U.S. Withdrawal from Afghanistan and Development of the Afghanistan Situation

Published in Wenweipo
(Hong Kong) on 20 July 2011
by Wang Wei (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Sharon Chiao. Edited by Nathan Ladd  .
After the U.S. disposed of Osama bin Laden, Afghanistan’s President Hamid Karzai said, "Ten years of fighting the war on terror, and in the end bin Laden was found in Pakistan; therefore, in the future Afghanistan should not be the battle ground for the war on terror, it should be Pakistan instead.” In reality, the Afghan government is not optimistic.

On Nov. 20, 2010, in Lisbon, Portugal, NATO reached an agreement that confirmed that NATO’s security forces in Afghanistan would cease combat duties and complete the transfer of security at the end of 2014. Then NATO troops in Afghanistan would take on supporting roles such as training and leading troops.

Currently, there are a total of 48 countries participating in NATO’s military activities in Afghanistan, a force over 130,000 strong. There are approximately 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. On June 22, 2011, President Obama announced plans for troop withdrawal from Afghanistan: Beginning by the end of this year, America will pull out 10,000 troops from Afghanistan. Before the end of the summer of 2012 another 23,000 will be withdrawn — a total of 33,000 troops. The transfer of security duties will be completed in 2014.

Last year the U.S. implemented its strategic plan by recognizing that Pakistan and Afghanistan are equally important and having the U.S. lead Afghan troops first. Then, after there was a sense of unity among the Afghan troops, the U.S. moved forward with its plan to withdrawal its troops from Afghanistan. The U.S. will use its soft and hard methods to deal with the Taliban. Although NATO troops in Afghanistan have increased their efforts to suppress the Taliban, there have been no obvious results. Roadside bombs, suicide bombers and other militant attacks from the Afghani Taliban have clearly increased; its targets are markets, airports, NATO military bases, government buildings and homes of U.N. workers. In May of this year, in Kandahar, the Taliban initiated a new wave of attacks on NATO troops.

Following the rise in casualties of NATO troops, NATO member states have markedly different opinions on the topic of troops in Afghanistan. The Netherlands and Canada have already pulled out or have decided to pull out of Afghanistan. More and more NATO member states have anti-war sentiments. Although it was announced at the NATO summit that took place in Portugal, that in 2014 the responsibility for Afghanistan’s security would be handed over to the Afghan government and troops, in reality the strategic goal of the U.S., “use Afghanistan to control Afghanistan,” has recently been difficult to implement. The U.S. is looking to have discussions with “moderate” Taliban members, but there is a great divide between each country’s positions; and the Afghani Taliban will continue to fight. From Karzai’s point of view, Afghan security needs at least 5 years before it can guarantee domestic security, and Afghanistan will be dependent on the U.S.’s economic and military aid for the next 20 years. In order to maintain its long term strategic interests in Afghanistan, the U.S. has recently been improving its relations with the Karzai government. While at the same time, U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan have increased the training intensity of the Afghan security troops. Currently, the Afghan national army is 70,000 strong. The U.S. Department of Defense’s goal is that the Afghan army and police force will have 282,000 people — 123,000 police officers and 159,000 soldiers — by July 2011.

The Afghan Battlefield Is Still too Unwieldy

According to NATO’s plans, the main directive of the multi-nation NATO troops stationed in Afghanistan in 2014 will be to train Afghan troops. However, NATO will not pull out of Afghanistan. The Taliban has again called for the departure of foreign troops from Afghanistan; the Afghani Taliban has threatened to get rid of the U.S.-led multi-nation troops on Afghani soil. Currently, Taliban activity has become more and more common, and in a few areas, many civilians, during a dispute, will turn and help the Taliban’s “shadow government,” causing the Taliban influence to increase. Although, the U.S. has begun discussions with the Taliban, the militants have not put down their weapons; in fact the Taliban is eyeing a return to power. Of the 34 provinces in Afghanistan, the Taliban has already established its shadow government in 32.

The Taliban’s attacks have also spread to peaceful areas in the north and west. Under these circumstances, the international opinion is that, in view of Afghanistan’s worsening situation, the duration of NATO’s troop presence will lengthen; it may pass the current stated goal of 2014. NATO military officers believe the process of NATO’s transfer of security responsibility to the Afghan government will be a slow and lengthy process. It will start in the districts and then slowly spread towards the provincial level; once the transfer of security responsibilities is complete, NATO troops will turn attention to the dangerous regions. Currently two thirds of militant attacks are centralized in three provinces: Kandahar and Helmand in the south and Kunar in the north. These provinces may become the last security responsibility transfer areas. The period of time that NATO forces are stationed in these provinces will be longer than other provinces. By 2014, these soldiers will become military training personnel or consultants, but they will still remain active in Afghanistan. When the 2014 deadline comes, only a small number of soldiers stationed in Afghanistan will be able to return home.

Currently, the U.S. is increasing its attacks against the Taliban from Afghanistan and Pakistan, and it is also actively increasing its military cooperation with India. In hopes of increasing its influence in southern and central Asia, the U.S. will not walk away from Afghanistan. It remains difficult for the security situation in Afghanistan to undergo great change in the near future.


