Afghan War

 by Rise to Peace

A Tale of Two Withdrawals: What the U.S. Can Learn from the Israeli Withdrawal from Lebanon

On August 15th, 2021, Taliban fighters captured Kabul without firing a shot, sending shock waves across the world and expediting the United States’ withdrawal from Afghanistan. Like the Afghanistan withdrawal, the 2000 Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon was long expected and planned. Nevertheless, the events on the ground shifted quickly and forced Israel to complete the withdrawal overnight. With events in Afghanistan still unfolding, the U.S. can learn from Israeli experiences in Lebanon and prevent a humanitarian disaster from occurring at the Kabul airport.

The Invasion

Israel and the U.S. invaded Lebanon and Afghanistan, respectively, in order to eradicate the havens these countries had become for terrorist organizations. Since the 1970s, the PLO has used southern Lebanon as a launching pad for attacks against Israel. In 1982, Israel invaded Lebanon and successfully removed the PLO from Lebanon. Israel subsequently supported the establishment of a friendly regime in Beirut led by the Phalanges.

Following its initial success, Israel withdrew from most of Lebanon and created a security zone in southern Lebanon. The military rationale underlying the establishment of the security zone was to prevent Hezbollah, another anti-Israel insurgent group, and its terror cells from entering Israel, and to deflect fire away from Israeli territory toward the IDF and the South Lebanon Army (SLA), a local militia fully funded and equipped by Israel.

Similar to the haven Lebanon provided the PLO and Hezbollah, the Taliban regime in Afghanistan provided sanctuary for Al-Qaeda. On September 11, 2001, Al-Qaeda operatives hijacked four commercial airliners and crashed them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. On October 7th, 2001, the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and with local anti-Taliban forces routed Al-Qaeda and ended the Taliban regime. On May 1st, 2003, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld declared an end to “major combat” in Afghanistan.

The Withdrawal

For over fifteen years, Israelis believed that their presence in southern Lebanon and the casualties associated with it were necessary. As their presence drew on, however, Israeli consensus shifted, leading to broad public support for a unilateral withdrawal and the election of Prime Minister Ehud Barak, a vocal supporter of the withdrawal. Barak tried to tie his plans for a withdrawal from Lebanon to a peace agreement with Syria. But this plan failed, leading to his decision to withdraw from Lebanon unilaterally and reject the advice of his senior military leaders that advocated against it. Consequently, the withdrawal from Lebanon didn’t go according to plan and what unfolded on the ground was described as chaos.

When Israel began to transfer its military outposts to the SLA in mid-May, the SLA proved unable to hold its ground, deciding to abandon its outposts and disband rather than continue fighting. Barak had to advance the timetable for the IDF’s withdrawal from July to May 24. The collapse of the SLA and Hezbollah’s lightning advance initiated a massive flood of SLA members and their families to the Israeli border, fearing Hezbollah’s retribution.

Unlike the Israeli withdrawal, the U.S. withdrawal was an integral part of the agreement the U.S. signed with the Taliban. While the Taliban has overwhelmingly violated the agreement, President Biden remained committed to the withdrawal, ignoring the warnings of his top military generals and diplomats. Emboldened by the U.S. withdrawal, the Taliban launched its major summer offensive. Once the first provisional capital fell, the Afghan Army collapsed in days, often surrendering to the Taliban without firing a shot. On August 15th, 2021, the Taliban entered victoriously into Kabul.

Conclusions

Every day we bear witness to the unfolding events in Afghanistan. Similar events were unfolding on the Israeli-Lebanese border in 2000. Then, Israel was overwhelmed with the rapid collapse of the SLA and the flood of refugees towards its border. Israel opened its borders and allowed Israel’s allies and their families to enter Israel. Nevertheless, it took Israel 20 years to officially honor the SLA fighters and their sacrifice.

