DOCSLIB.ORG

Transition in Afghanistan: Losing the Forgotten War?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transition in Afghanistan: Losing the Forgotten War? burke chair in strategy Transition in Afghanistan: Losing the Forgotten War? The Need to Reshape US Strategy in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia By Anthony H. Cordesman February 23, 2015 Request for comments: This report is a draft that will be turned into an electronic book. Comments and suggested changes would be greatly appreciated. Please send any comments to Anthony H. Cordsman, Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy, at [email protected]. ANTHONY H. CORDESMAN Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy [email protected] Cordesman: Strategy in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia February 23, 2015 ii On December 29, 2014, the US President and Secretary of Defense announced the formal end to Operation Enduring Freedom, its combat mission in Afghanistan, which had begun in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks. They also stated that the US would begin its follow-on mission, Operation Freedom's Sentinel, at the start of 2015. The President and the Secretary of Defense made these announcements with all the usual rhetorical flourishes and statements about success, future commitments, and host government progress of the kind top US officials made at the end of the Vietnam and Iraq conflicts. The President also implied that this Transition had ended America’s longest war, although Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel made it clear that relabeling the mission did not fully end America’s military role: 1 Operation Freedom's Sentinel, the United States will pursue two missions with the support of the Afghan government and the Afghan people. We will work with our allies and partners as part of NATO's Resolute Support Mission to continue training, advising, and assisting Afghan security forces. And we will continue our counterterrorism mission against the remnants of Al-Qaeda to ensure that Afghanistan is never again used to stage attacks against our homeland. US officials announced this Transition in Afghanistan without issuing any meaningful assessment of what some thirteen years of war had accomplished. They did so without any public attempt to provide a meaningful strategic assessment of the future US role and commitments in Afghanistan or the region, and without providing any meaningful public analysis or metrics of the combat situation. They did not issue any assessment of the political and economic prospects for Afghan security, and did not make any attempt to link its posture in Afghanistan to what was happening in Pakistan and Central Asia. Their announcements came after the US had completed the withdrawal of almost all of its combat forces from Afghanistan. They came after the US had also announced that it would reduce its troop presence some 10,800 personnel in 2015, plus a small counterterrorism force, then cut that total in half that by the beginning of 2016, and finally reduce it to a few hundred men in a small office of military cooperation by the beginning of 2017. Ignoring Costs No mention was made of the cost of the war in terms of casualties and dollars. The US Department of Defense reported that the total number of US dead had reached 2,356 – including 1,846 killed in action -- and the total number of wounded had reached 20,066 – by the end of December 2014..2 Other allied dead included 453 British dead and 676 other allied dead – for a total of 3,486 US and allied dead -- but comparable estimates of the wound were not available.3 While some estimates are available of Afghan killed and wounded, and are discussed in Chapter IV of this analysis, there are no estimates that cover length of the war that have any credibility. As for the dollar cost, no estimates exist for the total cost to all allied forces or the Afghan government. The US government has never published an official estimate of the direct costs of the war at point from 2001 to 2014, but an estimate by Amy Belasco of the Congressional Research Service put the direct costs at $743.7 billion from FY2001 to FY2015, with $647.3 billion for the Department of Defense, $33.6billion for the State Department and US Aid, and $6.9 billion for Veteran’s Administration.4 This estimate does not include the full cost of destroyed equipment and equipment transfers to the Afghans during the US withdrawal, the cost of reequipping US forces for Cordesman: Strategy in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia February 23, 2015 iii many combat losses, and the years of additional medical expenses for military personnel with lasting medical issues and disabilities.5 Some estimates that include the cost of the added federal debt, opportunity costs, and lifetime costs of those requiring continuing medical are in the trillions.6 As might be predicted, no US official addressed any of these issues, or addressed the full nature of the strategy the US was pursue in Afghanistan after 2014. No attempt was made to explain or justify the future expenses called for in the FY2015 budget submission that was still