Commentary
Spot analysis from Carnegie scholars on events relating to the Middle East and North Africa.
Michael Young
{
"authors": [],
"type": "pressRelease",
"centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
"centers": [
"Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
],
"collections": [],
"englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
"nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
"primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
"programAffiliation": "SAP",
"programs": [
"South Asia"
],
"projects": [],
"regions": [
"United States",
"South Asia",
"Afghanistan"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Military",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
REQUIRED IMAGE
Press Release
A strategy for success in Afghanistan
As the debate on future U.S. strategy continues, the war in Afghanistan is spreading to the North, the balance of power has shifted in the Taliban’s favor, and the Afghan government continues to lose legitimacy. In order to correct a failing strategy, the United States and its allies need to protect cities and reallocate more resources to the North.
Published on Nov 16, 2009
WASHINGTON, Nov 16—As the debate on future U.S. strategy continues, the war in Afghanistan is spreading to the North (an area that had previously been relatively quiet), the balance of power in Afghanistan has shifted in the Taliban’s favor, and the Afghan government continues to lose legitimacy in the eyes of the population and international community. In order to correct a failing strategy, the United States and its allies need to protect cities and reallocate more resources to the North, contends a new report by Gilles Dorronsoro.
Dorronsoro explains that more troops alone will not fix a flawed approach and details what a new, successful U.S. strategy should look like:
- Secure key cities and roads: If a state can be rebuilt in Afghanistan it will start in the cities, so less energy should be focused on the Pashtun countryside. This approach will decrease Coalition casualties and increase local participation.
- Redistribute Coalition troops: Troops are heavily deployed in the South and East where the prospects for success are low. They should be refocused on the North, where the Taliban can be stopped.
- Redistribute development aid: Development dollars are currently being directed most heavily to areas where Coalition control is weakest. These scarce resources should instead be focused on the more peaceful districts of Afghanistan.
- Build an Afghan partner: Increase the size and capabilities of the Afghan National Army, but understand that this will not happen overnight. An Afghan army of 150,000 by 2015 is a realistic and achievable goal.
“The Coalition badly needs a success in the next few months to counter the widely held perception that defeat is the likely outcome,” concludes Dorronsoro. “The current strategy could very well fail and result in yet another demand for reinforcements next year. A vigorous debate―more about strategy than resources―is needed.”
###
NOTES
- Gilles Dorronsoro is an expert on Afghanistan and Turkey. His research focuses on security and political development in Afghanistan, particularly the role of the International Security Assistance Force, the necessary steps for a viable government in Kabul, and the conditions necessary for withdrawal scenarios. Previously, Dorronsoro was a professor of political science at the Sorbonne, Paris. He also served as the scientific coordinator at the French Institute of Anatolian Studies in Istanbul, Turkey.
-
The Carnegie South Asia Program offers in-depth expertise on a range of issues relating to South Asia, including nonproliferation, international security, and political and economic development.
- Press Contact: David Kampf, 202/939-2233, dkampf@ceip.org
Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.
More Work from Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center
- The United States and Iran Have Agreed to a Two-Week Ceasefire
- Iran Rewrites Its War StrategyCommentary
In an interview, Hamidreza Azizi discusses how Tehran has adapted in real time to the conflict with the United States and Israel.
Michael Young
- Trump’s Plan for Gaza Is Not Irrelevant. It’s Worse.Commentary
The simple conclusion is that the scheme will bring neither peace nor prosperity, but will institutionalize devastation.
Nathan J. Brown
- What Does the Strait of Hormuz’s Closure Mean?Commentary
In an interview, Roger Diwan discusses where the global economy may be going in the third week of the U.S.-Israeli war with Iran.
Nur Arafeh
- Tehran’s Easy TargetsCommentary
In an interview, Andrew Leber discusses the impact the U.S. and Israeli war against Iran is having on Arab Gulf states.
Michael Young
