America in the World

Hillary Clinton says inconsistent American foreign policy is partly to blame for rise of Taliban in Pakistan

Mrs Clinton, US Secretary of State, made her comments in testimony to the Congress.  She was speaking as news emerged that Taliban militants havd "established effective control of a strategically important district [Buner] just 70 miles from Pakistan's capital, Islamabad":

"On Wednesday heavily armed Taliban militants were patrolling villages, and the local police had retreated to their station houses in much of Buner, officials and residents said. The staff members of local nongovernmental organizations have been ordered to leave, and their offices have been looted, they said. Pakistani television news channels showed Taliban fighters triumphantly carrying office equipment out of the offices of the organizations."

Mrs Clinton said that America had failed to stay with Pakistan after successfully supporting anti-Soviet rebels during the 1980s.  America withdrew leaving Pakistan to cope with militant freedom fighters inside its territory - many under the spell of Saudi-financed Wahhabism.

Obama announces 17,000 more troops for Afghanistan

President Barack Obama has announced that he will be sending 17,000 more American troops to southern Afghanistan.  They will join the current US Afghan-wide deployment of 33,000 servicemen and 30,000 other troops from NATO allies.  The troop announcement came before the completion of a sixty day review of policy in the nation.

Frederick W Kagan wrote for National Review, setting out nine principles for victory in Afghanistan.  They are summarised below:

1. Understanding our interests. Afghanistan may not currently be a sanctuary for al-Qaeda but it would likely become one again if we abandoned it.  Without stability in Afghanistan there will be no stability in Pakistan's border regions.
2. Understanding our goals.  Our aim is not to create paradise but to support a representative government in Kabul that can control the nation's centrifugal forces.
3. Differentiating between temporary and irreconcilable enemies.  Some enemies are determined to turn Afghanistan back to Taliban domination and need to be defeated but many groups that call themselves 'Taliban' are more motivated by their opposition to the central regime and its many corrupt local appointees.  Those groups can be part of the solution if they are given the opportunity to become part of local governance.
4. Committing to stay the course. The consensus in large parts of Afghanistan and Pakistan is that America and its allies won't stay the course; "Islamists point to our retreat following the Marine-barracks bombing in Lebanon in 1983, the “Blackhawk Down” incident in 1993, our abandonment of Afghanistan following the defeat of the Soviet Union in 1989, and our abandonment of Shiite and Kurdish Iraqis to Saddam Hussein’s retribution in 1991 and 1992."  Only when the US surged troops into Iraq in early 2007 did local communities have the confidence to turn themselves against the extremists in the knowledge that they were unlikely to risk retribution from them.
5. Counter-terrorism needs popular support.  Not all lessons from Iraq are transferable to Afghanistan but the most important lesson is.  Throughout 2006 US Special Forces killed many terrorists but there was little overall progress because most Iraqis did not feel safe and harboured terrorists or feared the consequences of turning against them.  Terrorism will only be defeated when local populations feel safe and see socioeconomic progress.
6. Troops need to be in the right place.  Most of the insurgency is outside of the urban areas.  Troops need to be deployed more carefully than in Iraq.
7. Outside troops often need to do the most difficult work.  Both because they are better equipped for it but also so that resentment of difficult work is not attached to Afghanistan's emerging army and police.
8. A good plan.  The current US military operation does not have enough senior officers to coordinate a plan for Afghanistan.  As part of the review now underway requires "a significant augmentation" of General McKiernan's staff.
9. No risks with Iraq.  There must be no switching of troops from Iraq to Afghanistan that would risk the considerable progress there.  US progress depends upon the credibility of operations in Iraq and a reputation for finishing tasks well.

Obama approves first controversial military action of his Presidency

Associated Press is reporting the first serious military operation of the Obama Presidency:

"Missiles fired from a suspected U.S. spy plane killed seven people Friday on the Pakistan side of the Afghan border, a lawless region where al-Qaida militants are known to hide out, officials said. The strike was the first on Pakistani territory since the inauguration of President Barrack Obama. Pakistani leaders had expressed hope Obama would halt the attacks, more than 30 of which have been launched since the middle of last year, reportedly killing several senior militants."

Barack Obama's approval of the raids that began under Defence Secretary Bob Gates - kept on by America's new President - should not come as a surprise.  When, in August 2007, he first advocated sending US troops into Pakistan to kill terrorist leaders the Wall Street Journal ran an editorial headline 'Barack Obama, Neocon'.

Dr Liam Fox, Defence spokesman for Britain's Conservatives, will be supportive.  He recently said that disruption of Pakistan's al-Qaeda-Taliban network should be celebrated.

Pakistani troops deployed to repel American forces

Global economic crises may have ensured less coverage of Pakistan's decision to deploy troops along the Afghan border yesterday than would otherwise have been the case. But the new government's policy of asking the military to prevent the forces of her ally, the United States, from entering the country to fight Taliban and Al Qaeda forces plainly risks a military escalation, with shots already having been fired into the air at American forces.

In our Notable Arguments page, we highlight Daniel Larison's despair that mainstream opinion within America remains largely of the view that such incursions must continue in spite of the additional risks.

Richard Holbrooke highlights massive transfer of wealth to oil-rich competitor regimes

Richard Holbrooke was a US Ambassador to the UN under Bill Clinton.  He is likely to feature in any Barack Obama administration, perhaps even as Secretary of State.  In the main essay for the latest edition of Foreign Affairs he sets out 'A Daunting Agenda' for the next President.  His two main concerns are: (1) the transfer of wealth to oil-rich and often threatening regimes and (2) the re-emergence of the Taliban and al-Qaeda within Pakistan.

THE TRANSFER OF WEALTH TO VENEZUELA, RUSSIA, SAUDI ARABIA AND OTHER COMPETITOR POWERS
"With the price of oil quadruple what it was four years ago, Americans are witnessing -- or, more to the point, contributing to -- the greatest transfer of wealth from one set of nations to another in history... The United States consumes more than 20 million barrels of oil a day, about 12 million of which are imported. Based on prices from the first half of 2008, that means the United States is transferring about $1.3 billion to the oil-producing countries every day -- $475 billion a year...  Saudi Arabia, which, although it has long worked with Washington to bolster world oil output and keep prices within an acceptable range, has simultaneously allowed billions of (ostensibly nongovernmental) dollars to go toward building extremist madrasahs and funding terrorist organizations, including al Qaeda. There will be more such complicated double-dealing in the future: Does anyone doubt that the current assertiveness on the international stage of, for example, Iran, Russia, and Venezuela comes from the economic muscle that accompanies their growing petrodollar reserves? (Venezuela now spends five times as much as the United States on foreign aid to the rest of Latin America.)"

AL-QAEDA IN PAKISTAN
"As a recent New York Times article stated, "It is increasingly clear that the Bush administration will leave office with Al Qaeda having successfully relocated its base from Afghanistan to Pakistan's tribal areas, where it has rebuilt much of its ability to attack from the region and broadcast its messages to militants across the world." Nothing -- not even Iraq -- represents a greater policy failure for the outgoing administration."