before Congress at the time of Transition, or projected in the FY2015 to FY2019 defense program. And, as usual, no one in the Congress chose to ask. Understating Risks Both the President and the Secretary of Defense sharply understated the risks inherent in the US approach to Transition. Secretary Hagel did not mention the risks involve at all, and President Obama made claims that the war had succeeded in “devastating the core al-Qaida leadership, delivering justice to Osama bin Laden, disrupting terrorist plots and saving countless American lives,” and “helped the Afghan people reclaim their communities, take the lead for their own security, hold historic elections and complete the first democratic transfer of power in their country's history.” His only reference to the threat was a short comment that, ““Afghanistan remains a dangerous place, and the Afghan people and their security forces continue to make tremendous sacrifices in defense of their country.”7 No mention was made of rising Afghan civilian and security force casualties, expanding areas of insurgent influence, the lack of government control and influence in many parts of the country, the continuing Taliban and Haqqani Network sanctuaries in Pakistan, or the overall trends in the fighting. No mention was made of the fact that US intelligence experts felt that the key insurgent factions had quickly recovered from any losses to their leadership, had reemerged as a major threat in Helmand and the south, and had expanded their influence and control in the eastern border areas and the north. As was the case in Vietnam -- and Iraq in 2011 --, the US ended its combat presence at a time when Transition involved a serious risk that the war would fail to achieve any form of security and stability. The combat situation was intensifying rather than declining, and the Afghan government was still partially paralyzed by the crisis growing out of the 2014 Presidential election, and Afghanistan did finally have newly elected leaders and had signed a bilateral security agreement (BSA) and a status of forces agreement. For all the bursts of favorable political rhetoric that followed the political compromises that came out of grossly corrupt election and signing a BSA, Afghanistan had virtually become a “forgotten war” at a time when the Taliban was making steady gains, civilian casualties were rising, and the Afghan forces were experiencing major problems. Afghan governance remained weak, corrupt, and ineffective. It was unclear that the political compromises made following the corrupt election could work; the Afghan budget faced a massive deficit and was dependent on equally massive US and donor aid indefinitely into the future. The Afghan economy was in crisis, and there were no public plans or meaningful efforts to provide official transparency on any major aspect of post-2014 Transition. A Lack of Meaningful Strategy Cordesman: Strategy in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia February 23, 2015 iv Afghanistan was only part of the story. Pakistan was in near-political chaos, had not eased its tensions with India, faced rising challenges from terrorism, had made uncertain progress in its latest military campaign, and had made no progress in dealing with the mix of economic and educational reforms that were critical to a stable future and shaping its broader strategy in South Asia. While US forces have effectively left Central Asia, the US had not announced any strategy to deal with Central Asia in the future, or to adjust to the impact of its growing tensions with Russia. And help try to shape the future of the region. The end result is that United States failed to define meaningful future strategies for Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia. More than that, setting a fixed deadline for withdrawal from Afghanistan has meant cutting its overall presence in Afghanistan so quickly that its Transition efforts may well fail. As for Pakistan, Central Asia, and South Asia, the US had decoupled transition out of Afghanistan from any visible attempt to shape a future posture in the region. In all four cases – Afghanistan, Pakistan, Central Asia, and South Asia -- the US needs to come to grips with the fact that strategy does not consist of concepts, good intentions, or public statements that will not be implemented in any meaningful form. It consists of making realistic assessments that shape US options, building on the policies and actions that are already in place, and developing practical plans that can be – and are – actually implemented. Rhetoric is the natural enemy of realism. It would be nice to see Afghanistan suddenly emerge in 2015 or 2016 as a unified, peaceful, developing democracy. It would be nice to see Pakistan put on the same path.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • John F. Kennedy and Berlin Nicholas Labinski Marquette University
