The Key to Stability in Afghanistan
Success in Afghanistan has always been tied to the expansion of the Afghan national security forces, experts agree. This news feature recaps the USIP event "Securing Transition: Assessing the Future of the Afghan National Security Forces." The panel discussion took place on February 25, 2011.
February 28, 2011
THE KEY TO STABILITY IN AFGHANISTAN – Success in Afghanistan has always been tied to the expansion of the Afghan national security forces, experts agree. The stronger and more robust the indigenous forces become, the more stable the country. Abdul Rahim Wardak, the Afghan Minister of Defense, said the Afghan Army is growing stronger and more capable. “No one should doubt our Afghan determination to succeed,” Wardak said at an event at USIP on Feb. 25. Wardak, a strong American ally in the Afghan campaign, articulated the concern among many Americans and members of Congress that the U.S. should be able to transition out of Afghanistan as soon as possible. “You should be assured that we really don’t want to be a burden on the international community or on the U.S. more than is required,” he said.
CORRUPTION AND THE POLICE – The Army has long been seen as credible in the eyes of the Afghan people. But the police force is plagued by corruption and Afghans are dubious that the police are a viable national security tool. NATO’s current training effort was restructured over the last year to weed out bad actors and reduce corruption across the force. “Corruption is a priority we’ve focused on,” said Bismillah Khan Mohammadi, the Afghan Minister of the Interior. Mohammadi said that attrition within the police has dropped, and the Interior department is working on narrowing “capability gaps” across the force. “We do believe in our mutual fight against terrorism and the Taliban, ensuring security and stability, and the role of the police has been a vital one,” he said through a translator. Strengthening the Afghan national security forces must include robust development of the police he said. “Development of the security forces without focus on development of the police will not be realistic.”
THE U.S. COMMITMENT TO THE REGION: LONG-TERM? – Even as the “surge” of American forces in Afghanistan continues, the biggest question is how long the U.S. will stay in the region. Many Americans believe that after 2014, when security responsibilities are transferred to the Afghans, the job will be done and the Americans can leave. But policy makers who have followed the issue over the years have long lamented the American abandonment of Afghanistan and Pakistan after the Russians left in 1989. Now there is renewed concern that the U.S. may leave again after 2014 – feeding the perception among the population there that the U.S. is simply “looking for the exits.” This undercuts American strategic interests there, said retired Lt. Gen. David Barno, now a senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security. But the more the U.S. counters this perception, the more effective it can be in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. “The confidence in U.S. staying power is a strategic multiplier for us,” he said. “If we can convince the Pakistanis that we are going to stay in the region for the long-term, then… they will put their chips on a different part of the table. But we’re only beginning to do that.”
