The Afghanistan Reckoning
This story was written by CBSNews.com political reporter Brian Montopoli.
For those of us lucky enough not to be closely connected to the battle for Afghanistan - not to be fighting, to be waiting for a husband or wife to come back, to be wondering why it's been so long since we're heard from a son or daughter - the war can be easy to ignore.
It's been nearly nine years, after all. Nine years in which what was seen as a righteous response to the Sept. 11 attacks slowly morphed into just another fact of life, a distant and murky conflict fading into the background, displaced by everyday problems and new distractions.
In June, 102 American and allied soldiers were killed in Afghanistan, the worst month since the war began. That figure may well be surpassed in July; the number of wounded is up substantially as well.
In one 24-hour period last week, eight American troops died in a trio of attacks, including a car bomb. The Pentagon has not yet released the names of these latest fallen, who join 20-year old Lance Cpl. William T. Richards of Trenton, Georgia, 22-year-old Cpl. Claudio Patino of Yorba Linda, California, and more than 1,000 others on the list of Americans who went into Afghanistan and never came out.
CBSNews.com Special Report: Afghanistan
The war is now entering its most crucial period, the year that will dictate if and when we will leave, and what, if anything, we will call victory. President Obama has insisted that, if conditions on the ground permit, America will begin the process of withdrawing troops from Afghanistan in July 2011 - one year from this month. Afghan president Hamid Karzai, meanwhile, said Tuesday that Afghan police and soldiers will be ready to take control of the country's security by 2014.
With the clock ticking loudly, Afghan leaders are plotting, politicians are bickering, and coalition forces are embarking on a go-for-broke push that is being portrayed as the best, last chance to break the back of the Taliban insurgency.
Meanwhile, violence remains a fact of life for the Afghan people. There was little surprise when the arrival of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other top-level diplomats in Kabul for an international conference Tuesday was marked by explosions echoing through the capital.
Here are the four factors that will determine if, and when, the war will finally come to an end.
The Fight
In February, coalition and Afghan forces pushed into a Taliban stronghold in southern Afghanistan called Marjah. The effort was seen as a test run and momentum builder before an offensive in nearby (and much larger) Kandahar, the birthplace of the Taliban.
While the initial push into Marjah was largely a success - albeit a bloody one - the aftermath was a different story.
The U.S.-led counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan is not primarily about killing the enemy. Rather, the focus is on nation building - creating stable and functioning governing structures that encourage potential enemies to turn away from the Taliban and al Qaeda.
In Marjah, the coalition attempted to install a "government in a box," as then-top Afghanistan commander Stanley McChrystal described it. It was meant to foster an environment in which insurgents, enticed by the possibility of a steady paycheck and easier life, were incentivized to work within the new reality instead of against it.
It didn't work. The Marjah offensive was widely publicized before it began, giving the Taliban plenty of time to hole up, wait out the initial push, and then go on the attack. The insufficiently-manned government in a box failed to take hold, and the Taliban was able to keep a high-profile, threatening presence, executing those who cooperated with the Americans. Three months after the initial offensive, McChrystal would be describing Marjah as a "bleeding ulcer."
The planned Kandahar offensive, meanwhile, got pushed back. Local leaders have proven less-than-eager to sign on with the coalition for a number of reasons: their longstanding ties to the Taliban, the lessons of Marjah, and the belief that the U.S. will be gone by July of next year, leaving the coalition's allies at the mercy of its enemies.
President Hamid Karzai's brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, essentially rules Kandahar. Nothing gets done there without the approval of the president's brother, who is reportedly tied to the opium and heroin trade and believed to operate something like a crime boss; reconstruction money in the region often ends up in the hands of criminal elements, who battle over who gets to be the one to steal it.
Pictures: Recent Scenes from Afghanistan
The United States has an uneasy relationship with Ahmed Wali Karzai, reportedly buying him off and benefiting from his inside knowledge while also lamenting the corruption and lawlessness that helps keep him (and his brother) in power.