The U.S. shouldn’t wait 20 years to honor its Afghan allies. The U.S. has a moral obligation of not leaving them behind, regardless of whether they are citizens or allies. The U.S. can still do the right thing and open Kabul’s airport gates, its aircraft’s doors, and most importantly its heart, to the fleeing Afghan allies.

in Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
 by Rise to Peace

Afghan Interpreters, the Peace Process, and the Future of Indigenous Support for US Combat Operations

As the United States prepares for its withdrawal from Afghanistan, discussions have continued about the fate of Afghan interpreters who played a vital role in US combat operations. These interpreters not only served as bridges to language barriers between soldiers and Afghan communities but also as cultural advisors to US soldiers. Their area knowledge and translations saved numerous US lives during the two-decade presence in Afghanistan.

The Current Challenge:

Because of insufficient awareness about interpreters, international media outlets have played a vital role in spreading the plight of those still in Afghanistan. After weeks of dialogue and advocacy, the first group of Afghan interpreters and their families arrived at a Virginia military base. This was to await the final process of their Special Immigrant Visas (SIVs) and escape likely retribution from the Taliban. The Department of Defense has planned additional emergency airlifts to evacuate approximately 3,000 more interpreters and their families. 

The success or failure to evacuate most Afghan interpreters has great strategic implications for the United States. Consequently, it will affect its future combat operations in the long term. The Biden administration must not betray these local heroes, as it will compromise the United States’ reputation as a force for good at a time of global consternation about democratic legitimacy. In understanding the historical role of Afghan interpreters, it becomes evident that their fears of abandonment have persisted for years and that preserving their trust will require policymakers to make difficult decisions.

A Rocky History:

The phrase “winning hearts and minds” underscores the importance of local support during the war. For many conflicts like the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, French operations in Vietnam, and even the American Revolution, lack of support for invading forces by the local populace foreshadowed inevitable failure. Indigenous support is so important in winning conflicts, that the US military has a unit dedicated to strengthening these partnerships, the US Army Green Berets. Local support from interpreters was crucial in the United States’ toppling of the Taliban. Local support also helped lay the foundation for a political solution to the conflict.

Although there is little data about the first interpreters who began working for US forces, it is highly likely that demand for their language abilities began and continued shortly after conventional troops began deploying to Afghanistan. Even before conventional forces, Green Beret and CIA officers relied heavily on translators to coordinate airstrikes, understand enemy maneuvers, and map partner forces to begin the initial offensive against the Taliban.

But interpreters and their families faced increased threats from Taliban retribution as coalition operations surged in 2007. The Obama administration’s 2014 initiative to withdraw the remaining US forces from Afghanistan foreshadowed the bureaucratic hurdles and anxieties encountered by interpreters during the drawdown. Many felt betrayed by the lengthy visa process, especially by unexplained rejections when they satisfied all requirements. Their families were constantly threatened by the Taliban, eventually forcing them to abandon wives and daughters during the lengthy visa process.

Their journeys to escape death were often unpredictable and expensive, relying on smugglers to ferry them to Iran, Greece, and Western Europe. Those who did not have funds to cover the entire journey were left in countries with nothing but false documents, eventually becoming homeless as countries failed to support them with refugee status or jobs. Those who suffered the most in escaping Afghanistan started to regret serving US troops, setting a dangerous precedent for the future of local cooperation in the age of major power competition. This is particularly concerning because local support will become more crucial as major powers like the US, China, and Russia rely on proxies in various countries to achieve their foreign policy goals.

The Need to Do More:

The newest arrival of the Afghan SIV applicants is a welcome development. However, this is insufficient because some reports indicate that the Defense Department would have to conduct 16 evacuation flights per day leading up to the August 31 deadline to account for all SIV applicants in Afghanistan. The US and Coalition governments are moving far too slow and risk sending a message to the world that they will not fulfill promises to local partners in conflict. Maintaining the reputation of democracies around the world has become increasingly important if the West hopes to combat a rising China.

If the US government fails to secure the safety of interpreters and leaves them marked for death by the Taliban, local allies in strategically important countries are less likely to work with American forces in the event of a conflict. Peace in these regions will be less attainable without this robust local support for US or allied forces.