    Marquette University e-Publications@Marquette Master's Theses (2009 -) Dissertations, Theses, and Professional Projects Evolution of a President: John F. Kennedy and Berlin Nicholas Labinski Marquette University Recommended Citation Labinski, Nicholas, "Evolution of a President: John F. Kennedy and Berlin" (2011). Master's Theses (2009 -). Paper 104. http://epublications.marquette.edu/theses_open/104 EVOLUTION OF A PRESIDENT: JOHN F. KENNEDYAND BERLIN by Nicholas Labinski A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School, Marquette University, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Milwaukee, Wisconsin August 2011 ABSTRACT EVOLUTION OF A PRESIDENT: JOHN F. KENNEDYAND BERLIN Nicholas Labinski Marquette University, 2011 This paper examines John F. Kennedy’s rhetoric concerning the Berlin Crisis (1961-1963). Three major speeches are analyzed: Kennedy’s Radio and Television Report to the American People on the Berlin Crisis , the Address at Rudolph Wilde Platz and the Address at the Free University. The study interrogates the rhetorical strategies implemented by Kennedy in confronting Khrushchev over the explosive situation in Berlin. The paper attempts to answer the following research questions: What is the historical context that helped frame the rhetorical situation Kennedy faced? What rhetorical strategies and tactics did Kennedy employ in these speeches? How might Kennedy's speeches extend our understanding of presidential public address? What is the impact of Kennedy's speeches on U.S. German relations and the development of U.S. and German Policy? What implications might these speeches have for the study and execution of presidential power and international diplomacy? Using a historical-rhetorical methodology that incorporates the historical circumstances surrounding the crisis into the analysis, this examination of Kennedy’s rhetoric reveals his evolution concerning Berlin and his Cold War strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Remembering George Kennan Does Not Mean Idolizing Him
    UNITED STATES InsTITUTE OF PEACE www.usip.org SPECIAL REPORT 1200 17th Street NW • Washington, DC 20036 • 202.457.1700 • fax 202.429.6063 ABOUT THE REPORT Melvyn P. Leffler This report originated while Melvyn P. Leffler was a Jennings Randolph Fellow at the United States Institute of Peace. He was writing his book on what appeared to be the most intractable and ominous conflict of the post–World War II era—the Cold War. He was addressing the questions of why the Cold War lasted as long as it did and why it ended when Remembering it did. As part of the ongoing dialogue at the United States Institute of Peace, he was repeatedly asked about the lessons of the Cold War for our contemporary problems. George Kennan His attention was drawn to the career of George F. Kennan, the father of containment. Kennan was a rather obscure and frustrated foreign service officer at the U.S. embassy in Lessons for Today? Moscow when his “Long Telegram” of February 1946 gained the attention of policymakers in Washington and transformed his career. Leffler reviews Kennan’s legacy and ponders the implications of his thinking for the contemporary era. Is it Summary possible, Leffler wonders, to reconcile Kennan’s legacy with the newfound emphasis on a “democratic peace”? • Kennan’s thinking and policy prescriptions evolved quickly from the time he wrote the Melvyn P. Leffler, a former senior fellow at the United States “Long Telegram” in February 1946 until the time he delivered the Walgreen Lectures Institute of Peace, won the Bancroft Prize for his book at the University of Chicago in 1950.
    [Show full text]
  • President Harry S Truman's Office Files, 1945–1953
    A Guide to the Microfilm Edition of RESEARCH COLLECTIONS IN AMERICAN POLITICS Microforms from Major Archival and Manuscript Collections General Editor: William E. Leuchtenburg PRESIDENT HARRY S TRUMAN’S OFFICE FILES, 1945–1953 Part 2: Correspondence File UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS OF AMERICA A Guide to the Microfilm Edition of RESEARCH COLLECTIONS IN AMERICAN POLITICS Microforms from Major Archival and Manuscript Collections General Editor: William E. Leuchtenburg PRESIDENT HARRY S TRUMAN’S OFFICE FILES, 1945–1953 Part 2: Correspondence File Project Coordinators Gary Hoag Paul Kesaris Robert E. Lester Guide compiled by David W. Loving A microfilm project of UNIVERSITY PUBLICATIONS OF AMERICA An Imprint of CIS 4520 East-West Highway • Bethesda, Maryland 20814-3389 LCCN: 90-956100 Copyright© 1989 by University Publications of America. All rights reserved. ISBN 1-55655-151-7. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ............................................................................................................................ v Scope and Content Note ....................................................................................................... xi Source and Editorial Note ..................................................................................................... xiii Reel Index Reel 1 A–Atomic Energy Control Commission, United Nations ......................................... 1 Reel 2 Attlee, Clement R.–Benton, William ........................................................................ 2 Reel 3 Bowles, Chester–Chronological
    [Show full text]
  • The Rollback of South Africa's Chemical and Biological Warfare
