|
|
In 2003, driven by the new strategic environment, NATO launched its first major out-of area UN mandated operation in Afghanistan. NATO’s main role in Afghanistan is to assist the Afghan Government in exercising and extending its authority and influence across the country, paving the way for reconstruction and effective governance. It does this predominately through its UN-mandated International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). While starting at the beginning with providing security in Kabul, the ISAF 2003, has gradually expanded the reach of its mission to cover Afghanistan’s whole territory. The number of ISAF troops has grown accordingly from the initial 5,000 to more than 71.000 troops coming from 43 countries, including all NATO members. Due to some underestimating of the situation and lack of proper coordination among the major players, the Taliban insurgency gained momentum, making in recent months the situation in Afghanistan quite difficult, both militarily and politically. That’s the reason for many people within the Alliance, being frustrated by the pace and effectiveness of progress, to raise legitimate questions about the cost of NATO mission in resources and in human terms. Although at the beginning it could seem to make sense, it is very important to understand two things: First, there are a lot of dramatically and hugely positive changes in Afghanistan, that portend well for the future: functioning central government, build up of the Afghan security forces, construction of roads, provision of clean water, access to healthcare, the presence of children in school, and access to education for females. All of these are up and growing. Second, at the present situation the way out of Afghanistan bears immediate threats for all the international community. As a result from the operations Al Qaeda no longer has any training camps in Afghanistan, they no longer have a safe haven in Afghanistan, and they haven’t managed to launch a single major attack from Afghanistan since NATO has been there. This is considered as a major blow to them and is estimated as a real success for NATO and a clear contribution to the world security environment, including in the NATO countries. There is no doubt, that if NATO forces are to walk away from Afghanistan, Al Qaeda would be right back. They would than have a sanctuary from which to launch their strategy of global jihad – a strategy that is directed first and foremost at the same Alliance’s countries. And if they ware to walk away, one can imagine the pressure on nuclear-armed Pakistan, and the way instability would spread like wild-fire through Central Asia. In other words, if NATO were to walk away, the world would feel the consequences in no time – in their own nations, in their capitals, and on their streets. That is why it is very important to understand that although the costs of the operation may appear to be high, the costs of walking away would be far, far higher. Being well aware of that scenario, NATO reaffirms its long-term commitment to supporting the Government of Afghanistan in building a stable and democratic Afghanistan, respectful of human rights, capable of securing itself, and at peace with its neighbors. With the recognition that world security is closely bound to Afghanistan’s one, the Alliance affirms that the UN-mandated NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) remains their key priority. That is expected be the key issue at the political discussions on Afghanistan at the NATO Foreign Ministers' Meeting, including ISAF partners, on the 2nd and 3rd of December. Based on the ministerial outcome, the Afghanistan-related component of the Force Generation Conference will take place in December to bring a meat to the bone of political decisions. It is expected NATO with its ISAF partners, despite the obvious difficulties, to decide on the approach, and troop levels needed, to take the mission forward. That should be a counter-insurgency approach, with substantially more troops, and it will place the Afghan population at the core of ISAF’s collective effort – by focusing on their safety, and by supporting reconstruction and development. According to the ISAF commander General McChrystal success in Afghanistan is possible, but the fight must be redefined. The objective should be the will of the Afghan people. “We must protect the Afghan people from all threats: from the enemy and from our own actions”. Hi outlines in six 'crucial next steps', which he hopes to enact on the ground to achieve his objectives: • Gain the initiative by reversing the perceived momentum possessed by the insurgents. • Seek rapid growth of the Afghan National Security Forces - the army and the police. • Improve the effectiveness of ISAF and ANSF through closer partnering, which involves planning, living and operating together and taking advantage of each other's strengths as they go forward. Within ISAF, they will put more emphasis on every part of that, by integrating headquarters, physically co-locating units, and sharing ownership of the problem. • Address shortfalls in the capacity of governance and the ability of the Afghan Government to provide rule of law. • Tackle the issue of predatory corruption by some officials or by warlords who are not in an official position but who seem to have the ability, sometimes sanctioned by existing conditions, to do that. • Focus ISAF resources and prioritize in those areas where the population is most threatened. They do not have enough forces to do everything everywhere at once, so this has to be prioritized and phased over time. Obviously in order to gain the initiative and reverse the insurgents momentum, coalition forces need not only more strength, but a new operational culture as well, which instead of distancing them physically and psychologically from the people who they seek to protect, connect them with those people. Making coalition forces operate and think in a fundamentally new way is not an easy task, but if they did, success was achievable. At the same time comprehensive and coordinated steps are to be taken to progressively hand over responsibility for security to the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) – district by district, province by province - as their own capacity develops. That would allow NATO to stay in Afghanistan only for as long as it takes to finish its mission, which ends when the Afghans are capable of securing and running their country themselves. Following that line, less than nine months after NATO’s Heads of State and Government announced the establishment of the NATO Training Mission for Afghanistan (NTM-A), the NATO Flag was raised at Camp Eggers in Kabul, marking the start of NATO’s mission to enhance training and mentoring of the Afghan National Security Forces. This new Alliance mission will merge with