Tweet
NATO wary as withdrawal looms
NATO's responsibilities in Afghanistan are governed by UN Security Council resolutions. According to Richard Yale II, a former special envoy, NATO's job in Afghanistan is "essentially to shore up a weak government in Kabul, to reconstruct Afghanistan, and to use military capabilities against forces which help Al Qaeda and want to destabilize the country."
"NATO is committed to managing a successful, yet challenging, transition process in Afghanistan," says Romain Poirot-Lellig, a former EU diplomat based in Kabul. "Pakistan is a strategic partner in this endeavour".
But other NATO and ISAF officials believe Pakistan had made pacts with the Taliban and is secretly backing them so that it can pressure the US into accepting its political demands and have influence in Kabul after the US leaves.
Art Keller, a former CIA official who had worked in joint operations with the Pakistani ISI, believes "there is a difference between supporting the enemy of your enemy in a time of emergency, and making the decision to have a permanent policy of manipulating religion to foster militancy. Until the Pakistan Army admits they've done that, they're not going to allow anyone to ask the question of whether that was actually the best thing for Pakistan."
But Russian security expert Peter Topychkanov thinks NATO can "hardly be regarded as an independent force in Afghanistan". "The alliance is a tool for consolidation of the military and other resources of the Western countries to solve various problems in Afghanistan," says Topychkanov, who is affiliated with the Center for International Security of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations.
Talks between the Taliban and US officials which would decide the future of the NATO mission in Afghanistan are in a limbo after Taliban anger over a US soldier's killing of 16 innocent Afghan villagers. The United States has paid $50,000 in compensation for each Afghan killed and $11,000 for each person wounded in the shooting spree.
The Taliban said in a statement sent out in English to reporters in Afghanistan and Pakistan: "We must categorically state that the real obstacle in the talks was the shaky, erratic and vague standpoint of the Americans. Therefore all the responsibility for the halt also falls on their shoulders."
"While NATO and ISAF troops battle the Taliban, the Haqqanis, Al Qaeda and the IEDs - we have an invisible enemy within the Afghan Army that we have trained," says Carl Adams, a former US Major General with an intelligence background who now lives in Dubai. "This year, Afghan forces have shot dead more NATO troops than the Taliban."
"The enemy is going to do all that they can to disrupt our operations and to disrupt the integrity of the government forces," says Marine Gen John Allen. "We should expect this," he said, citing examples from Iraq, Vietnam and other counter-insurgency operations historically.
Pakistan and NATO both blame each other for insurgency in Pakistan and Afghanistan because neither side has been able to stop cross-border infiltration.
"The chief irony is that the Pakistani establishment had previously called for NATO to do more in certain sectors," says Micheal Semple, an Irishman who works as a research fellow at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard Kennedy School and had worked for the EU in Afghanistan. "Infiltration now works both ways and Abdul Wali now mainly works out of Kunar. The Taliban now use firing positions close to Pakistan Army border posts."
Pakistan had suspended NATO supplies to Afghanistan after the Salala strike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in November. "A top ISI official in Thailand had assured us that the supplies would resume, but nothing has happened yet," said a source in the Pentagon.
Pakistan's Railway Minister Haji Ghulam Ahmad Bilour told reporters that members of a parliamentary committee that is reviewing Pakistan's foreign policy, particularly Ishaq Dar and Sardar Mehtab Abbasi of the PML-N, thoroughly discussed the government's decision to stop NATO supplies and their parties must now back the committee's recommendations.
A majority of diplomats at an envoys conference earlier this year voted in favor of resuming NATO supplies. Brigadier (r) Shaukat Qadir says the military will let the parliament decide.
After a probe into the Salala incident, the US said the Americans had fired in self-defence. Other mistakes that contributed to the fatal cross-border strike were the regrettable result of battlefield confusion, they said.
Peter Bergen of New America Foundation and CNN told TFT he believed NATO would stay in Afghanistan well beyond 2014. "It is in NATO's interests and in Afghanistan's interests. How many troops will that involve? My guess is many thousands but very few combat soldiers."
Carl Adams speaks of a multi-million Mazhar-i-Sharif base. "There are over 20,000 private contractors in Iraq after the US left. My guess is that there will be US presence in Afghanistan in some shape even after the withdrawal."
