Paper
Gilles Dorronsoro
{
"authors": [
"Gilles Dorronsoro"
],
"type": "legacyinthemedia",
"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": [
"South Asia",
"Afghanistan"
],
"topics": [
"Security",
"Military",
"Foreign Policy"
]
}
Source: Getty
In The Media
The Impact of the Kandahar Prison Break
The recent mass escape from the main prison in Kandahar demonstrates that the insurgency in Afghanistan is growing more sophisticated and more active.
Published on Apr 26, 2011
Source: New York Times
First, Kandahar was supposed to be the success story of the coalition and the gains in this province were to compensate for the deterioration of the security in the rest of the country. But these developments paint another story about progress on the ground.
The complexity of the attack shows that the insurgents have a strong presence in the city and clearly indicates that the police have not been able to fundamentally improve security at the prison, despite an attack there two years ago.
The prison break will have a strong psychological impact, discouraging people who were ready to work with the coalition. This is especially true since Kandahar’s police chief, an important local figure, was recently killed.
It is yet another indication that the targeted eliminations conducted by the coalition have not seriously disrupted the insurgents — most likely because the leadership is more in Pakistan than in Afghanistan. The few dozen cadres who escaped from Kandahar prison will reinforce, even if only marginally, the local leadership.
Second, this attack is part of a national trend indicating a more sophisticated and aggressive insurgency this year. The coalition is peaking in terms of resources and soldiers on the ground. The last few weeks have demonstrated the insurgents’ ability to organize complex attacks. The number of attacks against the coalition is at record levels and everything indicates that their offensive will be especially aggressive this year. Since the coalition doesn’t have the resources to launch another large-scale operation, the insurgency will likely make significant progress in the coming months.
In this context, the transfer of security operations and responsibilities to the Afghan national army before 2014 seems like a fantasy. Military withdrawal without negotiating with the Taliban leadership is impossible.
About the Author
Gilles Dorronsoro
Former Nonresident Scholar, South Asia Program
Dorronsoro’s research focuses on security and political development in Afghanistan. He was a professor of political science at the Sorbonne in Paris and the Institute of Political Studies of Rennes.
- Waiting for the Taliban in Afghanistan
- Afghanistan: The Impossible TransitionPaper
Gilles Dorronsoro
Recent Work
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 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
- Why Russia Could Escalate Hybrid Warfare Against EuropeCommentary
Mounting economic strain and battlefield losses will not necessarily make the Kremlin less dangerous. They could instead push Moscow toward a more aggressive hybrid campaign designed to test NATO’s Eastern flank, exploit allied hesitation, and fracture European resolve.
Maksym Beznosiuk
- In the Trump Gaza Plan, Diplomatic Failure is SuccessCommentary
By failing to address Palestinian representation, the current process is bound to lead to just another temporary arrangement.
Nathan J. Brown
- Carnegie’s Summer Beach ReadsCommentary
Carnegie experts recommend the books that kept them turning pages—and learning along the way.
- +8
Sophia Besch, Eric Ciaramella, Steve Feldstein, …
- Taking the Pulse: Enough with the Annual NATO Summits, Already?Commentary
Over the past ten years, NATO has held almost as many summits as it did during the entirety of the Cold War. Are they still useful, or is it time to stop holding annual meetings?
Rym Momtaz, ed.
- What’s Driving the Trump Administration’s Push to Dismantle the ICC?Commentary
The move is an escalation of its war on multilateralism.
Stewart Patrick