It is not logistically possible to evacuate all SIV applicants, but the State and Defense Departments need to allocate more planes, diplomats, and locations to process at least 40-50% of SIV applications and ferry them from the Taliban retribution. They should also increase transparency regarding why applicants are denied. These actions would enhance American soft power and foster trust in the local population crucial to the success of a military campaign. Biden administration should look at evacuating interpreters as a strategic imperative, one that may play a driving factor in an era defined by state competition. Afghan lives and successful US strategy hang in the balance.

in Rise to Peace blog 0 comments
 by Rise to Peace

The Security Threats to Afghanistan and its Problematic Shift to Peace

As the conflict status for Afghanistan resides on worsening, there has never been more reasonable grounds for troops to patrol and protect their people and prevent attacks from awaking.

With a robust Afghan National Security Force of approximately 350,000 troops, (1,000 UK and 3,500 US troops) deployed from the country Army Forces, its violence and security threats are supposed to have decreased under the freedom and protection intended under the NATO political and security agreement. After all, 30 countries are making executive decisions and a consensus on the actions best used to provisionally deter the threats and control of the Taliban and its ‘safe haven’ to terrorist groups in Afghanistan, such as Al-Qaeda.

There is still doubt among the citizens of Afghanistan, that deadly violence will most likely persist as a national surge. This is said to last until the Taliban and Afghan Government can form an alliance. Principally, this agreement is realistic in terms of how safety and control can be preserved. This is without further disruption from adversary parties or terrorist groups. To understand what could influence a peace alliance for Afghanistan, it is best to explore its current and emerging threats. 

Afghan Threats: Now and Tomorrow

Since 1978, there has been internal conflict, centred around revenge violence and political insurgence. This is between Afghan anti-communists and Afghan’s communist Government, known as the ‘Afghan War.’ Deadly threats soon turned into actions. This was largely in response to the September 11 terrorist strikes, which were mostly US-led invasions on the Afghan people. Subsequently, this guided the withdraw of the Taliban’s power in Afghanistan.

Ever since the devastating attacks, the US has been Afghanistan’s greatest threat – and in many ways – enemy. However, it is agreed that whilst both forces work together in the fight against terrorism, the elimination of “real threats” is underway. This is evident with the Taliban, ISIL, Al-Qaeda and their offline and online affiliates, in light of “#TalibanOurGuardians” circulating on Twitter as a top trending hashtag as they attempt to takeover across Central Asia. 

Today in the small and large cities of Afghanistan, there are ongoing security threats from Kabul towards Pakistan that highlight a potential resurgence of Al-Qaeda after the Taliban fails to cut ties, even after they pledged to do so. The Taliban are utilizing Al-Qaeda’s men that reside in Afghan, as their military position is stronger than ever before. If the Taliban choose to echo Al-Qaeda’s chain of commands, there will likely be an increase in violence.

Furthermore, there may be a disturbance to homes when used as ‘shields’ and predominantly women’s rights. This may jeopardise the progress made towards education and work for Afghan women and girls.

While terrorist groups become more advanced with technology and intelligence, the rationale for defence and preventing further threats is to form a relationship and offer cooperation between the Taliban and outside Governments. This may be an attempt to end the ‘forever war’ in Afghanistan. 

Many argue that the Afghan War will heighten with bloodshed and brutality. Consequently, this may result after its mutuality is lost between the NATO groups and the withdraw of US and British troops. This is evident with the Taliban capturing over 30 districts across Afghanistan, 48 hours following the US withdrawal announcement on June 19.

This is further reinforced with approximately 200 Humvees having been captured from All Nippon Airways in just 3 weeks. This will cause substantial disruption for US and British Air Forces in conflict zones. Essentially, this a faster reign of power than ISIL in Iraq in2014.

Could this jeopardise the US Government’s hold on the fight against terrorism? Many have argued that it has at least confirmed that their 20-year led mission to defeat has. Consequently, there is a difference in opinion. This is due to the conflicting opinion that peace action will bring great alliances for Afghanistan. This may eventually prevent the level of terrorism on their soil in years to come.

However, it is most likely the Taliban will continue to surge without cutting ties with Al-Qaeda. This is both a terrifying and dangerous period for the Afghan people; especially for those who disagree with the Taliban’s extreme beliefs.

Conclusion

There will always be crime and extremism among Afghan communities. This is likely due to its unrepairable history of terrorism conflict. Consequently, the momentum for change to peaceful neighbourhoods is heading in an undepictable direction.