拉登被美軍清除後,阿富汗總統卡爾扎伊說,打了十年的反恐戰爭,結果拉登在巴基斯坦抓住了,所以以後阿富汗就不再是反恐戰場了,反恐戰場應該是巴基斯坦了。事實上,阿富汗政局走向仍不容樂觀。

 北約成員國2010年11月20日在葡萄牙的里斯本達成一致,確定北約領導的駐阿國際安全援助部隊將於2014年底結束戰鬥任務,完成防務移交,此後,北約部隊在阿富汗將發揮訓練和指導等支持作用。

 目前,共有48個國家參與北約在阿富汗的軍事行動,總兵力超過13萬。駐阿美軍大約有10萬人,2011年6月22日,奧巴馬宣佈阿富汗撤軍計劃:美軍今年年底前從阿撤出1萬士兵,2012年夏季結束前再撤2.3萬人,兩批共撤軍3.3萬人,2014年完成阿富汗防務移交。

 去年美國對阿富汗實行「軍事先導、巴阿並重、軍經結合、以進求退」的戰略方針,使用軟硬兩手對付塔利班。儘管北約駐阿部隊一再加大清剿力度,卻沒有收到明顯效果。阿富汗塔利班發起的路邊炸彈襲擊、自殺式爆炸襲擊和其他各類武裝襲擊明顯增多,襲擊目標擴及機場、北約部隊基地、政府建築以及聯合國工作人員住所等。今年5月塔利班在坎大哈發動春季攻勢,對北約軍隊發起新一輪襲擊。

 隨著北約軍隊在阿富汗傷亡數字攀升,北約各成員國在駐軍阿富汗問題上分歧愈顯。荷蘭、加拿大已分別撤出或決定撤出駐阿軍隊,越來越多的北約成員國民眾反戰情緒高漲。儘管在葡萄牙舉行的北約峰會宣稱將在2014年將阿富汗的防務完全移交給當地政府和阿富汗軍隊負責,實際上美國「以阿治阿」的戰略目標近期難以實現,美國尋求與塔利班「溫和派」對話談判,但雙方立場相距甚遠,阿富汗塔利班將對抗下去。在阿富汗總統卡爾扎伊看來,阿富汗安全部隊至少要用5年時間才能保障國內安全,阿富汗在以後20年都將依賴美國的經濟和軍事援助。為了維護美國在阿富汗的長遠戰略利益,近期美國在改善與卡爾扎伊政府關係的同時,美軍和北約駐阿聯軍加大了對阿富汗安全部隊的培訓力度。目前,阿富汗國民軍兵力約7萬人,美國國防部的目標是,到2011年7月,阿富汗軍警數量將達到28.2萬人,其中警察12.3萬人,軍隊15.9萬人。

阿富汗戰場仍然是尾大不掉

 根據北約的安排,駐阿富汗多國部隊在2014年後主要承擔訓練任務,但並不會從當地撤走,塔利班則再次要求駐阿外國聯軍立即撤離;阿富汗塔利班武裝揚言,將在2014年前,把美國領導的多國部隊從阿領土上趕走。目前,塔利班武裝活動越來越頻繁,在一些地區,不少民眾在發生糾紛時,轉而向塔利班「影子政府」求助,導致塔利班影響力擴大。儘管美國方面也開始同塔利班談判,但塔利班並未放下武器;塔利班正著眼「重奪政權」,力圖捲土重來。在阿富汗的34個省,塔利班現已在32個省建立了它的影子政府。

 隨著阿富汗國內暴力襲擊增多,塔利班的襲擊活動也擴大到此前相對和平的北部、西部地區,在這種情況下,國際輿論認為,鑒於阿富汗局勢的發展趨勢,北約駐軍時間還將延長,可能超過此前制定的2014年撤軍時間表。北約軍方人士認為,北約向阿富汗軍隊移交安全防務的過程將是一個逐步進行的緩慢過程,從單個地區開始,逐步升級為省級;一旦相對安全的地區安全防務被移交,北約軍隊將轉戰相對危險的地區,目前2/3的武裝分子襲擊集中在3個省份——南部的坎大哈、赫爾曼德及東北部的庫納爾;這些省份可能成為最後移交防務的省份,北約軍隊在這些省份的駐紮期限要長於其它省份;到2014年,這些士兵基本轉換身份,成為軍事訓練人員或顧問,但是他們仍在阿富汗活動,屆時駐阿士兵將只有少數人能返回自己的國家。

 美國正從阿富汗、巴基斯坦兩個方向加強對塔利班的軍事打擊,並積極加強與印度的軍事合作,美國為擴大其在南亞和中亞地區的影響,將不會在阿富汗一走了之,阿富汗的安全形勢近期難有大的改觀。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Taiwan: Tariff Showdown Doesn’t Shake Confidence

Ireland: Donald Trump Could Be Swallowed Up by an Epstein Conspiracy He Helped Create

China: Blind Faith in US ‘Security Commitments’ Is Short-Sighted

Thailand: Donald Trump Buys Time with Weapons for Kyiv

Topics

Ireland: US Tariffs Take Shine Off Summer Economic Statement

Israel: Epstein Conspiracy: When the Monster Has a Life of Its Own and Rises Up

Spain: Another Threat from Trump

Canada: Negotiating a Business Deal without Trust

Taiwan: Tariff Showdown Doesn’t Shake Confidence

Australia: Donald Trump Made MAGA a Promise on the Epstein Files. They Are Holding Him to It

Australia: What’s Behind Donald Trump’s Latest Crypto Adventure?

Related Articles

Hong Kong: Foreign Media Warn US Brand Reputation Veering toward ‘Collapse’ under Trump Policy Impact

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Hong Kong: Can US Tariffs Targeting Hong Kong’s ‘Very Survival’ Really Choke the Life out of It?

Hong Kong: What Makes US Trade War More Dangerous than 2008 Crisis: Trump

Hong Kong: China, Japan, South Korea Pave Way for Summit Talks; Liu Teng-Chung: Responding to Trump