Brief—The War in
Afghanistan
From the article:
·
34 “green-on-blue” attacks this year in
Afghanistan, in which troops from the NATO-led coalition have been attacked by
their local allies in the Afghan security forces
o
In these attacks, 45 soldiers have been killed
and 69 wounded
·
On August 29th, an Afghan soldier
shot dead three Australian soldiers at a base in the south-central province of
Uruzgan
·
1/7 of all NATO deaths this year have been at
the hands of Afghan troops
·
The Taliban claim the attacks are part of a
campaign to infiltrate the Afghan army and police with assassins
o
NATO commanders reject this idea, say that only
1/10 of the attacks are the work of infiltrators
·
Most of the attacks are rooted in a mixture of
personal arguments and cultural misunderstandings
o
Afghan soldiers and policemen cite foreigners’
swearing, arrogance, ignorance of Islam and disrespect towards civilians as
sources of tension with their allies
o
Afghan soldiers are also given little leave, and
can be posted in a hotspot such as the Helmand province for years at a time
·
Afghan soldiers or police have also killed 53 of
their comrades and wounded 22 in 35 separate attacks this year
·
The attacks weaken American support for the war
Background
Following
the 9/11 terrorist attacks, America soon moved to cut off Al-Qaeda at its
source, which at the time was in Afghanistan. American and NATO troops have
been in the area since 2001, with mixed results and a now unclear mission.
After Osama bin Laden, the de facto leader of Al-Qaeda, was killed by U.S.
special forces in Pakistan, and dozens of other terrorist leaders have been
killed by drone strikes and through counter-insurgency measures, it is
difficult to say what the Western role is now. To be sure, Afghanistan is by no
means a perfect country. The Taliban continues to fight Western forces, and the
newly-elected Afghan government (led by Hamid Karzai, the president) struggles
to maintain control and to effectively train its soldiers and police forces.
However, the 11-year struggle seems to be coming to an end, as people either
see that the mission has been accomplished, or there is no point for American
troops to continue to attempt to build a democratic state.
The plan,
at least for American troops, is to decrease the amount of forces to 68,000 by
September 2012, from a peak of 100,000 in mid-2011. Barack Obama has promised a
“steady pace” of withdrawal after that, until the end of 2014, when only about
20,000 trainers and special forces personnel are left. The controversy is over
the ability of Afghanistan to contain the Taliban by themselves. Some say that
Afghan forces will not be able to keep the Taliban at bay, while others argue
that America needs to let the Afghan government approach the problem with
whatever strategies they believe will be effective.
The Motion:
THW Pull out of Afghanistan
Arguments:
Pro:
1.
The War is being Won
a.
American commanders argue that recently, with
the arrival of paratroopers, the Taliban has been pushed back. There are still
attacks, but less bombs have been found and Taliban leaders have fled into the
mountains. With the Taliban out of the towns and roads, the Afghan forces can
hold the newly cleared ground.
2.
America (and the West) has done enough harm
already
a.
By taking over operations in Afghanistan,
American troops have limited the ability of Afghans to take ownership of the
fight. We have created a harmful dependency that will make it difficult for the
Afghan government to make its own policies and develop its own solutions.
Nevertheless, at some point we must break this dependency. We cannot stay in
Afghanistan forever.
b.
This year, there have been 34 “green-on-blue”
attacks, in which forces from the NATO-led coalition have been attacked by the
Afghan security forces, their allies. In these attacks, 45 soldiers have been
killed and 69 wounded. Most of the reasoning for these attacks comes from
disagreements and cultural misunderstandings. Afghan soldiers are frustrated by
their allies’ swearing, arrogance, ignorance of Islam, and disrespect towards
civilians. At the point at which our allies in Afghanistan are killing our
soldiers, it is time to cut our losses and leave.
c.
Every year, there are thousands of civilian
casualties in Afghanistan. In 2009, Western forces accounted for about half of
all civilian casualties. In the first six months of 2010, over 3,200 Afghan
civilians were killed as a result of the fighting. At some point, the civilian
death toll forces us to question the purpose and efficacy of our war strategy.
We are clearly at the point where civilian deaths outweigh any victory we could
have against the Taliban.
3.
There is no victory strategy
a.
The war in Afghanistan, and this is true for
most modern conflicts in the Middle East, is unique. This is not a war between
two nations, each with boundaries, economies, constitutions, and (somewhat)
uniform values, as in typical wars of the past. Rather, we are attempting to
fight an ideological enemy that is extremely mobile and can cross national
borders with ease. There is no way to kill the ideology of Islamic extremists.
If anything, our attacks against them and their civilians will only increase
their recruitment. Attempts to continue to fight the Taliban or Al-Qaeda is a
losing battle. We may have superior force, but they know the landscape, the
culture, the language, and their ideology cannot be snuffed out.
Con:
1.
The Afghan government is not ready (Taliban will
win)
a.
Afghan forces are not numerous enough nor
trained heavily enough to be able to combat the Taliban. Even if the Taliban
has retreated, they can always come back, and the reason they retreated had to
do with the 100,000 American troops, which will drop by at least 80,000 by the
end of 2014. There are not enough Afghan troops to compete with the Taliban.
They will most likely lose control of the country to the Taliban, and then we
lose all the progress of the last eleven years
b.
There are reports of infiltration within the
Afghan security forces and police force, as evidenced by Afghan-on-Afghan
attacks within the Afghan military, killing over 50 troops this year. The
Taliban is not gone, and will continue to infiltrate the military until they take
back control of the government.
2.
America has an interest in forming a democracy
a.
After America originally chased off the Taliban
at the start of the war, the state-building process began. Afghanistan did (and
continues to) welcome U.S. assistance and aid. Not only that, but America has
sacrificed thousands of troops for this cause, and it would all be a waste if
we give up now. We need to stay longer in the country in order to stabilize the
government, root out corruption, and assist them in growing their economy to
the point that they are self-sufficient. It is within America’s interest to
have a democratic government in the Middle East that supports the U.S. It gives
us important diplomatic channels into Iran, Syria, and Pakistan. America also
stands to gain economically by having a trade partner. This could be a great
way to show the world America’s commitment to its values, as well as to keep
important diplomatic connections open.
3.
Afghanistan needs our help
a.
In the last 10 years, the average lifespan of women
in Afghanistan has increased by 15 years. This is due mostly to increased
access to healthcare, better nutrition and increased GDP. America has made
Afghanistan a better country. It is not perfect, but it is much better than
rule by the Taliban, and they can still use our help in building the economy
and the government.
b.
“Most people still do not have access to clean
water or electricity, even in Kabul, the capital city. In part this is due to
government corruption. Afghanistan is now ranked one of the most corrupt
countries in the world. But it is also a failure of the international
contracting firms that built the roads, many of which were too small to allow
farmers to pass trucks to get produce to market. Some used such poor
quality asphalt that the roads need rebuilding already. Even in
central Kabul the main road which runs between the airport and a central
district called Wazir Akbar Khan is so badly pot-holed that visitors think it
is due to war damage. The asphalt of the road, built a few years ago, has
already worn away.”—salon.com
i.
We need concerted efforts to help the citizens
while we keep the Taliban at bay. We do not need all of our troops, but we
cannot abandon our ally while we have left their country in such a weak state.
We are setting them up to either lose control of their government or be mired
in poverty for the next decade, and we must right this wrong.
Sources:
No comments:
Post a Comment