NATO's responsibilities in Afghanistan are governed by UN Security Council resolutions. According to Richard Yale II, a former special envoy, NATO's job in Afghanistan is "essentially to shore up a weak government in Kabul, to reconstruct Afghanistan, and to use military capabilities against forces which help Al Qaeda and want to destabilize the country."
"NATO is committed to managing a successful, yet challenging, transition process in Afghanistan," says Romain Poirot-Lellig, a former EU diplomat based in Kabul. "Pakistan is a strategic partner in this endeavour".
But other NATO and ISAF officials believe Pakistan had made pacts with the Taliban and is secretly backing them so that it can pressure the US into accepting its political demands and have influence in Kabul after the US leaves.
Art Keller, a former CIA official who had worked in joint operations with the Pakistani ISI, believes "there is a difference between supporting the enemy of your enemy in a time of emergency, and making the decision to have a permanent policy of manipulating religion to foster militancy. Until the Pakistan Army admits they've done that, they're not going to allow anyone to ask the question of whether that was actually the best thing for Pakistan."
But Russian security expert Peter Topychkanov thinks NATO can "hardly be regarded as an independent force in Afghanistan". "The alliance is a tool for consolidation of the military and other resources of the Western countries to solve various problems in Afghanistan," says Topychkanov, who is affiliated with the Center for International Security of the Institute of World Economy and International Relations.
Talks between the Taliban and US officials which would decide the future of the NATO mission in Afghanistan are in a limbo after Taliban anger over a US soldier's killing of 16 innocent Afghan villagers. The United States has paid $50,000 in compensation for each Afghan killed and $11,000 for each person wounded in the shooting spree.
The Taliban said in a statement sent out in English to reporters in Afghanistan and Pakistan: "We must categorically state that the real obstacle in the talks was the shaky, erratic and vague standpoint of the Americans. Therefore all the responsibility for the halt also falls on their shoulders."
"While NATO and ISAF troops battle the Taliban, the Haqqanis, Al Qaeda and the IEDs - we have an invisible enemy within the Afghan Army that we have trained," says Carl Adams, a former US Major General with an intelligence background who now lives in Dubai. "This year, Afghan forces have shot dead more NATO troops than the Taliban."
"The enemy is going to do all that they can to disrupt our operations and to disrupt the integrity of the government forces," says Marine Gen John Allen. "We should expect this," he said, citing examples from Iraq, Vietnam and other counter-insurgency operations historically.
Pakistan and NATO both blame each other for insurgency in Pakistan and Afghanistan because neither side has been able to stop cross-border infiltration.
"The chief irony is that the Pakistani establishment had previously called for NATO to do more in certain sectors," says Micheal Semple, an Irishman who works as a research fellow at the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard Kennedy School and had worked for the EU in Afghanistan. "Infiltration now works both ways and Abdul Wali now mainly works out of Kunar. The Taliban now use firing positions close to Pakistan Army border posts."
Pakistan had suspended NATO supplies to Afghanistan after the Salala strike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in November. "A top ISI official in Thailand had assured us that the supplies would resume, but nothing has happened yet," said a source in the Pentagon.
Pakistan's Railway Minister Haji Ghulam Ahmad Bilour told reporters that members of a parliamentary committee that is reviewing Pakistan's foreign policy, particularly Ishaq Dar and Sardar Mehtab Abbasi of the PML-N, thoroughly discussed the government's decision to stop NATO supplies and their parties must now back the committee's recommendations.
A majority of diplomats at an envoys conference earlier this year voted in favor of resuming NATO supplies. Brigadier (r) Shaukat Qadir says the military will let the parliament decide.
After a probe into the Salala incident, the US said the Americans had fired in self-defence. Other mistakes that contributed to the fatal cross-border strike were the regrettable result of battlefield confusion, they said.
Peter Bergen of New America Foundation and CNN told TFT he believed NATO would stay in Afghanistan well beyond 2014. "It is in NATO's interests and in Afghanistan's interests. How many troops will that involve? My guess is many thousands but very few combat soldiers."
Carl Adams speaks of a multi-million Mazhar-i-Sharif base. "There are over 20,000 private contractors in Iraq after the US left. My guess is that there will be US presence in Afghanistan in some shape even after the withdrawal."
Comment