Sunday, May 19, 2013


Features

Who Wants To Fund Afghan Security?

Any volunteers?
Any volunteers?
TEXT SIZE - +
By Charles Recknagel
Asking for funding in tough economic times is never easy.

But Washington faces just that hurdle as it hosts the NATO summit in Chicago on May 20-21.

The summit, to assess Afghanistan's security needs after foreign forces withdraw in 2014, is not a donors conference. But it is likely to be dominated by the question of who will pay the $4 billion a year U.S. and Afghan officials estimate is needed to support Afghan security forces.

The problem: Washington's European NATO allies have little money to spare. With the eurozone in crisis, they are staying quiet about helping underwrite the Afghan army and police.

The United States is expected to cover about two-thirds of the cost, but U.S. officials last month urged their NATO partners to contribute a total of $1.3 billion a year after 2014. The only countries, however, that have pledged so far are Germany at $193 million a year, Britain at $110 million a year, and non-NATO member Australia at $100 million a year.

"When you look at [Anders Fogh] Rasmussen, the secretary-general of NATO, and his report for 2011, his annual report, he really talks a lot about how many of the allies are not meeting commitments to have 2 percent of their GDP spent on the military and defense, and many are under 1 percent even, so it is very clear Europe is broke," Graeme Herd, of the Geneva Center for Security Policy in Switzerland, says. "There is no money."

Herd says European NATO members will not say "no" outright to U.S. pressure. But he expects them to attach strong conditions to any contributions in an effort to lessen their burden.

Test Of Nerves

One reason many European governments cannot simply refuse is public opinion.

Countries with troops or training missions in Afghanistan could risk belittling their own sacrifices if they turn away now.

"There is quite some political willingness to carry part of that burden among the European states," Henning Riecke, of the German Council on Foreign Relations in Berlin, says. "It is obvious that the continuing support of the Afghan security and police forces is the price for an honorable withdrawal of the combat force from Afghanistan."

But even if the Europeans do eventually pledge, their lack of enthusiasm suggests the days of the West shouldering Afghanistan's security costs are ending.

Gareth Price of London's Chatham House says Western capitals want Afghanistan's regional neighbors to help carry the burden.

He predicts tough poker playing in Chicago as some NATO states keep silent to force other countries to come forward.

"People would play their cards close to the chest in the hopes of getting other countries -- maybe from the Gulf, maybe China, from other parts of the world with less economic problems -- to step in and start funding the security side of things," Price says.

Welcome To Join

One key player is India. Price says prospects that country might contribute have grown since New Delhi and Kabul signed a security and trade pact in October.

"There is a recognition that India is popular in Afghanistan, it is doing lots of development work; but it's also benefiting from the security umbrella," Price says. "And the same logic would apply for China with a lot of its investments in mining and so forth."

India and China have not said whether they will help fund Afghan security. Nor has Japan or any of the Gulf states, which Western diplomats are reportedly approaching.

One other potential contributor is Russia. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in April Moscow was worried the drug trade and terrorism could grow in Afghanistan after the pullout of foreign forces.

NATO chief Rasmussen responded positively by saying that "we would welcome financial contributions from Russia, China, and other countries to ensure a strong sustainable Afghan security force beyond 2014." But so far there are no signs the conversation has gone further.
This forum has been closed.
Comment Sorting
Comments
     
by: Eugenio from: Vienna
May 17, 2012 18:59
"Who Wants To Fund Afghan Security?" is of course a rethorical question: everyone understands that funding Afghan security (as seen by NATO/US/RFE/RL) is tantamount to trying to pay back the debt of Greece - both will simply fail.
During the upcoming NATO summit in Chicago the new French president Hollande will annonce that France wants to take its troops out of Afghanistan ASAP. It is not to be excluded that after this a number of other European states will do the same. So, by 2013 the nation of Beavus, Butthead of George W. Obama will be "fighting terrorism" alone there.
Once Mullah Omar will have thrown all the Beavuses and Buttheads out of Afghanistan, the Taliban will install the Sharia law there and will continue their jihad in Pakistan.
And the only one to be thanked for this is as usual - Ronald Regan, this figter for the "freedom" of the Afghan people!
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
May 18, 2012 01:06
Eugenio, I agree with much of what you have said apart from the final outcome. After the US retreats from Afghanistan - as it has already in Iraq despite its earlier "no cut and run" statement - the various groups will sit down and the old men will sort out how the country will be run (i.e. divided up). That is how it is done in this part of the world, else the alternative is another civil war that nobody wants. Do not be suprised if an insurgent-majority government still keeps Karzai on as President because he has established a dialogue with the US, Pakistan and other sources of future financing. This part of the world is about to change significantly - Mullah Omar enjoys listening to his ipod these days.
In Response

by: Eugenio from: Vienna
May 18, 2012 18:46
Hey, William, yours is an interesting perspective. I have to admit that my info on such places as Afghanistan comes only from mainstream sources (meaning that it's probably a bunch of cheap propaganda) - so, I would not be surprised if what you're saying will be the real outcome. Even though when one remembers how Nadjibullah ended, one may have difficulty imagining that the Taliban have for Karzai plans any other from those that they had for his predecessor back in 1996.
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
May 18, 2012 23:45
Hi Eugenio, Nadjibullah made one terrible mistake - he wanted to implement communism and in the process commenced having his main opponents - the village-level religious leaders who ran the schools - beaten, sent to education camps, or assisinated. This led to the mullahs' students - the talibs (scholars) - asking what could be done, and the result was the Taliban. After the civil war there was on old score to be settled. Karzia has not done that and may escape with his life, else escape to a nice gated community in Texas to share with his fellow opportunist from that period - GWB.

In Response

by: Eugenio from: Vienna
May 19, 2012 11:08
An interesting point on the "gated community" in Texas next to George W. :-). I wonder how long it will take Karzai to run away from George W. back to the Taliban - better a quick death than a life-long torture of having to live next to Georgie :-).

by: Bill Webb from: Phoenix Arizona USA
May 18, 2012 03:12
The biggest contribution to Afghan security will come from the Afghan people themselves by giving up their drug dealer economy and getting real jobs. How many generations that takes is going to be determined by them alone, but 4 billion a year is what they want from the rest of the world to wean them from the easy money. Get real!!!
In Response

by: William from: Aragon
May 19, 2012 00:10
Hi Bill, "Potential opium production in 2011 was estimated at 5,800 tons, a 61% increase compared to 2010" (Afghanistan Opium Survey 2001, UN Office of Drugs and Crime). At the close of the Taliban-dominated period it was down to 190 tons - check for yourself. After that, the US military had control of the country with the borders closed, air control, spy satellites and drones, supercomputers analysing data and 130,000 ISAF troops occupying the country. Did you think that nearly 6,000 tons of opium is getting out via the backs of donkeys at night over tops of the mountains? The sooner the world's biggest drug addict leaves this destroyed country the better.

Most Popular