thedrifter
06-14-09, 10:39 AM
opinion
An opportunity in Afghanistan
By U.S. Sen. Mark Udall
The Denver Post
Posted: 06/14/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT
I recently visited Afghanistan and Pakistan to see for myself how President Obama's new strategy for the region will be implemented.
The landscapes, culture and people were familiar. Twenty years ago, I climbed the Himalayas as a young mountaineer. More recently, as a member of the Armed Services Committee in the House and now the Senate, I have visited our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I believe there is a window of opportunity to try to achieve the "core objective" the president set out — defeating al-Qaeda and preventing them from using Afghanistan as a haven for destabilizing Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state with a history of illicit transfers of nuclear materials and expertise. In the estimation of many experts, the possibility that Islamic radicals could undermine the Pakistani state has become all too real.
This isn't about "staying the course." This is about finally committing resources and attention to an area that is a critical front in the war against Islamic extremism and correcting the mistakes and missteps of the last seven years. However desirable, our real strategic goal in the region is not a flourishing democracy in Afghanistan. Our aim should be sustainable and achievable — stability and security in the region.
But if, as Gen. David Petraeus has said, "we can't kill our way to victory," then how do we achieve these goals? Despite grave strategic mistakes in Iraq that have made the job of stabilizing Afghanistan and Pakistan harder, we have, nevertheless, learned a great deal about how to protect the civilian population, train security forces, and strengthen government institutions as part of a counterinsurgency campaign. The president's new strategy applies this counterinsurgency approach to the region, adding U.S. troops, military trainers, civilian experts, and development aid.
During my visit, I learned that our efforts to increase the Afghan National Army and improve its capacity are paying off — the ANA has become the most trusted and effective institution in the country, an evolution that will ultimately allow U.S. soldiers to reduce their role. I met with Provincial Reconstruction Team specialists who shared their belief that with training and assistance, Afghanistan could move away from poppy (opium) production and once again grow enough food to provide for its own people, while depriving insurgents of their funding source.
In Pakistan, I was encouraged to see that the Pakistani government has begun to focus more on the growing insurgency on its western borders, and less on the eastern border with India. There is a greater recognition that extremism poses an existential threat to Pakistan itself, not just to its ungoverned areas, and that the civilian government must assert itself in this perilous environment.
While there is room for optimism, I do have concerns about the way forward. In Afghanistan, corruption remains pervasive. The planned "civilian surge" may not be sufficient to address the governance challenge. Coordinating the 42-country NATO effort with new U.S. troops and civil-military strategy won't be easy. Civilian casualties caused by U.S. airstrikes risk jeopardizing broader goals.
In Pakistan, I am concerned that the Pakistani army doesn't yet understand how to fight an insurgency and that it lacks the will to sustain its fight against insurgents within its borders. And unless the 2.5 million Pakistanis who have fled the fighting in the Swat region are cared for and resettled, refugee camps could become insurgent breeding grounds. The international community must step up to help face these challenges, since instability in this part of the world is not just an American problem.
I believe the president's combined civil-military strategy is our best hope to turn the tide in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But we should not overestimate our abilities to rebuild broken states and transform entire regions of the world. Ensuring our security at home and serving our interests abroad means we need to be both smart and tough as we engage with our allies and adversaries.
I will support the president's efforts because leaving the region is neither responsible nor risk-free. But I also intend to keep our mission in Afghanistan focused on achievable and specific goals, and to develop a strategy that engages our diplomatic and civil expertise as much as our military power.
Mark Udall is a U.S. senator from Colorado.
Ellie
An opportunity in Afghanistan
By U.S. Sen. Mark Udall
The Denver Post
Posted: 06/14/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT
I recently visited Afghanistan and Pakistan to see for myself how President Obama's new strategy for the region will be implemented.
The landscapes, culture and people were familiar. Twenty years ago, I climbed the Himalayas as a young mountaineer. More recently, as a member of the Armed Services Committee in the House and now the Senate, I have visited our troops in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I believe there is a window of opportunity to try to achieve the "core objective" the president set out — defeating al-Qaeda and preventing them from using Afghanistan as a haven for destabilizing Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state with a history of illicit transfers of nuclear materials and expertise. In the estimation of many experts, the possibility that Islamic radicals could undermine the Pakistani state has become all too real.
This isn't about "staying the course." This is about finally committing resources and attention to an area that is a critical front in the war against Islamic extremism and correcting the mistakes and missteps of the last seven years. However desirable, our real strategic goal in the region is not a flourishing democracy in Afghanistan. Our aim should be sustainable and achievable — stability and security in the region.
But if, as Gen. David Petraeus has said, "we can't kill our way to victory," then how do we achieve these goals? Despite grave strategic mistakes in Iraq that have made the job of stabilizing Afghanistan and Pakistan harder, we have, nevertheless, learned a great deal about how to protect the civilian population, train security forces, and strengthen government institutions as part of a counterinsurgency campaign. The president's new strategy applies this counterinsurgency approach to the region, adding U.S. troops, military trainers, civilian experts, and development aid.
During my visit, I learned that our efforts to increase the Afghan National Army and improve its capacity are paying off — the ANA has become the most trusted and effective institution in the country, an evolution that will ultimately allow U.S. soldiers to reduce their role. I met with Provincial Reconstruction Team specialists who shared their belief that with training and assistance, Afghanistan could move away from poppy (opium) production and once again grow enough food to provide for its own people, while depriving insurgents of their funding source.
In Pakistan, I was encouraged to see that the Pakistani government has begun to focus more on the growing insurgency on its western borders, and less on the eastern border with India. There is a greater recognition that extremism poses an existential threat to Pakistan itself, not just to its ungoverned areas, and that the civilian government must assert itself in this perilous environment.
While there is room for optimism, I do have concerns about the way forward. In Afghanistan, corruption remains pervasive. The planned "civilian surge" may not be sufficient to address the governance challenge. Coordinating the 42-country NATO effort with new U.S. troops and civil-military strategy won't be easy. Civilian casualties caused by U.S. airstrikes risk jeopardizing broader goals.
In Pakistan, I am concerned that the Pakistani army doesn't yet understand how to fight an insurgency and that it lacks the will to sustain its fight against insurgents within its borders. And unless the 2.5 million Pakistanis who have fled the fighting in the Swat region are cared for and resettled, refugee camps could become insurgent breeding grounds. The international community must step up to help face these challenges, since instability in this part of the world is not just an American problem.
I believe the president's combined civil-military strategy is our best hope to turn the tide in Afghanistan and Pakistan. But we should not overestimate our abilities to rebuild broken states and transform entire regions of the world. Ensuring our security at home and serving our interests abroad means we need to be both smart and tough as we engage with our allies and adversaries.
I will support the president's efforts because leaving the region is neither responsible nor risk-free. But I also intend to keep our mission in Afghanistan focused on achievable and specific goals, and to develop a strategy that engages our diplomatic and civil expertise as much as our military power.
Mark Udall is a U.S. senator from Colorado.
Ellie