What is ''the mission'' in Afghanistan?

[Gokul43201]

I think the one real and significant shift on the ground in Afghanistan is that Karzai is now quite strongly demanding a big change in NATO's operating parameters (requiring that troops be removed from all rural areas and be stationed only in a few large urban bases, etc.). Or at least that's what I recall hearing in the news during the immediate aftermath of the shootings. Wonder how that's been developing since. Such a significant gulf between the expectations of the local governing body and the occupying military force can be quite problematic.

 

[alt]

http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/

As US soldier Robert Bales is charged with murdering 17 Afghan civilians, Dateline gets unprecedented access to the survivors and the investigation.


This is fascinating - and quite perculiar. Reporter Yalda Hakim got into the village and spoke to villagers. Several said they were certain Bales did not act alone, and that they saw other soldiers acting with him.

It really fires up the imagination !

Edit - more specific link ..
http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/story/about/id/601431/n/Anatomy-of-a-Massacre

 

[mheslep]

Brief anecdote: good friend of mine was on the special forces detail assigned to Karsai back in ~2002 or so. According to him, Karsai was working as a maître d' in a Baltimore, Md restaurant before becoming Mr President. Wiki says that Karsai's siblings emigrated to the US in during the Soviet invasion, and that, after his father was assassinated, in "2000 and 2001, he traveled to Europe and the United States to help gather support for the anti-Taliban movement." but provides no more detail.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamid_Karzai#Early_career

 

[ThomasT]

Opium production is one of the means insurgent groups raise money for their insurrections (and not just in Afghanistan).

The Taliban made it a point to crack down heavily on opium production to starve its rival groups of money and was surprisingly successful. But their success would be the exception; not the country's rate of production during the US occupation.

And, of course, now that the Taliban is one of the insurgent groups, it relies on the same drug trade it had managed to suppress.

Long term, there has to be an economic alternative to opium production for rurual Afghanistan residents. The lack of that economic alternative is a reason that country is in the state its in.

Major crackdowns (such as the Taliban's) only work temporarily and wouldn't work well at all for an outside force (such as the US or NATO). A major crackdown by an outside force would just be invaders oppressing the residents and driving them into poverty.

Opium production is a sign of how effective or ineffective the US occupation has been. But, suggesting a US departure would lower opium production is a gross overstatement.

Your points are taken. Whether US departure would lower opium production is an empirical question, which, it seems, we'll learn the answer to within 3 to 4 years.

 

[ThomasT]

How would the removal of US/NATO troops make the heroin/poppy problem better?

Don't know. Just wondering. There seems to be a positive correlation between US occupation of Afghanistan and that country's opium production.

If the Taliban takes over again, they *might* return to banning Poppy and chopping off the hands/legs/heads of the growers. Is that better?

Better than what?

 

[ThomasT]

IMO, that's just an assertive twist on the of the passive position we currently hold that has resulted in us entering perhaps a half dozen mostly altruistic wars over the past 20 years.

I do think that individuals sometimes exhibit what might be called altruistic behavior. But I don't think that countries, wrt national policies and actions, ever do this.

 

[ThomasT]

Anyway, whatever the military missiion is, or was, in Afghanistan, it's apparently going to be over in a couple of years. But I would guess that there's still going to be a significant private US economic influence in Afghanistan. Deals will be made with the Taliban. US companies, and the Taliban, will profit.

 

[BobG]

We need to defeat Al-Qaeda and the Talibans of course! They have done enough evil in this world. They have themselves to blame, they should never have flewn those planes into the twin towers to start with!

Two separate groups. Al-qaeda flew planes into the WTC. The Taliban stood in between the US and al-qaeda.

That said, the Taliban, Pakistani forces, and al-qaeda fought together against other Aghani groups during Afghanistan's virtually never ending civil war. And the Taliban is a very oppressive group, especially towards women in Afghanistan. There's little to like about their group.

But, technically, they were not part of the terrorist acts against the US.

 

[mheslep]

I have difficulty gauging Taliban strength from news reports. The recent Taliban bombings are tragic, though I don't know that they indicate any military change. That is, sending round the odd random suicide bomber is one thing, taking and holding a city which was previously targeted indiscriminately by your suicide bombers is another.

 

[ThomasT]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/2012.06.01u.s.-afghanistanspasignedtext.pdf

 

[influx]

I think its to stop the spread of Shariah law across Muslim countries and the reestablishment of the Islamic Caliphate which would be disastrous for the West.

 

[edward]

The dynamics in Afghanistan took a strange turn last Summer. There are large deposits of rare Earth's in Afghanistan.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=afghanistan-rare-earth-elements-could-beat-taliban