It is into this environment that thousands of coalition and Afghan troops are now pouring into the region for a planned push to clear the area of insurgents in late July or early August. They are not, military officials now insist, there for an "offensive": instead, the sure-to-be-bloody push is being called a mission of cooperation, as though, as CBS News' Mandy Clark put it, the troops had shown up for a neighborhood barbecue.
Other places in Afghanistan (Kunduz in the north, Khost in the east) are arguably just as problematic as Kandahar right now. But the coalition is heavily invested in achieving success in the region, with victory there being portrayed as the key to turning the tide against the Taliban. If nothing else, the already tenuous domestic support for the war is unlikely to hold without tangible progress in what has become the military's central operation.
The Military
The now-famous Rolling Stone article that led to McChrystal's dismissal laid bare the tensions between the former general's team and much of the war's civilian leadership. But it also spotlighted something that from the troops' perspective is a much bigger issue: The war's rules of engagement, which many have complained are far too restrictive.
Afghanistan Sets Security Timeline
Casey: U.S. Could be at War Another Decade
Fearful of killing civilians (and in the process, potentially creating a host of new terrorists), McChrystal last year tightened the rules of engagement to limit the circumstances in which troops can fire and launch attacks. While there had been complaints about restrictive rules of engagement even before the change, the decision brought to a boil complaints that the rules put troops' lives at risk. (Said one service member to the Washington Post: "We've been handcuffed by our chain of command.")
General David Petraeus, who took over for McChrystal, has promised to "look very hard" at the current rules, though it's not clear what, if anything, he will change. In a counterinsurgency strategy - something about which Petraeus literally wrote the book - keeping a lid on civilian casualties, despite the risks associated with it, comes with the territory.
Copyright 2010 CBS. All rights reserved. For those of us lucky enough not to be closely connected to the battle for Afghanistan - not to be fighting, to be waiting for a husband or wife to come back, to be wondering why it's been so long since we're heard from a son or daughter - the war can be easy to ignore.
It's been nearly nine years, after all. Nine years in which what was seen as a righteous response to the Sept. 11 attacks slowly morphed into just another fact of life, a distant and murky conflict fading into the background, displaced by everyday problems and new distractions.
In June, 102 American and allied soldiers were killed in Afghanistan, the worst month since the war began. That figure may well be surpassed in July; the number of wounded is up substantially as well.
In one 24-hour period last week, eight American troops died in a trio of attacks, including a car bomb. The Pentagon has not yet released the names of these latest fallen, who join 20-year old Lance Cpl. William T. Richards of Trenton, Georgia, 22-year-old Cpl. Claudio Patino of Yorba Linda, California, and more than 1,000 others on the list of Americans who went into Afghanistan and never came out.
CBSNews.com Special Report: Afghanistan
The war is now entering its most crucial period, the year that will dictate if and when we will leave, and what, if anything, we will call victory. President Obama has insisted that, if conditions on the ground permit, America will begin the process of withdrawing troops from Afghanistan in July 2011 - one year from this month. Afghan president Hamid Karzai, meanwhile, said Tuesday that Afghan police and soldiers will be ready to take control of the country's security by 2014.
With the clock ticking loudly, Afghan leaders are plotting, politicians are bickering, and coalition forces are embarking on a go-for-broke push that is being portrayed as the best, last chance to break the back of the Taliban insurgency.
Meanwhile, violence remains a fact of life for the Afghan people. There was little surprise when the arrival of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and other top-level diplomats in Kabul for an international conference Tuesday was marked by explosions echoing through the capital.
Here are the four factors that will determine if, and when, the war will finally come to an end.
The Fight
In February, coalition and Afghan forces pushed into a Taliban stronghold in southern Afghanistan called Marjah. The effort was seen as a test run and momentum builder before an offensive in nearby (and much larger) Kandahar, the birthplace of the Taliban.
While the initial push into Marjah was largely a success - albeit a bloody one - the aftermath was a different story.