    The Rollback of South Africa’s Chemical and Biological Warfare Program Stephen Burgess and Helen Purkitt US Air Force Counterproliferation Center Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama THE ROLLBACK OF SOUTH AFRICA’S CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE PROGRAM by Dr. Stephen F. Burgess and Dr. Helen E. Purkitt USAF Counterproliferation Center Air War College Air University Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama The Rollback of South Africa’s Chemical and Biological Warfare Program Dr. Stephen F. Burgess and Dr. Helen E. Purkitt April 2001 USAF Counterproliferation Center Air War College Air University Maxwell Air Force Base, Alabama 36112-6427 The internet address for the USAF Counterproliferation Center is: http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/awc-cps.htm . Contents Page Disclaimer.....................................................................................................i The Authors ............................................................................................... iii Acknowledgments .......................................................................................v Chronology ................................................................................................vii I. Introduction .............................................................................................1 II. The Origins of the Chemical and Biological Warfare Program.............3 III. Project Coast, 1981-1993....................................................................17 IV. Rollback of Project Coast, 1988-1994................................................39
    [Show full text]
  • Cultural Detente: John Le Carré from the Cold to the Thaw Leah Nicole Huesing University of Missouri-St
    University of Missouri, St. Louis IRL @ UMSL Theses Graduate Works 4-14-2016 Cultural Detente: John le Carré from the Cold to the Thaw Leah Nicole Huesing University of Missouri-St. Louis, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis Recommended Citation Huesing, Leah Nicole, "Cultural Detente: John le Carré from the Cold to the Thaw" (2016). Theses. 168. http://irl.umsl.edu/thesis/168 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Works at IRL @ UMSL. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of IRL @ UMSL. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Huesing 1 Cultural Détente: John le Carré from the Cold to the Thaw Leah Huesing B.A. History, Columbia College, 2009 A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Missouri-St. Louis in partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in History May, 2016 Advisory Committee Peter Acsay, Ph. D Chairperson Minsoo Kang, Ph.D. Carlos Schwantes, Ph.D. Huesing 2 Abstract British spy fiction author John le Carré inspired Cultural Détente, a movement in American popular culture which banished the simplicities of the 1950’s and replaced it with a relaxation of tensions from 1960-1965. Cultural Détente manifested from within Western liberal, democratic society after the strict conformities of the 1950s. After the dissipation of McCarthyism and the anti-Communist crusaders, the public was ready to embrace a ‘thaw’ in tensions. Even with all of the evidence already in place, there has yet to be any historical evaluation of a 1960s Cultural Détente that anticipated and made possible the détente of Richard Nixon.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Newly Uncovered Documents on North
    COLD WAR INTERNATIONAL HISTORY PROJECT WORKING PAPER #53 North Korea's Efforts to Acquire Nuclear Technology and Nuclear Weapons: Evidence from Russian and Hungarian Archives By Balazs Szalontai and Sergey Radchenko August 2006 THE COLD WAR INTERNATIONAL HISTORY PROJECT WORKING PAPER SERIES Christian F. Ostermann, Series Editor This paper is one of a series of Working Papers published by the Cold War International History Project of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. Established in 1991 by a grant from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Cold War International History Project (CWIHP) disseminates new information and perspectives on the history of the Cold War as it emerges from previously inaccessible sources on “the other side” of the post-World War II superpower rivalry. The project supports the full and prompt release of historical materials by governments on all sides of the Cold War, and seeks to accelerate the process of integrating new sources, materials and perspectives from the former “Communist bloc” with the historiography of the Cold War which has been written over the past few decades largely by Western scholars reliant on Western archival sources. It also seeks to transcend barriers of language, geography, and regional specialization to create new links among scholars interested in Cold War history. Among the activities undertaken by the project to promote this aim are a periodic BULLETIN to disseminate new findings, views, and activities pertaining to Cold War history; a fellowship program for young historians from the former Communist bloc to conduct archival research and study Cold War history in the United States; international scholarly meetings, conferences, and seminars; and publications.
