Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Holbrooke Heralds U.S.-Afghan Pre-Election Engagement

Special Envoy Richard Holbrooke told an audience at the Center for American Progress that when it comes to U.S. civilian efforts in Afghanistan, concepts of victory and defeat are irrelevant.

Print Friendly

(Inter Press Service)

With Afghanistan’s elections fast approaching and the country’s security situation rapidly deteriorating, the Obama administration is touting a new, broad approach to winning the fight against insurgent groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, spoke at the Center for American Progress (CAP) on August 12 about the civilian component of the new U.S. approach.

Holbrooke stressed the incremental nature of the civilian effort, pointing out that defeat and victory are not yet relevant terms to use in terms of civil society programs. “The payoff is still to come. We have to produce results, and we understand that, and we’re not here today to tell you we’re winning or we’re losing. We’re not here today to say we’re optimistic or pessimistic.”

Holbrooke was joined by a panel of ten members of his interagency team, which represents the nine agencies that are working together on the U.S.-Afghanistan-Pakistan civilian effort.

Holbrooke’s team coordinates a range of non-military U.S. activities in the region, including agriculture, governance, media and communications, and investigations into terrorist financing.

“We’re here to tell you that we are in this fight in a different way, with a determination to succeed,” Holbrooke said.

Though several members of Holbrooke’s panel stressed that the fates of Afghanistan and Pakistan are intertwined, much of the discussion focused on military and civilian efforts in Afghanistan.

Holbrooke explained the apparent prioritization of Afghanistan by saying that the Taliban and Al Qaeda “are basically fighting in support of one another, so they are allies.” He also observed, “If you abandon the struggle in Afghanistan, you will suffer against Al Qaeda as well.”

The broadening of strategy comes at a particularly difficult time for U.S. troops in Afghanistan. July saw 40 U.S. military casualties, the highest monthly total yet in Afghanistan, and so far, 18 U.S. soldiers were killed in August.

In an August 10 article in the Wall Street Journal, General Stanley McChrystal, commander of U.S. troops in Afghanistan, acknowledged the worsening situation there, saying that the Taliban are threatening formerly secured areas in the north and west, and that “U.S. casualties are likely to remain high for months to come.”

McChrystal is expected to report to Obama this September about the situation in Afghanistan, at which point the administration will presumably decide whether to send more troops.

Much of the recent escalation of violence in Afghanistan has come from the Taliban—in anticipation of upcoming elections, set for August 20.

The Taliban have vowed to derail the elections, urging Afghanis not to vote and calling the election a “seductive U.S. process.”

President Barack Obama has called the upcoming elections “the most important event this year in Afghanistan,” and both the U.S. and the larger international community are working to ensure that voting goes as smoothly as possible.

At the CAP event, Holbrooke senior advisor Jane Marriott conceded that the elections “are being held in very difficult security conditions, and they won’t be perfect.”

Still, she said, the U.S. is working to help the election and campaign process along; one example Marriott cited is the U.S. providing media capacity and transportation to candidates, helping them to “campaign properly.”

According to Rina Amiri, another Holbrooke advisor, anticipation about the election has reached a fever pitch in Afghanistan, among both candidates and voters.

“This is the most candidates that have competed for an election,” said Amiri, referring to the 41 presidential candidates, including two women, and the 3,300 people running for 420 seats in the provincial council elections.

She also added that 17 million Afghans—about half of the country’s population—have registered to vote. This is up from the roughly 12 million who registered to vote in the 2004 elections.

President Hamid Karzai is considered the leader in the pool of presidential candidates, though recent polls suggest that he will likely not get the 50 percent of the vote needed to win the presidency outright in the first round. If no candidate gets 50 percent, a runoff will be held in October.

The Obama administration and Karzai government have had an at times rocky relationship. Karzai has criticized the U.S. use of private contractors, and the U.S. administration has criticized Karzai’s relationships with prominent Afghan warlords.

However, the U.S. stance appears to have softened recently. According to the Associated Press, Hillary Clinton recently indicated that Washington will work with whomever wins Afghanistan’s presidential election.

This attitude was reflected at the CAP event by Holbrooke’s team. Marriott characterized the United States and the international community as “actively impartial in these elections,” and Amiri told the Inter Press Service that “The [U.S.] embassy enjoys a good relationship with all of the candidates.”

Amiri also dismissed reports of friction between the Washington and Karzai as being a media creation: “There is a whole other reality that exists at the press level,” she said. “I think all of the key candidates are showing that they are going to be engaging on a constructive level,” regardless of election outcomes.

Post-election, then, is when Holbrooke’s team hopes to work with the government to push its various civilian programs. “After this election is settled,” said Holbrooke, “we [the international community] will be asking the government to reinvigorate the leadership in these fields that we’ve heard today.”

Holbrooke also remarked that, as important as all of his team’s efforts are, security is the primary determinant of real success on the civilian front; he noted that a school or a bridge is useless without the security to use them. “Of course, you can’t do civilian growth unless you have security,” he said. “It’s obvious.”

Danielle Kurtzleben writes for the Inter Press Service.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

John Bolton, the controversial former U.S. ambassador to the UN and dyed-in the-wool foreign policy hawk, has been selected by President Trump to replace National Security Adviser McMaster, marking a sharp move to the hawkish extreme by the administration.

The Institute for the Study of War is a D.C.-based counterinsurgency think tank that has supported long-term U.S. military intervention in the Greater Middle East, especially Iraq and Afghanistan.

Rep. Liz Cheney (R-WY) has been an outspoken proponent of militarist U.S. foreign polices and the use of torture, aping the views of her father, Dick Cheney.

United against Nuclear Iran is a pressure group that attacks companies doing business in Iran and disseminates alarmist reports about the country’s nuclear program.

Gina Haspel is a CIA officer who was nominated to head the agency by President Donald Trump in March 2018. She first came to prominence because of accusations that she oversaw the torture of prisoners and later destroyed video evidence of that torture.

Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS), President Trump’s nominee for secretary of state to replace Rex Tillerson, is a “tea party” Republican who previously served as director of the CIA.

Richard Goldberg is a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies who served as a foreign policy aide to former Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL).

For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

New NSA John Bolton represents an existential threat to the Iran nuclear deal and any hopes for peace in the region.

Print Friendly

Hardliners at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies are working overtime to convince the Trump administration to “fix” the nuclear agreement with Iran on the pretext that it will give the US leverage in negotiations with North Korea.

Print Friendly

North Korea and Iran both understand the lesson of Libya: Muammar Qaddafi, a horrifyingly brutal dictator, gave up his nuclear weapons, was eventually ousted from power with large-scale US assistance, and was killed. However, while Iran has a long and bitter history with the United States, North Korea’s outlook is shaped by its near-total destruction by forces led by the United States in the Korean War.

Print Friendly

Europe loathes having to choose between Tehran and Washington, and thus it will spare no efforts to avoid the choice. It might therefore opt for a middle road, trying to please both parties by persuading Trump to retain the accord and Iran to limit missile ballistic programs and regional activities.

Print Friendly

Key members of Trump’s cabinet should recognize the realism behind encouraging a Saudi- and Iranian-backed regional security agreement because the success of such an agreement would not only serve long-term U.S. interests, it could also have a positive impact on numerous conflicts in the Middle East.

Print Friendly

Given that Israel failed to defeat Hezbollah in its war in Lebanon in 2006, it’s difficult to imagine Israel succeeding in a war against both Hezbollah and its newfound regional network of Shiite allies. And at the same time not only is Hezbollah’s missile arsenal a lot larger and more dangerous than it was in 2006, but it has also gained vast experience alongside its allies in offensive operations against IS and similar groups.

Print Friendly

Donald Trump should never be excused of responsibility for tearing down the respect for truth, but a foundation for his flagrant falsifying is the fact that many people would rather be entertained, no matter how false is the source of their entertainment, than to confront truth that is boring or unsatisfying or that requires effort to understand.