‘U.S. policy in the Iraq war is the principal cause of a sharp decline’ in Europe’s belief in U.S. leadership since 2002. NATO Struggling In Afghanistan, Congressional Study RevealsBy Cliff Montgomery – Feb. 23rd, 2008The Congressional Research Service on January 7th, 2008 released an updated version of its report, NATO in Afghanistan: A Test of the Transatlantic Alliance. The study explains how NATO members are working to respond to new threats in the country of the Taliban and al-Qaeda.We quote from its impressive introduction below:“NATO’s mission in Afghanistan is seen as a test of the allies’ military capabilities and their political will to undertake a complex mission. Since September 11, 2001, the allies have sought to create a ‘new’ NATO, able to go beyond the European theater and combat new threats such as terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD). […]”This change in overall mission reflects a NATO consensus that the principal dangers to allied security lie distant from the treaty area and require new political tools and military capabilities to combat them.”Two military operations in Afghanistan seek to stabilize the country.”Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) is a combat operation led by the United States against Al Qaeda remnants, primarily in the eastern and southern parts of the country along the Pakistan border. OEF is not a NATO operation, although many coalition partners are NATO members. Approximately 13,000 troops are in OEF, including 11,000 U.S. forces.”The second operation is the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), established by the international community in 2002 to stabilize the country. NATO assumed control of ISAF the following year. By December 2007, ISAF had an estimated 41,700 troops from 39 countries, with NATO members providing the core of the force. The United States has approximately 15,000 troops in ISAF.”NATO’s effort in Afghanistan is the alliance’s first ‘out-of-area’ mission beyond Europe. The purpose of the mission is the stabilization and reconstruction of Afghanistan. Although NATO has undertaken stabilization and reconstruction missions before–for example in Kosovo–the scope of the undertaking in Afghanistan is considerably more difficult.”Taliban and Al Qaeda remnants are resisting the operation, Afghanistan has never had a well-functioning central government, and the distance from Europe and the country’s terrain present daunting obstacles.”Reconstruction must therefore take place while combat operations, albeit often low-level, continue. And although the allies agree upon a general political objective, some have differing interpretations how to achieve it.”The mission in Afghanistan is likely to be important for NATO’s future, and for U.S. leadership of the alliance. The European allies insisted that a U.N. resolution govern NATO’s mission to give legitimacy to the insertion of allied troops in Afghanistan. This important political requirement was achieved.”In the past several years, NATO governments have also repeatedly pledged to develop capabilities making their forces more expeditionary and ‘deployable.'”The mission in Afghanistan provides a hard test of these capabilities. Several key NATO members, above all the United States, have insisted that the allies must generate the political will to counter the greatest threats to their security. Again, Afghanistan provides a test of will against the concrete danger of international terrorism.”NATO’s mission in Afghanistan also tests U.S. leadership of the alliance. Some allies question whether the United States will distance itself from inhumane practices reportedly used in U.S. military-run prisons; and whether the U.S. commitment to the interests of the allies preserves the mutual sense of obligation that once more clearly characterized the alliance.”The allies also believe that the United States, as a global power, must provide leadership and resources to counter the destabilizing influences upon Afghanistan of two neighboring states, Iran and Pakistan.”A highly respected German Marshall Fund poll has found a sharp decline in European public opinion towards U.S. leadership since 2002. In key European countries, the desirability of U.S. leadership in the world fell from 64% in 2002 to 36% in June 2007; the approval rating of President Bush in these same countries fell from 38% in 2002 to 17% in 2007.”U.S. policy in the Iraq war is the principal cause of this decline.”This decline is complicating the effort of allied governments to sustain support for the ISAF mission.”Afghanistan presents a growing challenge to NATO. Over the past two years, Taliban attacks have increased in scope and number, and Taliban fighters are adopting some of the tactics, such as roadside bombs, used by insurgents in Iraq.”The Karzai government in Afghanistan is coming under international criticism, and its public support has diminished, due to corruption and an inability to improve living conditions.”Some warlords continue to exert influence, and the narcotics industry remains an entrenched threat to the country’s political health.”The allies are not in full agreement how to counter these problems, but allied officials say that they need a strong and reliable Afghan government to provide reasonable services and competence to the population if NATO is to succeed.”Like what you’re reading so far? Then why not order a full year (52 issues) of thee-newsletter for only $15? A major article covering an story not being told in the Corporate Press will be delivered to your email every Monday morning for a full year, for less than 30 cents an issue. Order Now!
What Happens With Congress During A Federal Shutdown?
What congressional activities are still performed during this impasse?