    [Show full text]
  • The Collapse of Communism and the End of the Cold War (1945 – 1991) Content Statement
    The Collapse of Communism and the End of the Cold War (1945 – 1991) Content Statement • The collapse of the Communist governments in Eastern Europe and the USSR brought an end to the Cold War Objectives • Define or describe the following terms: –Détente –Reagan Doctrine –“Star Wars” Program –Mikhail Gorbachev –Commonwealth of Independent States Objectives • Explain how the collapse of Communist governments in Eastern Europe and the USSR brought an end to the Cold War era • What role did the United States play in the collapse of Communism? The Cold War • The period from 1945 to 1991 saw a host of important events in the Cold War battle between the U.S. and the Soviet Union • There were multiple causes for the collapse of Communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union • The effect of this collapse was the reduction of tensions between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. that had characterized the Cold War period for 45 years Détente with the Soviet Union, 1972 • President Nixon believed in pursuing a policy of détente - a relaxing of tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union • Nixon sought to halt the build-up of nuclear weapons • In 1972, he became the first President to visit Moscow, where he signed an agreement (SALT) with Soviet leaders Détente with the Soviet Union, 1972 –The Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) were two rounds of conferences and corresponding international treaties involving the United States and the Soviet Union on the issue of armament control –The two rounds of talks and agreements were SALT I and SALT II Détente with the Soviet Union, 1972 • The agreement limited the development of defensive missile systems • Nixon further agreed to sell American grain to the Soviets to help them cope with food shortages • In 1973, when war broke out in the Middle East, the United States and Soviet Union further cooperated in pressuring Israel and the Arab states to conclude a cease-fire Détente with the Soviet Union, 1972 • Détente also allowed the United States to reduce its armed forces from 3.5 million to 2.3 million, and to withdraw U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Cold War Revision and Interpretation Guide
    Teacher Fellowship Programme 2017: The Cold War in the Classroom in partnership with Paul Calder Teacher Fellow Resource: Cold War revision aid and interpretation guide Cold War revision aid and interpretation guide Introduction and rationale This resource is based on an idea for an activity for an overview of the Holocaust, developed by Paul Salmon of UCL. I found it very effective in helping post-16 students in their understanding of events. The Cold War period seemed to offer a similar opportunity to provide a chronological overview of events. Furthermore, the students often found it difficult to connect the historiography of the Cold War with the main events. So another aim of this resource is to provide a visual and interactive connection between them. Timelines are often seen as one-dimensional and relegated to a lower status in the study of history. However, as Tim Chapman recognised: Timelines are just one tool useful for developing chronology, both for single studies of particular changes but also for comparative work. They allow pupils to work with greater independence and a wider vocabulary. (Teaching History, 73, ‘Historical Witnesses’, October 1993, pp.25-26). The aim of this resource is to develop the latter factors in particular. Students will work in collaboration and progress their understanding in partnership. The interactive nature of the resource allows the teacher and student to develop points through discussion and make links thematically and chronologically. More able students can be stretched through questioning: both in terms of informed, spontaneous questioning from the teacher and through encouraging students to ask questions of the timeline themselves.
    [Show full text]
  • John F. Kennedy
    T he PRESIDENTIAL RECORDINGS JOHN F. KENNEDY !! T H E GREA T CRISES, VOLUM E ON E "" JULY 30–AUGUST 1962 Timothy Naftali Editor, Volume One George Eliades Francis Gavin Erin Mahan Jonathan Rosenberg David Shreve Associate Editors, Volume One Patricia Dunn Assistant Editor Philip Zelikow and Ernest May General Editors B W. W. NORTON & COMPANY • NEW YORK • LONDON Copyright © 2001 by The Miller Center of Public Affairs Portions of this three-volume set were previously published by Harvard University Press in The Kennedy Tapes: Inside the White House During the Cuban Missile Crisis by Philip D. Zelikow and Ernest R. May. Copyright © 1997 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America First Edition For information about permission to reproduce selections from this book, write to Permissions, W. W. Norton & Company, Inc., 500 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10110 The text of this book is composed in Bell, with the display set in Bell and Bell Semi-Bold Composition by Tom Ernst Manufacturing by The Maple-Vail Book Manufacturing Group Book design by Dana Sloan Production manager: Andrew Marasia Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data John F. Kennedy : the great crises. p. cm. (The presidential recordings) Includes bibliographical references and indexes. Contents: v. 1. July 30–August 1962 / Timothy Naftali, editor—v. 2. September 4–October 20, 1962 / Timothy Naftali and Philip Zelikow, editors—v. 3. October 22–28, 1962 / Philip Zelikow and Ernest May, editors. ISBN 0-393-04954-X 1. United States—Politics and government—1961–1963—Sources.
