Obama expected to unveil the new US strategy in Afghanistan
Radu Alexandru CUCUTA
December 1st, 2009
The international media is expecting with interest the President's West Point speech, expected to detail the outlines of the new American strategy in Afghanistan. Media pundits have concentrated their reports on the PR campaign of the White House and on the efforts of the Obama administration to inform the world leaders on the new American approach to the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Dubbed by the international observers as a “choreography” of political gestures and moves, the strategy has been in the making for the better part of 2009 and as far as the media is concerned, it is not a risk-free decision.
The most important element noticeable insofar is the attention the administration has given to informing and communicating with its allies and other interested parties. The president has already informed the Russian and the French president in regard to the dispositions he is to enact, Gordon Brown being the next leader in line to find out what the US has in mind for the region. In addition to that, the President is also expected to hold talks with 30 congressmen, Democrat and Republicans alike, in order to cement their endowment of the new plan. On the British side, the US has gone at great lengths to ensure that Great Britain retains its nominal freedom of political and military movement (due to the intense political climate in the UK it is of utmost importance for the Labour Government to ensure that it is perceived as an equal partner of the American war effort – hence the complementary presentation of a British approach to the conflict in Afghanistan, focused around a 500 man increase of the British forces already deployed in Afghanistan).
The American strategy is expected to focus on two things. The 30-35000 surge in military personnel (following a 4000 increase in spring) is to be directed towards both securing major urban areas and towards the training and the building-up of the Afghan military (which is also expected to rise in numbers up to an estimated 130000 people). The American president is also expected to signal that the US commitment to Afghanistan is limited (just as Gordon Brown declared on Monday), but a pulling-out date is not going to be delivered.
There are several arguments that can be made about the new American strategy. On the one hand, there is a great deal of uncertainty as to the measure of military success the surge might have on the situation in the field. Not only is the 30000 men rise in numbers below the 40000 quota general McChrystal, the leading military commander in Afghanistan, estimated is necessary, but several voices have criticised the possibility of a swift military victory over the Taliban forces. In spite of a new level of military presence, the US forces are to face dire opposition in a very volatile region, as that inhabited by the Pashtun tribesmen. The classic dillemas of countering insurgency make a rise in troops necessary, but whether 30000 soldiers and military advisors will do remains to be seen (if one keeps in mind that, as the recent Pakistani intervention in FATA proved, the problem to be adressed is not that of the superiority of the conventional military in terms of arms, tactics and logistics, but that of Taliban control of Afghan territory).
Furthermore, the political background is not a cause of hope either - the controversies surrounding the reelection of Karzai and the inability of the Afghan government to enact it mission (governinng the country) are manifest problems that the strategy needs to adress. In spite of the lack of a centralised command network, the Taliban receive steady social and regional support, and playing the carrot and the stick counter-insurgency policy requires not only an adequately strong stick, but also a very enticing carrot.
