Posted on Mar 6, 2015
$65 Billion Later, U.S. Hands Reins to a Weak Afghan Army
3.99K
32
12
2
2
0
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/03/04/65-Billion-Later-US-Hands-Reins-Weak-Afghan-Army
Since 2002, the United States has poured at least $65 billion into building up, training and equipping Afghan National Security Forces so they could stand up against insurgents once U.S. soldiers and their allies returned home.
However, more than a decade later, that plan, along with the Afghan National Security Forces, seems to be slowly falling apart.
Related: What the Pentagon is Hiding from its Auditors
A new report from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) contains information that the Pentagon attempted to keep secret—revealing the grim outlook on the Afghan forces.
According to SIGAR, the ANF has shrunk to its lowest level in years---with at least 20,000 troops fewer than last year.
The report comes just months after the NATO-led coalition ended its combat mission in Afghanistan. It’s grim finding raises new questions over whether the ANF will actually be able to defend the country on its own. It also calls into question whether the tens of billions used to train and retain these now dwindling troops could have been better spent.
According to the report, the force shrunk by 11 percent in the first three quarters of 2014 to 169,000, that figure bumped up a bit at the end of the year to about 173,000—still making it the smallest since 2011.
Stories on the ground seem to match the auditors’ dreary findings. A report last fall from Reuters described Afghan police forces that were ill equipped to fight the Taliban on their own, and worried what would happen when the NATO troops disappeared.
"Sometimes up to 200 Taliban attack our checkpoints and if there are no army reinforcements, we lose the fight," Afghan Police Chief Ahmadullah Anwari told Reuters months before the NATO-led coalition ceased its combat mission.
The latest figures became unclassified after auditors blew the whistle on the Pentagon for suspiciously classifying all documents and information relating to the Afghan Security Forces late last year.
Related: U.S. Agencies Track Millions Spent Afghan Women’s Programs
SIGAR’s report said that the Pentagon’s records, which were previously classified, had an “accounting error” and didn’t include the correct number of Afghan troops for all of 2014. Officials said they were accidentally counting civilians twice. They apparently caught the error last fall but never bothered to mention it to the auditors. The newly unclassified data had correct information, though auditors suspect the number of Afghan police forces might also contain errors.
“The U.S. military’s inconsistent reporting on ANSF strength numbers indicates long-standing and ongoing problems with accountability and personnel tracking,” the report said. “Given that accurate reporting on ANSF strength is an important factor in judging Afghanistan’s ability to maintain security and in determining the pace of U.S. troop withdrawals from the country, and that the United States is paying to train, equip, and sustain the Afghan troops based on these numbers, these inconsistencies are deeply troubling.”
Separately, the report said that $25 million for women in the Afghan National Forces had not been used.
Since 2002, the United States has poured at least $65 billion into building up, training and equipping Afghan National Security Forces so they could stand up against insurgents once U.S. soldiers and their allies returned home.
However, more than a decade later, that plan, along with the Afghan National Security Forces, seems to be slowly falling apart.
Related: What the Pentagon is Hiding from its Auditors
A new report from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) contains information that the Pentagon attempted to keep secret—revealing the grim outlook on the Afghan forces.
According to SIGAR, the ANF has shrunk to its lowest level in years---with at least 20,000 troops fewer than last year.
The report comes just months after the NATO-led coalition ended its combat mission in Afghanistan. It’s grim finding raises new questions over whether the ANF will actually be able to defend the country on its own. It also calls into question whether the tens of billions used to train and retain these now dwindling troops could have been better spent.
According to the report, the force shrunk by 11 percent in the first three quarters of 2014 to 169,000, that figure bumped up a bit at the end of the year to about 173,000—still making it the smallest since 2011.
Stories on the ground seem to match the auditors’ dreary findings. A report last fall from Reuters described Afghan police forces that were ill equipped to fight the Taliban on their own, and worried what would happen when the NATO troops disappeared.
"Sometimes up to 200 Taliban attack our checkpoints and if there are no army reinforcements, we lose the fight," Afghan Police Chief Ahmadullah Anwari told Reuters months before the NATO-led coalition ceased its combat mission.
