NATO in Afghanistan: A test of the Transatlantic allaince

Abstract

The mission of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in Afghanistan isseen by many as a test of the alliance's political will and military capabilities. Since theWashington Summit in 1999, the allies have sought to create a "new" NATO, capable ofoperating beyond the European theater to combat emerging threats such as terrorism andthe proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Afghanistan is NATO's first "out-ofarea"mission beyond Europe. The purpose of the mission is the stabilization andreconstruction of Afghanistan. The mission has proven difficult, an "industrial-strength"insurgency according to General David Petraeus, head of U.S. Central Command,because it must take place while combat operations against Taliban insurgents continue.The situation in Afghanistan has seen a rise in the overall level of violence due toincreased Taliban military operations, an increase in terrorist-related activities, and recentmajor offensive operations conducted by the allies.U.N. Security Council resolutions govern NATO's responsibilities in Afghanistan.The NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) faces formidableobstacles: shoring up a weak government in Kabul; using military capabilities in a distantcountry with rugged terrain; and rebuilding a country devastated by war and troubled by aresilient narcotics trade. NATO's mission statement lays out the essential elements of thetask of stabilizing and rebuilding the country: train the Afghan army, police, andjudiciary; support the government in counter-narcotics efforts; develop a marketinfrastructure; and suppress the Taliban.Between 2001 and 2006, ISAF proceeded in four stages to extend its area ofresponsibility over the whole of Afghanistan. Although the allies agree on ISAF's mission, they have differed on how to accomplish it. Some allies continue to restrict theirforces from engaging in counter-insurgency operations and have placed operationalrestrictions on their troops. The principal mechanism to rebuild Afghanistan are theProvincial Reconstruction Teams (PRT) composed of military and civilian officials andcharged with extending the reach of the Afghan government by improving governanceand rebuilding the economy. The counter-narcotics efforts involving the destruction ofpoppy fields and drug facilities seems to be making some head way although drugs arestill a major source of funds for the insurgents. Finally, continued turmoil in parts ofPakistan has complicated the effort to prevent the Taliban from infiltrating Afghanistan.Most observers suggest that ISAF 's efforts to stabilize Afghanistan will require along-term commitment from the allies. The Obama Administration has made the conflicta policy priority. On December 1, 2009, President Obama announced a new strategy forAfghanistan including the decision to commit an additional 30,000 U.S. military forces toaddress the conflict. The plan also considers the idea of reducing the number of U.S.forces in Afghanistan beginning in 2011 if conditions on the ground warrant. The 111thCongress continues to support the U.S. commitment in Afghanistan despite some risingopposition influenced in part by a growing negative public opinion in the United Statestowards the war and the added cost of the expanded war. The Congress has alsodemanded more integration and cooperation among all parties involved in thestabilization and reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan. See also CRS Report RL30588,Afghanistan: Post-Taliban Governance, Security, and U.S. Policy, by Kenneth Katzmanand CRS Report R40156, War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Military Operations, and Issuesfor Congress, by Steve Bowman and Catherine Dale. © 2011 Nova Science Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved.