By Kenneth J. Theisen
Regular readers of this site are well-aware of the current debate going on in the U.S. about the escalating war in Afghanistan. But this debate is not confined to just deploying additional U.S. troops there.
The U.S. is also engaged in trying to pressure its allies to bear a greater burden in Afghanistan on behalf of U.S. imperialism. Toward that end the U.S. has been trying to utilize NATO more effectively.
NATO defense ministers met in Slovakia on October 23rd to discuss NATO strategy regarding Afghanistan. They backed the U.S. idea of an expanded counter-insurgency strategy in that country, but did not agree to any commitment to deploy any additional NATO or allied troops at this time. The ministers are deferring troop decisions until U.S. President Obama decides what to do about General Stanley McChrystal’s request for additional U.S. troops to be deployed to Afghanistan.
NATO forces are currently deployed in Afghanistan as part of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF). General McChrystal is commander of this force, as well as the commander of all U.S. troops there. There are presently about 65,000 U.S. forces in Afghanistan and approximately 39,000 soldiers from NATO and U.S. allied nations. U.S. troop strength will reach about 68,000 by the end of the year, but Obama is currently deciding whether to increase these numbers dramatically in response to a request from General McChystal.
Secretary of Imperialist War Robert Gates put a positive spin on the NATO ministers’ meeting when he stated, “I detect a commitment and an energy on the part of our allies … in terms of their determination to participate with us in Afghanistan and see this through to a successful conclusion. There were a number of allies who have indicated they were thinking about or moving toward increasing their military or their civilian contributions or both, and I found that very heartening."
But one of the reasons that the U.S. has not been able to get additional troop commitments from its NATO allies is the recent fraudulent election in Afghanistan. This absence of “legitimacy” has hurt the U.S. efforts to build support for its escalation of the Afghan War. This is why the U.S. pressured Afghan President Karzai to agree to a new election on November 7, 2009.
Dutch Defense Minister Eimert Van Middelkoop, indicated his country is awaiting the final Afghan election results "because the legitimacy of the Afghan government is key." He said the Netherlands is also waiting to see what Obama does about McChrystal’s request.
Denmark‘s Defense Minister Soeren Gade also raised the question of the Afghan government’s legitimacy. He said U.S. allies would not increase troop levels until they are assured the new government in Kabul is committed to the NATO goals regarding Afghanistan.
Although the NATO ministers did not agree to any additional NATO troops being sent to Afghanistan at their meeting they did agree on the need to build-up Afghan puppet forces so that they can carry a bigger burden in the fighting. NATO commanders want to double the size of the Afghan military forces to about 400,000 personnel.
NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen told reporters, “We are just setting up a Training Mission for Afghanistan. I will be pushing Ministers hard to fully resource it – with trainers, equipment and money. It is a very simple calculation. If we want to be able to do less later, we have to invest more now.”
Rasmussen also talked about the need for a “legitimate” Afghanistan government. He said, “The necessary steps must be taken to ensure that the conduct of the next round of voting achieves a higher standard than we saw in the first round, so that the Government that results from this process has legitimacy in the eyes of the Afghan people.”
One of the problems in regard to enlarging the size of the Afghan forces is that ISAF does not have enough trainers to support a massive build-up of the Afghan puppet forces. But War Secretary Gates told reporters, “Hopefully we’ll agree to put more effort into the training area. We agree upon the fact that we need a stronger Afghan footprint all over Afghanistan, especially in the south and the east where there is heavy fighting. That is part of our exit strategy to make sure that the Afghan national army can deal with the security problem itself.”
Gates also indicated that a U.S. decision on troop numbers in Afghanistan was likely in the near future. He stated, “Probably over the next two or three weeks we’re going to be considering some specific options and teeing them up for a decision by the president.” He went on to say, “The question is: Do we have the strategy right in light of the situation we face? Does it need refinement in some way? And if it does need some adjustment — in light of the events that have taken place over the last number of months, including the elections and so on — what are the implications … in terms of General McChrystal’s resource request?” Gates further told the NATO allies that the U.S. “has no intention of pulling out of Afghanistan or abandoning our core mission there.”
If Obama orders a larger buildup of American forces (I believe he will.) this will not only result in an increase in U.S. forces but will also likely result in allied nations increasing their forces there as well. Such a decision will also lead to an increase in the size of the Afghan puppet forces as advocated by U.S. and other NATO commanders. Such a dramatic increase in military forces acting on behalf of U.S. imperialism will undoubtedly increase the death and destruction within Afghanistan and will also probably increase the suffering and death in nearby Pakistan too.
We must continue to oppose escalation of this war and demand its end. Expansion of this war is in the interests of U.S. imperialism and its allies, but not in the interests of the people of Afghanistan or the world.