams University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: http://docs.rwu.edu/law_fac_fs Part of the Criminal Law Commons, Human Rights Law Commons, International Law Commons, Law and Politics Commons, and the Legal Profession Commons Recommended Citation Peter Margulies, The eD tainees' Dilemma: The irV tues and Vices of Advocacy Strategies in the War on Terror, 57 Buff. L. Rev. 347, 432 (2009) This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Faculty Scholarship at DOCS@RWU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Law Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of DOCS@RWU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. +(,121/,1( Citation: 57 Buff. L. Rev. 347 2009 Provided by: Roger Williams University School of Law Library Content downloaded/printed from HeinOnline Thu Nov 17 10:09:44 2016 -- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and Conditions of the license agreement available at http://heinonline.org/HOL/License -- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text. -- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your HeinOnline license, please use: Copyright Information BUFFALO LAW REVIEW VOLUME 57 APRIL 2009 NUMBER 2 The Detainees' Dilemma: The Virtues and Vices of Advocacy Strategies in the War on Terror PETER MARGULIESt INTRODUCTION For detainees in the war on terror, advocacy outside of court is often the main event.' Analysis of advocacy through the prism of Supreme Court decisions 2 resembles surveying t Professor of Law, Roger Williams University School of Law; e-mail: [email protected].
    [Show full text]
  • La Terrible Impostura
    Thierry Meyssan 11 de septiembre de 2001 LA TERRIBLE IMPOSTURA Ningún avión se estrelló en el pentágono (A) Editorial El Ateneo 303.6 Meyssan,Thierry MEY La terrible impostura - la. ed., - Buenos Aires El Ateneo, 2002 256 p.; 15,Sx22,Scm. © de la traducción, Ariadna Martin Sirarols ISBN: 950-02-8684-X 1. Título - 1. Historia Diseño de interiores: Lucila Schonfeld Foto de tapa:Tom Horan, AP © 2002,Thierry Meyssan © 2002, Carnot Derechos exclusivos de edición en castellano reservados para América Latina. Queda hecho el depósito que establece la ley 11.723 Primera edición de Editorial El Ateneo © 2002, LIBRERÍASYENNY S.A. Patagones 2463 - (C1282ACA) Buenos Aires -Argentina Tel.: (54 11) 4942 9002 / 4943 8200 - Fax: (54 11) 4308 4199 E-mail: [email protected] Impreso en la Argentina índice PRIMERA PARTE Introducción 11 Una escenificación sangrienta Capítulo 1. El avión fantasma del Pentágono .............. 15 Capítulo 2. Cómplices en tierra .................................... 33 Capítulo 3.Topos en la Casa Blanca ............................. 45 Capítulo 4. El FBI hace aspavientos ............................... 55 SEGUNDA PARTE Muerte de la democracia en Norteamérica Capítulo 5. ¿Respuesta o ganga?.................................... 69 Capítulo 6. ¿De la oración fúnebre a la guerra santa? ..................................................... 81 Capítulo 7. Plenos poderes ........................................... 91 TERCERA PARTE El imperio ataca Capítulo 8. ¡La culpa es de Bin Laden! ......................... 109 Capítulo 9. Los
    [Show full text]
  • Nouvel Ordre Géopolitique Mondial Les Géostratégies De Domination
    Dr. Angel ANGELIDIS LE NOUVEL ORDRE GÉOPOLITIQUE MONDIAL LES GÉOSTRATÉGIES DE DOMINATION Doc. AA – 06 FR – 06 – 2014 Auteur: Dr. Angel ANGELIDIS Docteur Ingénieur Agronome (ETSIA - Université Polytechnique de Madrid), Docteur d’Etat ès Sciences Economiques (Université de Montpellier), Ex-Membre du Cabinet du Commissaire G. Contogeorgis, (Commission Thorn 1981-1984) Ex-Chef de Division et Conseiller auprès du Parlement Européen, Comendador de la Orden Civil de Mérito Agrícola de España Comendador de la Real Orden de Isabel la Católica de España, Ex-professeur invité à l’Ecole Diplomatique de Madrid et à l’Université Montesquieu Bordeaux IV, American Order of Excellence and Academician for lifetime, American Bibliographical Institute, USA, Vice-Président de l’Institut de Gestion des Crises Géopolitiques, Thessalonique, Grèce. De gauche à droite: Βυζάντιοv, Αυτοκρατορικός Θυρεός κατά τήν περίοδον τών Παλαιολόγων (Blason de l’Empire Byzantin, Dynastie de Paléologues - Coat of Arms of the Byzantine Empire, Paleologos Dynasty - Escudo del Imperio Bizantino, Dinastía de Paleólogos); Emblème du Patriarcat Orthodoxe de Constantinople - Coat of arms of the Orthodox Patriarchate of Constantinople - Escudo del Patriarcado Ortodoxo de Constantinopla; Aigle bicéphale russe impériale et contemporaine - Russian double-headed eagle Imperial and contemporary - Águila bicéfala rusa imperial y contemporánea; Armoiries de l'Alcazar de Tolède, Espagne - Coat of arms of the Alcazar of Toledo, Spain - Escudo del Alcázar de Toledo, España. Éditeur : Dr. Angel ANGELIDIS 97, Avenue Marcel Thiry B - 1200 Bruxelles BELGIQUE TÉL. & FAX : (+32) 02 762 91 19 E-MAIL : [email protected] WEBSITES : WWW.ANGELIDIS.EU, WWW.ANGELIDIS.BE Les opinions exprimées dans ce document relèvent de la responsabilité exclusive de l’auteur.