Without ground protection from troops, threats will become harder to suppress and may be too late to prevent. Nevertheless, there is a somewhat logical basis for the Government’s decisions to build trust and alliance with Afghanistan’s violent extremist organisations. Most importantly the Taliban.

The progress towards peace will be determined in the forthcoming months. This will be measured by the Afghan Government’s attempts to tackle the Taliban insurgency. Beyond all, this will depend on how the control takeover is targeted whilst utilizing the advantages of Counter-Terrorism strategies, such as networking and negotiation, for inviting cooperation and harmony in Afghan. This is before there is no way of “containing” terrorist groups and their affiliates in such countries.

 

in Afghanistan / Rise to Peace blog / United States 0 comments
 by Shailene Pimentel

Women in the Afghan Peace Process

Fawzia Koofi, a women’s rights activist and politician is eating lunch with members of the Taliban delegate at Doha peace conference. July 7, 2019. Image: Rise to Peace

Under Taliban rule (1996-2001), Afghan women were banned from attending schools and working as well. In addition to violating their civil and political rights, the Taliban has threatened women lives. Since the fall of the Taliban, women have feared that negotiating for a peace agreement with the Taliban meant giving up some of their rights in exchange for the chance to end the war.

In 2015, the Afghan government created a National Action Plan (NAP) that was developed to address the challenges women have faced in the areas of participation, protection, prevention, relief, and recovery.

As a result of the NAP, women have the chance to attend school and to participate in political and economic opportunities.

Women want to participate in the Afghanistan peace process.

Of 23 rounds of talks between 2005 and 2014, there were only two occasions where women were present at the table. Moreover, there has only been one minister in the Afghan government that was a woman. Women have gained the right to participate politically, but what good does that do when women’s roles aren’t addressed in the government/local sector?

There are a few ways outside of the government in which Afghan women make contributions to address violence and equality throughout the country.

Female electoral candidates work to provide a voice for uneducated women.

For example, female members of peace councils try to negotiate with insurgent leaders. By doing so, they are working to reassure their support for reintegration of Taliban fighters into the community.

Women also encourage local fighters to participate in talks within the community to address current extremist narratives. 

Involving women in the peace process could only benefit the affair. In the past, the female-led peace councils have gathered with the wives of fighters to facilitate the release of hostages, which has been successful.

Building relationships and trust with allies could lead to a negotiation between the two parties. Given the violent history towards women, it is hard to contribute to the peace movement since it’s predominantly male-led. 

Wazhma Frogh is the Cofounder of the Research Institute for Women, Peace, and Security and is one of the brave women in Afghanistan. She briefed the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) on various recommendations to improve the involvement of women in the peace process.

Her advocacy included topics such as delegating a specific institution to oversee the NAP to ensure proper inclusion and implementation, allowing more women to participate in peace talks, and encouraging women to participate in the policing and security sector.

Integrating women into the political realm in a country where women have long suffered inequality could take some time to incorporate fully.

Therefore, the Afghan government should consider making small changes that further women’s participation. For instance, the government should consider including a particular amount of females in peace talks. One or two women would be better than none at all.

The government should also include women in law enforcement and security. Since local female political leaders move to represent the underrepresented women, this will provide women with more opportunities for leadership and capacity building in an area that most women fear.

This could give women the confidence they need to understand political matters in a way where they can then network in domains where men cannot. 

Afghani women today are not only moving to become more equal but wanting to partake in a way that allows them to help the entire country to progress from war. Including women in the peace process empowers them to build trust and rapport with both local communities and the government. 

in Asia / Rise to Peace blog / women-in-extremism 0 comments
 by Rise to Peace

U.S Cannot Win Afghanistan War Without Pakistan

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Joseph Dunford has said that the U.S. cannot win the war in Afghanistan without securing cooperation from Pakistan.

Pakistan would be a key element of Washington’s new strategy for South Asia, he said.

In this episode of Mehwar, host Massoud Malik discusses the topic with Ahmad Shah Mohibi, a political affairs analyst.

http://www.tolonews.com/mehwar/mehwar-us-cannot-win-afghanistan-war-without-pakistan

 

in Ahmad Mohibi / Asia / Rise to Peace blog 1 comments