Gilles Dorronsoro
Fixing a Failed Strategy in Afghanistan
To correct a failing strategy in Afghanistan, the United States and its allies need to focus on protecting Afghan cities and reallocating more resources to the North.
As the debate on future U.S. strategy draws to a close, 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.
Gilles 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.”
About the Author
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 AfghanistanPaper
- 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 Russia Eurasia Center
- Why Has Kazakhstan Started Deporting Political Activists?Commentary
The current U.S. indifference to human rights means Astana no longer has any incentive to refuse extradition requests from its authoritarian neighbors—including Russia.
Temur Umarov
- Why Are China and Russia Not Rushing to Help Iran?Commentary
Most of Moscow’s military resources are tied up in Ukraine, while Beijing’s foreign policy prioritizes economic ties and avoids direct conflict.
Alexander Gabuev, Temur Umarov
- Georgia’s Fall From U.S. Favor Heralds South Caucasus RealignmentCommentary
With the White House only interested in economic dealmaking, Georgia finds itself eclipsed by what Armenia and Azerbaijan can offer.
Bashir Kitachaev
- What Does War in the Middle East Mean for Russia–Iran Ties?Commentary
If the regime in Tehran survives, it could be obliged to hand Moscow significant political influence in exchange for supplies of weapons and humanitarian aid.
Nikita Smagin
- How Trump’s Wars Are Boosting Russian Oil ExportsCommentary
The interventions in Iran and Venezuela are in keeping with Trump’s strategy of containing China, but also strengthen Russia’s position.
Mikhail Korostikov