• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Gilles Dorronsoro"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [
    "Eurasia in Transition"
  ],
  "regions": [
    "South Asia",
    "Afghanistan"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Yes, the Afghans Hate Us

With Afghans growing increasingly frustrated by the Western forces in their country, President Obama should use the political cover provided by the death of Osama bin Laden to change his strategy in Afghanistan and negotiate with the Taliban.

Link Copied
By Gilles Dorronsoro
Published on May 5, 2011
Program mobile hero image

Program

South Asia

The South Asia Program informs policy debates relating to the region’s security, economy, and political development. From strategic competition in the Indo-Pacific to India’s internal dynamics and U.S. engagement with the region, the program offers in-depth, rigorous research and analysis on South Asia’s most critical challenges.

Learn More
Project hero Image

Project

Eurasia in Transition

Learn More

Source: National Interest

Yes, the Afghans Hate UsAlong the road between Jalalabad and Asadabad, two cities in eastern Afghanistan, an American truck is broken down as Afghan vehicles approach. A U.S. soldier steps out to stop oncoming traffic and begins to scream obscenities and, with his rifle butt, hit cars (including mine) that don’t move back fast enough. This will block the road for almost an hour and brew distrust and even hatred between American troops and the local population. Isolated incident? Unfortunately no.

Afghans say that this is just one minor incident in a series of more serious events. Nine children were recently shot down from an American helicopter in Kunar province after the pilot mistakenly thought they were insurgents. And shortly before I witnessed tensions mounting on the roadside, more than sixty civilians were killed in a coalition bombing.

Far from being contained to a specific area, the rejection of foreigners and international troops is pervasive across Afghanistan. This is a major problem for the coalition. A few outrageously manipulated polls notwithstanding, Afghans obviously see the coalition as an occupying force. With war crimes committed by some rogue U.S. troops and vile pictures of American servicemen smiling near the bodies of dead civilians still circulating widely via mobile phone—even to the most remote Afghan villages—the credibility of the coalition is destroyed.

Sermons in mosques—even in central Kabul—frequently reflect a growing exasperation with U.S. involvement in the country. While some of the recent violence during protests following the burning of the Quran in the United States may have been caused by extremists, these demonstrations clearly show that most Afghan people are frustrated.

President Karzai is trying to channel popular sentiment by passing laws inspired by fundamentalists. In the latest instance, wedding dresses now must be “decent” not to violate a strict interpretation of sharia law. But Karzai is not the winner in this—insurgents are clearly benefiting most from rising anti-Western feelings.

Osama bin Laden’s killing this week was undoubtedly a good thing, but it doesn’t solve the problem of al-Qaeda or win the war in Afghanistan.

Rejection of the West’s involvement continues to grow. When General Petraeus, the architect of the 2007 surge in Iraq and next CIA director, arrived as the new commander of American forces in Afghanistan in June 2010, he brought a change in strategy but failed to win more support from Afghans. Protecting the population now comes second, with priority given to disrupting the Taliban’s insurgency as much as possible. Reforming the government has fallen off the agenda and the coalition is supporting corrupt officials, particularly in the south, and helping mostly discredited militias that are largely ineffective and always unpopular. And military operations in Kandahar have destroyed many private estates and orchards.

And to make matters worse, the unpopular Western forces and their tactics still aren’t going to win the war with the insurgency. There are more Taliban than a year ago and targeted assassinations of the group’s leaders are further radicalizing the movement.

Withdrawing Western forces in the coming years will undoubtedly give up territory to the insurgents. There is no way that the Afghan army will be big and strong enough to resist the Taliban. We have already seen this in the east following the evacuation of several U.S. bases. Insurgents have taken control in numerous valleys and radical groups—including Lashkar-e-Taiba and al-Qaeda—now enjoy sanctuary in Afghanistan.

Sad record: more than ten years after the invasion, the coalition can’t even guarantee that radical groups will not use Afghanistan as a sanctuary despite the successful raid on bin Laden’s hiding place deep within Pakistan.

The United States needs to rethink its strategy today and begin negotiating the best possible solution with the insurgency if it wants to leave anytime soon. Bin Laden’s death gives Washington an opportunity to do just that. President Obama now enjoys a certain degree of political cover to change gears in Afghanistan and negotiate with the Taliban—it doesn’t ensure success, but it’s the only hope left.

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.

    Recent Work

  • Paper
    Waiting for the Taliban in Afghanistan

      Gilles Dorronsoro

  • Paper
    Afghanistan: The Impossible Transition

      Gilles Dorronsoro

Gilles Dorronsoro
Former Nonresident Scholar, South Asia Program
Gilles Dorronsoro
SecurityForeign PolicySouth AsiaAfghanistan

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

  • Trump seated and gesturing while speaking
    Commentary
    Emissary
    The Iran War Is Making America Less Safe

    A conflict launched in the name of American security is producing the opposite effect.

      • Sarah Yerkes

      Sarah Yerkes

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Is it NATO’s Job to Support Trump’s War of Choice?

    Donald Trump has demanded that European allies send ships to the Strait of Hormuz while his war of choice in Iran rages on. He has constantly berated NATO while the alliance’s secretary-general has emphatically supported him.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

  • India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 Era
    Research
    India and a Changing Global Order: Foreign Policy in the Trump 2.0 Era

    Trump 2.0 has unsettled India’s external environment—but has not overturned its foreign policy strategy, which continues to rely on diversification, hedging, and calibrated partnerships across a fractured order.

      • Sameer Lalwani
      • +6

      Milan Vaishnav, ed., Sameer Lalwani, Tanvi Madan, …

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Lukashenko’s Bromance With Trump Has a Sell-By Date

    Lukashenko is willing to make big sacrifices for an invitation to Mar-a-Lago or the White House. He also knows that the clock is ticking: he must squeeze as much out of the Trump administration as he can before congressional elections in November leave Trump hamstrung or distracted.

      Artyom Shraibman

  • Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, wearing an orange cap, and the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath, dressed in saffron robes, are greeting supporters of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) during a roadshow ahead of the Indian General Elections in Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India, on April 6, 2024.Trump raises hands behind a lecternCarney speaking on stage
    Collection
    The Middle Power Moment?

    The world has entered an era of upheaval—a period of heightened geopolitical rivalry, deepening political polarization, quickening technological change, glaring economic inequality, accelerating environmental crises, and eroding respect for international law. This moment of disruption and fluidity is also one of opportunity, however. It provides openings for middle powers, both established and emerging, to exercise unaccustomed agency and influence the future of global order.

    Carnegie scholars are analyzing middle power responses to this moment of upheaval and assessing whether—and under what conditions—these states can contribute to practical problem solving. They are asking critical, concrete questions: What countries, precisely, are we talking about when we refer to middle powers? In what issue areas do their priorities converge and diverge, including across North-South divides? In what domains can middle powers pack a punch, rather than produce a whimper? Are they willing to shoulder actual burdens and responsibility? Finally, how can middle powers assert themselves globally, without running afoul of or threatening their relations with the United States or China?

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.