U.S. Acting Secretary of Defense Patrick M. Shanahan meets with Afghan commandos at Camp Commando, Afghanistan, Feb. 11, 2019. (Lisa Ferdinando/DoD)
Military Times: Afghan forces could turn guns on Kabul without US air support, cash and troops, among other warnings
Afghanistan remains dependent on the U.S.-led coalition to combat insurgencies, pay Afghan troops, maintain oversight of corruption and generally just prevent the country from devolving into chaos.
That doesn’t bode well for the peace negotiations currently underway between U.S. and Taliban diplomatic teams.
A new series of warnings were introduced by John F. Sopko, the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction, ahead of the release of SIGAR’s 2019 “High-Risk List” report.
SIGAR has made two previous High-Risk List reports, Sopko said, but this one is unique due to the ongoing peace negotiations to end America’s longest war.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: This report is probably accurate. We may also be repeating history. The Soviet installed Afghan government in the 1980s collapsed within two years once the spigot was cut, with the Afghan military either deserting and/or joining the enemy.
5 comments:
Perfectly predictable by a laymen to Afghanistan's history. If the USA stays another 20 years, the same thing would happen. Too many of these tribesmen are loyal to their tribe and not to a central government. Make the job too risky and off they go wheeling and dealing for some travel money in exchange for that American gear.
I agree. To succeed in Afghanistan requires the "nation building" paradigm, something neither US leaders nor tax payers are willing to do (and rightfully so). It would cost trillions and take 20+ years if you're an optimist. This is an unacceptable ask of all American citizens and soldiers alike. And "just muddling along" is depressing too. Let's face it, without Russian cooperation - who are likely engaged in a proxy war with the US there and have so many interests, from historic to modern day, to see them (the US) fail, it's not gonna work either way. So either all nations foot the bill or I suggest the US only stays there to fight back Russians. But then again this is old cold war mentality. I rather see them get along and help Afghanis..but that too is utterly unrealistic, also because as we've learned the hard way, not everyone wants a democracy or western values (and Russia or China certainly wouldn't want that either).. so there's no way forward and our brave soldiers and afghan civilians get caught up in this power struggle between east and west.
If the Afghanis won't fight, then there is no help for them. The best thing to do is cut the best deal you can with the Taliban and move on. Perhaps work with the Russian and Chinese on any transition if they want to fill the gap when US leaves.
What is strange is that I constantly read how majority of Afghanis don't want the Taliban to return to power. So why aren't they willing to fight them? Is it the Afghan national government is so bad? Or do Afghans just fight worse in a more modern military that the US tried to build, and would fight better under a more traditional system? Would they be willing to fight for something else - like local ethnic militias who were fighting the Taliban prior to the US invasion? That may not be ideal, but if it is the only thing that works then supporting warlordism is the only real alternative.
One reason the Taliban triumphed originally was that they got full support from Pakistan while their rivals, like the Northern Alliance, only received help from former Soviet Union and India. But in the 1990s, the FSU countries were in chaos and had low oil prices, and even India had not had its decades of high growth. Now it's different. A Northern Alliance like coalition could receive support by more stable and wealthy Russia, India, China, and receive Western support as well. Pashtun Afghanistan under the Taliban might be inevitable, but the non-Pashtun parts might retain de facto independent.
I have the feeling a lot of the Afghan military is comprised of recruits who don't join to fight, but simply to get some clean clothes, a roof over their heads, and food and pay. Such people are useless. You need to find the people willing to fight and support them. However, I think it is likely most of those are such reprobates that the West cannot do so for moral reasons. All the more reason to let Russians and Chinese take over.
When you have to spoon-feed a nation to just stay morally on the right side, there will never be any solution. It's like dealing with mentally handicapped kidnappers; "naah, give me money or we will just lay down on the ground and do nothing!"
They are literally telling the world that if they don't have their training wheels they all will succumb to terrorism. What a great DNA pool.
Wow.
"When you have to spoon-feed a nation to just stay morally on the right side, there will never be any solution."
Excellent comment.
Post a Comment