    [Show full text]
  • Choosing Sides and Guiding Policy United States’ and Pakistan’S Wars in Afghanistan
    UNIVERSITY OF FLORDA Choosing Sides and Guiding Policy United States’ and Pakistan’s Wars in Afghanistan Azhar Merchant 4/24/2019 Table of Contents I. Introduction… 2 II. Political Settlement of the Mujahedeen War… 7 III. The Emergence of the Taliban and the Lack of U.S. Policy… 27 IV. The George W. Bush Administration… 50 V. Conclusion… 68 1 I. Introduction Forty years of war in Afghanistan has encouraged the most extensive periods of diplomatic and military cooperation between the United States and Pakistan. The communist overthrow of a relatively peaceful Afghan government and the subsequent Soviet invasion in 1979 prompted the United States and Pakistan to cooperate in funding and training Afghan mujahedeen in their struggle against the USSR. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Afghanistan entered a period of civil war throughout the 1990s that nurtured Islamic extremism, foreign intervention, and the rise of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, ultimately culminating in the devastating attacks against Americans on September 11th. Seventeen years later, the United States continues its war in Afghanistan while its relationship with Pakistan has deteriorated to an all-time low. The mutual fear of Soviet expansionism was the unifying cause for Americans and Pakistanis to work together in the 1980s, yet as the wars in Afghanistan evolved, so did the countries’ respective aims and objectives.1 After the Soviets were successfully pushed out of the region by the mujahedeen, the United States felt it no longer had any reason to stay. The initial policy aim of destabilizing the USSR through prolonged covert conflict in Afghanistan was achieved.
    [Show full text]
  • To Download the PDF File
    Contemporary Canadian military/media relations: Embedded reporting during the Afghanistan War by Sherry Marie Wasilow Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Communication Carleton, University Ottawa, ON 2017 © 2017 Sherry M. Wasilow ABSTRACT News reporters have been sporadically attached to military units as far back as the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, but the U.S. implemented the first official and large-scale embedded program in 2003 during the Iraq War. The Canadian Forces Media Embedding Program (CFMEP) was officially implemented in 2006 during the Afghanistan War. While considerable research has been carried out on the U.S. and British embed programs and their impact on media coverage, there has been very little academic study of Canada’s CFMEP, or its impact on media coverage of the Afghanistan War. This work seeks to investigate Canadian military/media relations throughout a period of roughly 10 years during Canada’s mission in Afghanistan. In doing so, it will examine how official procedures governing media coverage – particularly embedding policy – gave shape to the war reporting received by Canadians. First, within the broader subject area of military/media relations, this study establishes the origins of embedded reporting, and Canada’s reasons for becoming involved in the Afghanistan War. Second, it weaves together academic, official (both military and government), and journalist perspectives regarding the practice and effects of embedded reporting on Canadian war reporting during the Afghanistan mission. Third, it analyzes coverage by four major media organizations of Canada’s participation in the Afghanistan War during a 10-year period: from its initial military contributions in 2001 through to the end of troop deployment in 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • Badal a Culture of Revenge the Impact of Collateral Damage on Taliban Insurgency
    Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis and Dissertation Collection 2008-03 Badal a culture of revenge the impact of collateral damage on Taliban insurgency Hussain, Raja G. Monterey, California. Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/4222 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS BADAL: A CULTURE OF REVENGE THE IMPACT OF COLLATERAL DAMAGE ON TALIBAN INSURGENCY by Raja G. Hussain March 2008 Thesis Advisor: Thomas H. Johnson Thesis Co Advisor: Feroz H. Khan Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED March 2008 Master’s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE BADAL: A Culture of Revenge 5. FUNDING NUMBERS The Impact of Collateral Damage on Taliban Insurgency 6. AUTHOR(S) Raja G. Hussain 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Naval Postgraduate School REPORT NUMBER Monterey, CA 93943-5000 9.