The U.S.-led counterinsurgency strategy in Afghanistan is not primarily about killing the enemy. Rather, the focus is on nation building - creating stable and functioning governing structures that encourage potential enemies to turn away from the Taliban and al Qaeda.
In Marjah, the coalition attempted to install a "government in a box," as then-top Afghanistan commander Stanley McChrystal described it. It was meant to foster an environment in which insurgents, enticed by the possibility of a steady paycheck and easier life, were incentivized to work within the new reality instead of against it.
It didn't work. The Marjah offensive was widely publicized before it began, giving the Taliban plenty of time to hole up, wait out the initial push, and then go on the attack. The insufficiently-manned government in a box failed to take hold, and the Taliban was able to keep a high-profile, threatening presence, executing those who cooperated with the Americans. Three months after the initial offensive, McChrystal would be describing Marjah as a "bleeding ulcer."
The planned Kandahar offensive, meanwhile, got pushed back. Local leaders have proven less-than-eager to sign on with the coalition for a number of reasons: their longstanding ties to the Taliban, the lessons of Marjah, and the belief that the U.S. will be gone by July of next year, leaving the coalition's allies at the mercy of its enemies.
President Hamid Karzai's brother, Ahmed Wali Karzai, essentially rules Kandahar. Nothing gets done there without the approval of the president's brother, who is reportedly tied to the opium and heroin trade and believed to operate something like a crime boss; reconstruction money in the region often ends up in the hands of criminal elements, who battle over who gets to be the one to steal it.
Pictures: Recent Scenes from Afghanistan
The United States has an uneasy relationship with Ahmed Wali Karzai, reportedly buying him off and benefiting from his inside knowledge while also lamenting the corruption and lawlessness that helps keep him (and his brother) in power.
It is into this environment that thousands of coalition and Afghan troops are now pouring into the region for a planned push to clear the area of insurgents in late July or early August. They are not, military officials now insist, there for an "offensive": instead, the sure-to-be-bloody push is being called a mission of cooperation, as though, as CBS News' Mandy Clark put it, the troops had shown up for a neighborhood barbecue.
Other places in Afghanistan (Kunduz in the north, Khost in the east) are arguably just as problematic as Kandahar right now. But the coalition is heavily invested in achieving success in the region, with victory there being portrayed as the key to turning the tide against the Taliban. If nothing else, the already tenuous domestic support for the war is unlikely to hold without tangible progress in what has become the military's central operation.
The Military
The now-famous Rolling Stone article that led to McChrystal's dismissal laid bare the tensions between the former general's team and much of the war's civilian leadership. But it also spotlighted something that from the troops' perspective is a much bigger issue: The war's rules of engagement, which many have complained are far too restrictive.
Afghanistan Sets Security Timeline
Casey: U.S. Could be at War Another Decade
Fearful of killing civilians (and in the process, potentially creating a host of new terrorists), McChrystal last year tightened the rules of engagement to limit the circumstances in which troops can fire and launch attacks. While there had been complaints about restrictive rules of engagement even before the change, the decision brought to a boil complaints that the rules put troops' lives at risk. (Said one service member to the Washington Post: "We've been handcuffed by our chain of command.")
General David Petraeus, who took over for McChrystal, has promised to "look very hard" at the current rules, though it's not clear what, if anything, he will change. In a counterinsurgency strategy - something about which Petraeus literally wrote the book - keeping a lid on civilian casualties, despite the risks associated with it, comes with the territory.
- no previous page
- next
1/2
Popular in Politics
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 294 Comments
- For GOP, scandals could be an electoral plus - or minus 81 Comments
- Where is the Benghazi cover-up Republicans promised? 379 Comments
- FBI seeks anonymous source behind Menendez allegations
- Ousted IRS chief: "I did not mislead" the American people 256 Comments
- Why Obama should worry that current scandals might impact 2016 226 Comments
- Obama: I didn't know about IRS report 613 Comments
- Immigration deal reached in House
But anyone who thinks those things are "not clear" does not deserve to be taken seriously.
