Is the US Enhancing Security and Stability in Afghanistan?

2015-12-15T11:03:36-05:00

Today DoD provided Congress with a report on “Enhancing Security and Stability in Afghanistan” in accordance with Section 1225 of the Carl Levin and Howard P. “Buck” McKeon National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2015 (Public Law 113-291). This report addresses developments from June 1- Nov. 30.

The Taliban-led insurgency continue to present a formidable threat, as seen in both Helmand and Kunduz provinces, but the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) have proven their willingness to fight and their ability to thwart the insurgency’s efforts to achieve its strategic objectives. During the reporting period, the RS mission helped the ANDSF improve their capabilities in key areas such as intelligence, aviation, and sustainment.

In order to preserve hard-fought gains and help the ANDSF continue to develop, on Oct. 15 President Obama announced that U.S. forces will maintain their current posture of up to 9,800 military personnel through most of 2016. By the end of 2016, rather than drawdown to a Kabul-only presence, the United States will maintain 5,500 military personnel in Kabul and Bagram, in addition to a limited presence in the south and east. At the Dec. 1 NATO Foreign Ministers meeting, NATO allies and Resolute Support operational partners agreed to sustain the Resolute Support presence, in Afghanistan for 2016.

Although considerable challenges remain, the Department of Defense remains committed to the ANDSF and confident that the ANDSF has the capabilities, capacities, and morale to set the conditions for a secure Afghanistan.

The report is posted at http://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/1225_Report_Dec_2015_-_Final_20151210.pdf

8ÜXk4zÞF`mwÎÎf4ÍË+Ä P PRÜBÓ bª+_m=Þu Î7") BPñ3î(v$§ÜÃúÔÍWûNûËÑîýI&Ö!ûñ` I endstream endobj 4047 0 obj stream hÞY]7rÇ¿Êy10ûÈVQ8åÄÕÑ4 R}ûüEòÞ«VËm%ÈCòÉbí\ÛËiË2oÑg*eó%UªÙmþóÕ¿qýþæÍËo~s{sûñÛ«_Þ|}ÿñÇ/ÞþíúÛ«gÿxîÕõk7èÆ?sõê§O]ßjÒÔµîÏW?[úñíÛï¿ûßûw4mÁ9góýñùëW¿ùåæõõí§ëÿÚ~~ûúùoìæÕµmÌÙz4ýôüõõÕãÿËOþdc4ÄFôÙíûëÛßþ~õÓÛ¿_É«§·Ï_ÝüöøÍËW»zv{ýú?¶æ~ùøîÚº7ïnß¿úëÜXJÍáûçérÿÒÌÇïéÿ|qÏÓ'¿ýç§Oþõù»«uäWO~eóîÎãôì»! È3W¿înµmî[ÜN&í1FoGÙêumoj¡oîð~óê«wÀ$Heíð}ÍEk-õiO)m=øpÄºÅ...

Response by MAJ Alvin B. made Dec 15 at 2015 11:35 AM

2015-12-15T11:35:04-05:00

IMHO: For the moment it appears we are helping to stabilize the situation, enhancing is debatable at this point. We have not achieved a sufficiently secure environment to enable withdrawal of US and/or NATO forces. The long term ability of the Afghan forces to protect and defend their own territory (Nation) is still a question mark, as tribal loyalties still tend to take precedence over nation-state perspectives and requirements.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Dec 15 at 2015 11:49 AM

2015-12-15T11:49:42-05:00

So is the Afghan military supposed to be the fixing force and we are the hammer?

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Dec 15 at 2015 2:36 PM

2015-12-15T14:36:30-05:00

I served three deployments in Afghanistan 04-06 and 08, during these deployments one of the key things that I heard a lot from Afghans was that they needed to to step up and take a greater lead in their fight, but corruption and greed was their greatest enemy.

Response by Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin made Dec 15 at 2015 2:43 PM

2015-12-15T14:43:40-05:00

How can we when we've all but pulled out? I'd say we were being very effective after being there both in 2002 and 2013-14. Their infrastructure improved, technology, and then some. Still they are extremely challenged when it comes to their education levels. The best thing they had going for them was their younger generations. These are the ones who best worked with us and were willing to work with us and learn the skills they need to secure and protect their country. The older generations are where the corruption comes from and the refusal to stray away from Soviet influenced methodologies.