Dear All
The Americans are starting to signal what everyone knew was coming.
They are unable to win the war in Afghanistan.
US Gen Stanley McChrystal has given an interview to the Financial Times newspaper saying that there had been "enough fighting".
In his article he goes on to say that a political solution in all conflicts was "inevitable".
This at last is the realisation that the current impasse cannot be sustained.
In mirroring his attitude the top UN envoy in Kabul said it was time to talk to the militants.
It is only a matter of time before the British are told to change their policy to be inline with the new American thinking.
When America speaks, the British Government repeats.
At present Turkey is trying to broker talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban.
The carrot is the Taliban playing a possible role in the government.
The US and Nato are pledged to increase troops in 2010, this will not solve the political problem, the US cannot keep such a level of expense indefinitely with the current economic climate.
For the Americans, it was only logically for them to come to the conclusion that the problem isn’t a military one on the ground but a cultural one, deep rooted.
Gen McChrystal however said;
‘if the new US-led strategy was successful, the militants "could look desperate" in a year's time’.
Given that time isn’t an issue for the Taliban, this statement doesn’t make sense but suggests that they are hedging their bets.
When the issue came up of senior Taliban could have a role in the future Afghan government, he said;
"I think any Afghans can play a role if they focus on the future, and not the past”.
So both the Afghan Government and Americans are of similar thinking, with the Americans having a better over view.
What is interesting is that how far United Nations special representative Kai Eide has gone. He is calling for some senior Taliban leaders to be removed from a UN list of terrorists.
This is a major policy shift and could be seen as a prelude to direct talks which will surely come.
He puts it rather bluntly;
"If you want relevant results, then you have to talk to the relevant person in authority. I think the time has come to do it”.
So, what was achieved in Afghanistan?
That question will be picked over by historians for a very long time.
In the round, I would say that the West has learned that occupation will eventually lead to mission failure.
At present, Nato is gearing up for an offensive in Helmand province, capturing territory is meaningless in Afghanistan unless they are capturing hearts and minds.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
The Americans are starting to signal what everyone knew was coming.
They are unable to win the war in Afghanistan.
US Gen Stanley McChrystal has given an interview to the Financial Times newspaper saying that there had been "enough fighting".
In his article he goes on to say that a political solution in all conflicts was "inevitable".
This at last is the realisation that the current impasse cannot be sustained.
In mirroring his attitude the top UN envoy in Kabul said it was time to talk to the militants.
It is only a matter of time before the British are told to change their policy to be inline with the new American thinking.
When America speaks, the British Government repeats.
At present Turkey is trying to broker talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban.
The carrot is the Taliban playing a possible role in the government.
The US and Nato are pledged to increase troops in 2010, this will not solve the political problem, the US cannot keep such a level of expense indefinitely with the current economic climate.
For the Americans, it was only logically for them to come to the conclusion that the problem isn’t a military one on the ground but a cultural one, deep rooted.
Gen McChrystal however said;
‘if the new US-led strategy was successful, the militants "could look desperate" in a year's time’.
Given that time isn’t an issue for the Taliban, this statement doesn’t make sense but suggests that they are hedging their bets.
When the issue came up of senior Taliban could have a role in the future Afghan government, he said;
"I think any Afghans can play a role if they focus on the future, and not the past”.
So both the Afghan Government and Americans are of similar thinking, with the Americans having a better over view.
What is interesting is that how far United Nations special representative Kai Eide has gone. He is calling for some senior Taliban leaders to be removed from a UN list of terrorists.
This is a major policy shift and could be seen as a prelude to direct talks which will surely come.
He puts it rather bluntly;
"If you want relevant results, then you have to talk to the relevant person in authority. I think the time has come to do it”.
So, what was achieved in Afghanistan?
That question will be picked over by historians for a very long time.
In the round, I would say that the West has learned that occupation will eventually lead to mission failure.
At present, Nato is gearing up for an offensive in Helmand province, capturing territory is meaningless in Afghanistan unless they are capturing hearts and minds.
Yours sincerely
George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University
No comments:
Post a Comment