    [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]
  • The Main Enemy the Inside Story of the Cias Final Showdown with the Kgb 1St Edition Pdf, Epub, Ebook
    THE MAIN ENEMY THE INSIDE STORY OF THE CIAS FINAL SHOWDOWN WITH THE KGB 1ST EDITION PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Milt Bearden | 9780345472502 | | | | | The Main Enemy The Inside Story of the CIAs Final Showdown with the KGB 1st edition PDF Book New Softcover Quantity Available: 1. May 16, Lynn rated it really liked it Shelves: cold-war , espionage. The FBI agents played hard-because the course kept them sharp for following real Soviet spies. So only when the officer reported to work the next day would he go through a thorough debriefing, while the tape recordings of his brief encounter with the agent were transcribed. I recommend it for any readers who want to know more about international spy intrigue. This is history very up close and very personal. Read this ages ago. So other than those two and a half small disappointments, this filled in some excellent gaps and also provided a touch of insight as to how, after the death of Casey, the Agency went through a load of directors. A landmark collaboration between a thirty-year veteran of the CIA and a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, The Main Enemy is the story of the generation of spies who came of age in the shadow of the Cuban missile crisis and rose through the ranks to run the CIA and KGB in the last days of the Cold War. These were among the most difficult jobs in the CIA. This memoir of a retired CIA employee was vetted by the agency and so may not be entirely accurate. Jan 22, Pete rated it liked it Shelves: political-intrigue , non-fiction , historical.
    [Show full text]
  • Terrorist Crime, Taliban Guilt, and the Aysmmetries of the International Legal Order Mark A
    NORTH CAROLINA LAW REVIEW Volume 81 | Number 1 Article 3 12-1-2002 Victimhood in our Neighborhood: Terrorist Crime, Taliban Guilt, and the Aysmmetries of the International Legal Order Mark A. Drumbl Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Mark A. Drumbl, Victimhood in our Neighborhood: Terrorist Crime, Taliban Guilt, and the Aysmmetries of the International Legal Order, 81 N.C. L. Rev. 1 (2002). Available at: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol81/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in North Carolina Law Review by an authorized administrator of Carolina Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. VICTIMHOOD IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD: TERRORIST CRIME, TALIBAN GUILT, AND THE ASYMMETRIES OF THE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL ORDER MARK A. DRUMBL* This Article posits that the September 11 attacks constitute non- isolated warlike attacks undertaken against a sovereign state by individuals from other states operating through a non-state actor with some command and political structure. This means that the attacks contain elements common to both armed attacks and criminal attacks. The international community largely has characterized the attacks as armed attacks. This characterization evokes a legal basis for the use of force initiated by the United States and United Kingdom against Afghanistan on October 7, 2001. Notwithstanding the successes of the military campaign and the need for containment of terrorist activity, this Article suggests that there are important deontological, communitarian, and consequentialist reasons why the attacks-and terrorism in general-should be constructed as criminal attacks.
    [Show full text]
  • A Dual Track Strategy for Afghanistan
    The Third Way National Security Program February 4, 2009 TO: Interested Parties FROM: Matt Bennett, Vice President for Public Affairs; Scott Payne, Policy Advisor, National Security Program RE: A “Dual Track Strategy” for Afghanistan With the change in administrations, the most pressing national security debate involves the future of Afghanistan. On the one hand, President Obama is pursuing a dual track strategy—deploying more troops to Afghanistan to stabilize the country (and to maintain pressure on al Qaeda and their allies across the border in Pakistan) and restructuring development aid and regional diplomatic efforts. But a rising chorus of voices on the other side of the debate is arguing that the United States should pursue only a single track, by withdrawing its military forces and focusing solely on development. Many in this growing group of critics believe that recent setbacks in our stabilization efforts reflect something fundamental about the history of Afghanistan. They argue not only that we are not succeeding, but that we cannot (and even that we need not) succeed in Afghanistan for American security interests to be protected. While simple lessons from history are convenient and pessimism is understandable after the catastrophes of the Bush years, these critics are wrong, and the basic premise of their claim clouds the real debate over the future of Afghanistan. Success in Afghanistan not only is possible, it is a fundamental part of providing for American national security. We therefore believe that the President is right, and progressives should support a dual track strategy for Afghanistan that uses both hard and soft power-force, combined with development and diplomacy, to stabilize the nation and deny our enemies a safe haven.
    [Show full text]