The latest figures became unclassified after auditors blew the whistle on the Pentagon for suspiciously classifying all documents and information relating to the Afghan Security Forces late last year.
Related: U.S. Agencies Track Millions Spent Afghan Women’s Programs
SIGAR’s report said that the Pentagon’s records, which were previously classified, had an “accounting error” and didn’t include the correct number of Afghan troops for all of 2014. Officials said they were accidentally counting civilians twice. They apparently caught the error last fall but never bothered to mention it to the auditors. The newly unclassified data had correct information, though auditors suspect the number of Afghan police forces might also contain errors.
“The U.S. military’s inconsistent reporting on ANSF strength numbers indicates long-standing and ongoing problems with accountability and personnel tracking,” the report said. “Given that accurate reporting on ANSF strength is an important factor in judging Afghanistan’s ability to maintain security and in determining the pace of U.S. troop withdrawals from the country, and that the United States is paying to train, equip, and sustain the Afghan troops based on these numbers, these inconsistencies are deeply troubling.”
Separately, the report said that $25 million for women in the Afghan National Forces had not been used.
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
5
5
0
4
4
0
Personally this is the reason Afghanistan has been a black hole and organized government has not succeed in over 30 years. I do not see the country standing because the warlords will return to their old ways and the defense forces are not capable of defending themselves.
(4)
(0)
CPT Zachary Brooks
GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad How about securing our border so attacks on our soil become less likely in the first place?
(2)
(0)
Cpl Michael Strickler
GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad and CPT Zachary Brooks, I always liked looking at this image. Kinda along the same thoughts I have toward the massive funds sent to Afganistan
(2)
(0)
CPT Zachary Brooks
Cpl Michael Strickler While I agree on the concept, Detroit would have failed eventually anyway due to bad policies.
(1)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
Yes, when Americans allow their corporations to get tax breaks by moving production overseas... when they stand by and watch as other countries manipulate currency markets, when a good or product made in a sweatshop by child labor using practices that destroy the local environment is allowed to compete on an even basis with goods made responsibly by decently paid workers in a safe environment. Detroit is what were going to get. German wages and benefits are much higher than the US and they have an export economy because the government executed good policies ... if we could even manage a balanced economy, where exports equaled imports, we'd be in great shape.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
Yeah our complete failure in nation building times two, Iraq and Afghanistan. You would think after our success in Germany we would know what we are doing in this business. Understand not wanting to commit but if you want to do it right you have to span generations.
(3)
(0)
COL Ted Mc
CSM (Join to see) Sergeant Major; You have to remember that (generally) in the cases of both Germany and Japan, [1] planning for post-war administration started YEARS before the end of the way, [2] you were dealing with unified nations which were not in the middle of civil wars, [3] the US government maintained a presence on the ground for DECADES, and [4] the people sent to administer the countries spoke the local language, knew the local culture, and were actually qualified for the positions they were posted to.
You should also remember that (essentially) in the cases of BOTH Germany and Japan the local people who did the actual running of the countries after the war were the same local people who did the actual running of the countries before/during the war.
It isn't that the knowledge, talents, and experience weren't available - it's just that the knowledge, talents, and experience didn't happen to align with what the leadership wanted reality to be so they weren't utilized.
You should also remember that (essentially) in the cases of BOTH Germany and Japan the local people who did the actual running of the countries after the war were the same local people who did the actual running of the countries before/during the war.
It isn't that the knowledge, talents, and experience weren't available - it's just that the knowledge, talents, and experience didn't happen to align with what the leadership wanted reality to be so they weren't utilized.
(3)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
I believe we were able to succeed in Germany because we understood Germany. I do not have faith that we ever really understood the dynamics in Iraq, much less Afghanistan. You can do everything right... you can grow bamboo in the desert, however as soon as your not there to keep the ground wet, it's going to start dying.
(2)
(0)
CSM (Join to see)
COL Ted Mc and SSG (Join to see)
Very good points and I agree with them all. It also helped that we pretty much annihilated their entire male population and in Japan's case, almost their entire population. Kind of hard to fight back or build an insurgency.
Very good points and I agree with them all. It also helped that we pretty much annihilated their entire male population and in Japan's case, almost their entire population. Kind of hard to fight back or build an insurgency.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google