Tuesday, July 10, 2007

NATO - Better Than the Other Guys


When it comes to Afghanistan, Sarah Chayes is considered expert. An NPR reporter turned Afghan aid worker, Chayes has a lot of time and experience on the ground in that country.

In an op-ed piece in today's New York Times, Chayes praises NATO forces in Afghanistan as much better trained and focused than their US counterparts. She also says that criticisms of NATO by US leaders are unwarranted and that it wasn't NATO that lost Afghanistan:

But if NATO is doing better than the United States, why is Afghanistan doing worse? The answer is twofold. NATO was brought in too late, and under false pretenses.

Within days after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, NATO voted to invoke Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty — its core principle, which states that an armed attack on one member will be viewed by the others as an attack on themselves. Never before in the history of the organization had the principle been activated. The American reaction was thanks but no thanks. Our government was sure we could go it alone in Afghanistan, that allies would be an inconvenience.

In 2003, NATO moved peacekeeping forces into Kabul and parts of northern Afghanistan. But not until 2005, when it was clear that the United States was bogged down in Iraq and lacked sufficient resources to fight on two fronts, did Washington belatedly turn to NATO to take the Afghan south off its hands. And then it misrepresented the situation our allies would find there.
NATO was basically sold a beefed-up peacekeeping mission. It was told, in effect, that it would simply need to maintain the order the United States had established and to help with reconstruction and security.

In fact, as was clear from the ground, the situation had been deteriorating since late 2002. By 2004, resurgent Taliban were making a concerted push to enter the country from Pakistan, and intensive combat between American forces and Taliban fighters was taking place north of Kandahar. By 2005, top Afghan officials could be blown up in downtown Kandahar without drawing much of a reaction from either the Afghan government or ours. Notorious drug lords governed the three main southern provinces to which we were dispatching our allies. It was the bloodiest and most belligerent situation since the fall of the Taliban.

NATO should have been brought in from the start and given the kind of muscular peacekeeping mission it learned to conduct in the Balkans. Afghanistan’s president, Hamid Karzai, begged for peacekeepers, spread throughout the country, in those early years when they could still have made a difference.

Having snubbed our allies when we should have accepted their help, and having stuck them with the most difficult, yet most strategically critical, part of Afghanistan, the least we could do now is offer gratitude and support, rather than blame our friends for our own follies.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Typical of the US right wing to 'blame the other guy' and ain't we in Canada used to the fact the gutless MFr's look for scapegoats when the heat is on them. And to demonstrate how practised they are at being ignorant, Half the US still blames Canada fostering/training the 9/11 crews that got all the training they needed at US flight schools as landed US immigrants.
US generals and politicians are famous for their yellow color so expect a lot more of this bullshit when the wheels come off the wagon. Do expect the US to take drastic action against Canada when we leave Afghanisnam. Liklihood is 'Maple Syrup' will become 'Freedom Syrup'.

Karen said...

Hah, you and I seem to read the same material, :).

I really found it fascinating, not to mention refreshing.

It's taken too long to see truth speak to power, but it's good to see none the less.

The Mound of Sound said...

Chayes is certainly an interesting character. I just find the path that led her from reporter to aid worker quite fascinating. I wonder where she thinks Afghanistan will be in five years?

Karen said...

I don't know. She's certainly committed to it being better.

I'm envious of her courage frankly.

I suspect she has a vision, but not a critical mass to support it.

I wish we, as Canada, were spending more time creating that critical mass.

Not to support our values, but thier's.

What a damn shame.