 |
Mr Raspal Khosa
Introduction: Transition and Australia's Afghanistan endgame
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO)-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) began a new chapter in its mission in Afghanistan following the 19 20 November 2010 Lisbon Summit, with the adoption of a phased plan known as the ‘transition’ (Inteqal in the Dari and Pushtu languages of Afghanistan) process that will see Afghans assume responsibility for their own security by the end of 2014. |
|
Read the article>> |
|
 |
Major General Jim Molan (Retd.)
Walking the talk: The need to commit fully to the strategy in Afghanistan
Following the takeover of the war by US commanders and the recent surge of US troops and funding, ISAF now has more than a fair chance of success in Afghanistan. Success for interventionist forces is the provision of breathing space to develop governance, economy and security forces that will enable Afghans to win their war years or decades after foreign forces have left. Recent progress, especially compared to the situation one year ago, and a succeeding model in Iraq, shows that these types of wars can be won. |
|
Read the article>> |
|
 |
Professor William Maley
Political challenges to 'transition' in Afghanistan
The hope that ‘transition’ can be accomplished in Afghanistan by 2014 crucially depends upon developments in two spheres. First, the radical groups that make up the Taliban movement currently enjoy the use of sanctuaries in Pakistan, supported by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate (ISI). If these sanctuaries remain intact and operational, then the prospects for anything but disaster in Afghanistan are very poor. Second, in key respects the politics, political institutions, and public administration of Afghanistan are profoundly dysfunctional. If problems in this sphere are left to fester, then ‘transition’ could still lead to a shambles, even if the issue of sanctuaries has been confronted. |
|
Read the article>> |
|
 |
Ms Nell Kennon
Striking the right balance: Delivering Australian aid to Afghanistan
An enhanced Australian civilian presence in Afghanistan is an important step in instituting new leadership structures that marry military, political and aid priorities. The expansion of Australia’s civilian presence is long overdue. In a country wrought by three decades of conflict and disorder, military means alone will never secure long lasting peace or security. |
|
Read the article>> |
|
 |
Dr Andrew Phillips
Strategic resolve, Australian interests, and the long Afghan endgame
Reading Raspal Khosa’s insightful contribution to this forum, I was reminded of a quote from legendary football coach Vince Lombardi about his beloved Green Bay Packers: ‘They never lost a game. They simply ran out of time.’ This quote seems particularly apposite in light of Prime Minister Gillard’s recent declaration that Australian military and civilian personnel may be in Afghanistan for at least another decade, and NATO’s similarly expansive commitment to forming a strategic partnership with Afghanistan to extend beyond 2014. |
|
Read the article>> |
|
 |
Dr Rod Lyon
Afghanistan: Being realistic about outcomes
Raspal Khosa has given us a good overview of the proposed endgame in Afghanistan. But endgames are notoriously difficult—Brian Bond’s classic study, The Pursuit of Victory, cautions that victory on the battlefield, even where it can be gained, frequently cannot be translated into meaningful political outcomes. Ironically, war is the pursuit of politics by other means, but the pursuit and the politics often prove to be misaligned in the end. In all endgames we have to be realistic about what is achievable and what isn’t. And that means we should focus not on mission statements and good intentions, but on outcomes. |
|
Read the article>> |
|
|
|
Mr Raspal Khosa
Concluding remarks
The most salient feature of the ISAF strategy in Afghanistan is the transition to an Afghan Government lead by the end of 2014, whilst sustaining an enduring partnership well beyond that date. The process requires Afghan institutions to assume responsibility for security, and the associated domains of governance and development, on a province by-province basis, with a concomitant drawdown of foreign combat forces. |
|
Read the article>> |
|