Just about for years ago I set out on Obama's Afghanistan road,
Seekin' my fame and glory, lookin' to turn the mullah?s hemorrhoid into a pot of gold.
Well, things got bad, and things got worse, I guess you will know the tune.
Oh ! lord, stuck in Obama's Afghanistan yet again.
Flew in yet again on a big plane, I hope I'll be in one piece flyin out when I go.
I was yet again just passin' through, must now be yet another 3 tours or more.
Running out of time and patience ["Not to complain but whatever the hell happened to my youth?!"], looks like they took still more of my friends.
Oh ! lord, Im stuck in Obama's Afghanistan yet again.
The Hope and Change man in the White House said yet again I was on my way.
Somewhere I lost his connection, he ran out of words to say.
I came into Kabul, yet another one year stand, looks like the plans fell through yet again
Oh ! lord, stuck in Obama's Afghanistan yet again.
Mmmm...
If I only had a woman ["Hey Jack, do you remember what a woman is?"], for evry Obama tour Ive done.
And evry time Ive had to fight while Obama escalated while golfing and power drunk.
You know, Id like to catch the next plane back to where Im from.
Oh ! lord, Im stuck in Obama's Afghanistan yet again.
Oh ! lord, Im stuck in Obama's Afghanistan yet again.
- CCR Soldier Boy
So the job of our troops under Obama and Petraeus is to <b>serve</b> the Muslim Afghans. From warriors to servants. Maybe Martha Stewart can design nice little dhimmi servants uniforms for them to wear while serving the Afghan Muslims.
And serve them until what? Until they decide that they like Karzai, our King in Kabul. So our troops in Afghanistan are now hostage to the likes and dislikes of a bunch of misogynistic throwbacks, a corrupt regent and the duplicitous Pakistanis. Great, just great
Petraeus even has one of his Islam clueless or driven mad officers saying, "It's a trial, and the people are the jury". So what does that make American troops? Well obviously that makes them the prisoners in the dock.
Petraeus is every bit as loony as Colonel Nicholson in <i>The Bridge on the River Kwai</i>, but Alec Guinness was only acting.
As for the Child Emperor, Obama, he golfs and parties and politics a lot while American troops die for madness. He doesn't care.
Obama promised during the campaign to try one last time in Afghanistan. He is going thorugh his campaign checklist and I wish more than anyone we would pulll out but glad at lesat that we have a timeline. A year from now we will start pulling out the troops. Period. Hopefully McCain will be long gone from the Senate and JD Hayworth as a laughing stock of the senate. These guys are clowns.
Aimlow Joe was here
www.aimlow.com
.
1.January 28, 2010: If you want to build a well in a village the cost could be quoted at $20,000.00, but it will end up costing $250,000 because of the multiple layer of sub-contracting, and this is because everyone has to get their cut and there is so much money sloshing around from donor countries. You only have to look at the mob in Chicago during the 30s when the government was trying to clean it up. The parallels are similar, except in Afghanistan the government officials are corrupt all the way back to Hamid Karzai. Nobody in Kabul wants to change the mob because they are the mob.
.
2. Monday, October 19, 2009 - Being a logistical nightmare has made Afghanistan a costly place to wage war. In the course of debating General Stanley McChrystal's request for 40,000 additional troops, lawmakers uncovered the fact that it costs $400 a gallon to fuel the vehicles and planes the Pentagon is using to fight the Taliban. Afghanistan lacks a seaport of its own, so fuel must first be shipped to Karachi, Pakistan, and then trucked all the way into Afghanistan.
.
3. Tuesday, June 29, 2010 - Top officials in the Afghanistan government are helping funnel billions of dollars out of the country, say U.S. investigators. Members of the U.S. Department of Justice, the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration sent to Afghanistan estimate that more than $3 billion in cash has been openly flown out of Kabul International Airport in the past three years. according to The Wall Street Journal.