the US-led Combined Security Transition Command (CSTC-A) to foster new and existing relationships and build on the already expanding task of training and mentoring the Afghan National Security Forces in preparation for the future security and sustainment of Afghanistan. In particular NTM-A will build on its training capacity with the Afghan National Army, while adding much needed emphasis on training the Afghan National Police. Once inaugurated, NTM-A is now in the process of resourcing – with trainers, with equipment and with money. The expectations are that next year it would be possible to start handing more lead responsibility for security to Afghan forces. ISAF will do this in a coordinated way, where conditions permit, and they will then be able progressively to move into a support role. Building capability, capacity and quality of ANSF forces will enable the Government of Afghanistan to take the lead in bringing security and stability to Afghanistan. In this regard it is very important the Government itself to be in a position adequately to follow the steps and therefore increasingly to play its role as a major factor for security and stability in the country. Following that, NATO put a lot of efforts to help Afghan government to organize free and democratic presidential elections, which brought in President Karzai second second term as leader of Afghanistan. This is an historic event: the second time in modern Afghan history that a government has taken office peacefully. It is a testimony as well to the courage of the Afghan people, and their determination to exercise their hard-won democratic right to choose their own leaders. President Hamid Karzai at the very beginning has expressed his will to tackle with the critical issues in more decisive and efficient way. NATO strongly supports his intention to form a capable and inclusive administration, and to make it accountable, one in which corruption has no place. It is matter of critical importance that the Afghan people, and the citizens of the countries sending troops to the ISAF, see concrete progress in this regard. There is one thing that should be clearly understood: the process of building security and stability in Afghanistan has a significant military aspect, but it is not only military and even not only NATO issue. It needs more and well coordinated efforts from all international community and its major players. NATO understanding is that a comprehensive approach – a truly joined up civilian and military effort - is the only way for the process to succeed. Each one party has its unique role to play. There is a need the United Nations to lead the overall process – in close coordination with the legitimate government where there is one. NATO can provide security, and train local forces so they can eventually take over. The European Union can finance and run civilian projects, and now, military ones as well. The International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank are vital for funding civilian reconstruction, from roads to schools. There is also a need NGOs to spread their web of projects, from improving health care to promoting new approaches to agriculture. And also individual nations to take responsibility for key aspects of good governance, such as demilitarizing armed groups and building a balanced, impartial, and accountable judicial system. The point is, all of these elements need to work together. To reinforce each other, not just work side by side in the same space what at the moment, due to different circumstances is mostly the case. Now each player, military and civilian, operates within its own stovepipe, at its own pace, and with its own bureaucratic structures and working methods. And so the combined impact of their efforts remains much less than what it could be, and should be. The Comprehensive Approach should not be viewed as an attempt by NATO to subordinate others. It is not about hierarchy. The Comprehensive Approach is all about synergy. NATO suggests some concrete steps how to develop strong permanent relationships between all major institutions and NGOs and how to deliver a truly effective Comprehensive Approach: First, parties must instill a completely new understanding of the need for better civil-military cooperation. Early on in NATO Afghanistan mission, the so-called Provincial Reconstruction Teams – or PRTs were created. In these PRTs, soldiers and civilian development experts work together. Today within ISAF there are 26 Provincial Reconstruction Teams. And this approach has been a true success. It combines the two things that Afghanistan needs most: security and development. And it shows that cultural changes, both in the military, and in the civilian establishments could be effected. But more can be done – indeed, more is being done. NATO is opening up the way of planning and running operations so that they include the indispensable civilian knowledge and expertise – from rule of law to alternative livelihoods; from public health to cultural aspects; and from education to gender awareness. This represents a real revolution in the way they think and organize their cooperation. And they believe it will help to strengthen the essential civil-military cooperation and encourage military and civilian actors to see each other as indispensable partners, rather than competitors. Second, there is a need of strategic partnership between all major institutions and Non Governmental Organizations – and at all levels. The key elements in such a strategic partnership should include better sharing of information; liaison officers; joint training; regular exchange of lessons learned and best practice; and joint seminars and conferences. Working on this direction, there are some positive signs and even some achievements. Just a year ago was signed a Joint Declaration between the United Nations and NATO. NATO and the European Union are also working more closely together, not just in the Balkans and in Afghanistan, but also off the coast of Somalia. Some of NATO’s projects have been supported by the World Bank. NATO is using its experience to help newer international institutions, such as the African Union, to be more effective. Afghanistan has been a catalyst for bringing the NGO community and NATO closer together. All these concrete steps are helping to build a strong and permanent relationship between all the major institutions. That would guarantee continuity of positive changes and visible results in the Afghanistan political and security landscape. A positive outcome of these joint efforts would result in bringing closer peace, stability and prosperity for this decades war-torn country, and would play in mid- en long term a significant role for more secure environment not only in the region, but worldwide as well. |
 |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