    [Show full text]
  • Unintended Alliances: Kennedy, Israel, and Arab Nationalism
    UNINTENDED ALLIANCES: KENNEDY, ISRAEL, AND ARAB NATIONALISM by Michael Bocco A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of The Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, Florida December 2008 Copyright by Michael Bocco 2008 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I wish to express my sincere thanks to the History Department’s Faculty at Florida Atlantic University for all their help and guidance through the years to make this thesis possible. They provided not only a conducive learning environment but also became an extended family, which is something I will always cherish. I am grateful for the invaluable assistance from many individuals. First, I would like to thank the History Department for awarding me the O’Sullivan Travel Grant, which allowed me to travel to the John F. Kennedy Library in Boston, Massachusetts. I greatly appreciate Mrs. Marjorie O’Sullivan’s generosity for making this award possible. A special thanks to David Glauber for all his help in the early thesis writing process, and his attentive ear was greatly appreciated. This work benefited from an exceptional thesis committee. A sincere appreciation goes to Dr. Mark H. Rose for providing me with encouragement to think outside of the box in history and in life. Dr. Eric J. Hanne offered his personal and academic guidance that helped me comprehend both western and eastern perspectives on the Middle East. Last but certainly not least, a most heartfelt thanks to Dr. Kenneth A. Osgood for enlarging the scope of this project, being a mentor, and pushing me to strive for excellence.
    [Show full text]
  • Conference 5Th SESSION.Zonova. Eu-Russia Relations
    From Cold War to Cold Peace: the EU-Russian Relations. By Tatiana Zonova - MGIMO- Moscow In April 1951, when the agreement on the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community was signed, the Cold War was at its height, and the Korean Peninsula was facing a real Hot War. It is not surprising that the reaction of the USSR towards the ongoing process of the West European integration has been very cautious. In a note dated September 11, 1951 handed by the Minister of Foreign Affairs A.Vyshinsky to Charge d'Affaires of France, the «Schuman declaration" of 9 May 1950 was assessed as part of a plan aimed at the remilitarization of West Germany and the revival of German imperialism, incompatible with the interests of preserving peace in Europe. The note was followed by articles on the European Coal and Steel Community which appeared in the Soviet central press. The European Coal and Steel Community was seen as a step towards the formation of economic bloc analogue of the aggressive NATO bloc. On the eve of the signature of the Treaty of Rome which established the European Economic Community and the European Atomic Energy Community the Foreign Ministry issued a statement handed to the embassies of European countries and the United States in Moscow (16 March, 1957). The statement claimed that the plan to create two new closed organizations would inevitably lead to further deepening of the division of Europe. They stressed that all the activities of the "Common market" and the Euratom would be subordinated to the interests of NATO while West Germany would be dragged more deeply into the system of closed military groupings of the Western powers.
    [Show full text]
  • Transition in Afghanistan: Losing the Forgotten War?
    burke chair in strategy Transition in Afghanistan: Losing the Forgotten War? The Need to Reshape US Strategy in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia By Anthony H. Cordesman January 26, 2015 Request for comments: This report is a draft that will be turned into an electronic book. Comments and suggested changes would be greatly appreciated. Please send any comments to Anthony H. Cordsman, Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy, at [email protected]. ANTHONY H. CORDESMAN Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy [email protected] Cordesman: Strategy in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Central Asia January 2015 ii On December 29, 2014, the US President and Secretary of Defense announced the formal end to Operation Enduring Freedom, its combat mission in Afghanistan, which had begun in the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 attacks. They also stated that the US would begin its follow-on mission, Operation Freedom's Sentinel, at the start of 2015. The President and the Secretary of Defense made these announcements with all the usual rhetorical flourishes and statements about success, future commitments, and host government progress of the kind top US officials made at the end of the Vietnam and Iraq conflicts. The President also implied that this Transition had ended America’s longest war, although Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel made it clear that relabeling the mission did not fully end America’s military role: 1 Operation Freedom's Sentinel, the United States will pursue two missions with the support of the Afghan government and the Afghan people. We will work with our allies and partners as part of NATO's Resolute Support Mission to continue training, advising, and assisting Afghan security forces.
    [Show full text]