The way ahead in Afstan

Two stories.

1) Canadian Press (Murray Brewster):

Comparisons to Iraq highlight re-enegized Afghan war in 2009

Canada's mission in Afghanistan was originally due to end in February 2009 but instead will grow in scope and cost in the coming year because of a political compromise arranged last spring by the Harper government.

With 103 soldiers dead, hundreds more wounded and an estimated price tag of $18.3 billion, the country appears resigned to a long, costly fight in a war that for some has come to resemble the bloody stalemate in Iraq.

Tens of thousands of fresh U.S. troops are due to surge into Afghanistan starting in the spring, much as they did in Iraq two years ago.

The Americans appear ready, over the objection of some allies, to adopt a transplanted strategy to pacify Afghanistan. Ground commanders have warned of more confrontation with the Taliban and escalating violence.

As well, Afghans will be headed to the ballot box in the fall of 2009, giving militants another reason to increase attacks.

"One can expect a more intense insurgency and a more determined effort on the part of the Taliban to disrupt democracy," Defence Minister Peter MacKay said in a year-end interview with The Canadian Press.

The influx of as many as 30,000 more American troops is reflection of president-elect Barrack Obama's determination to make the war in Afghanistan the central front in the fight against terrorism.

Reinforcements are coming from battle-hardened units drawn down from Iraq, where violence is slowly subsiding.

Even without the political push of a new U.S. Democratic administration, there have been signs throughout 2008 that the battle in Afghanistan's desert wastelands and mountain creases may become the conflict of choice for Islamic jihadists.

Where once the south presented the greatest challenge to stability, security in the once relatively quiet eastern region of the country descended this year into an unanticipated cauldron of bombings and fire fights.

The most graphic illustration was the massacre of 10 newly-arrived French soldiers, ambushed in a mountain pass last August not far from the capital, Kabul.

Despite the bloodshed and the alleged influx of foreign fighters, the head of the Canadian army said only a superficial comparison can be made between Afghanistan and Iraq.

"I wouldn't say it's the war of choice for jihadists - yet," said Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie.

"The Afghans themselves (are) very proud, very ancient people, with very rich tribal cultures and in the hinterlands relatively xenophobic to outsiders."

The "natural suspicion and hostility" toward foreigners is not restricted to westerners and extends to those "who seem very keen to use their young men to attack NATO forces," he added.

Leslie, who did a stint as commander of NATO's International Security and Force, or ISAF, five years ago in Kabul, said "there are enormous tensions between Afghans, no matter what ethnicity, and non-Afghans" that will likely temper the violence to levels below what Iraq experienced.

Much of the bloodshed in and around Baghdad since 2004 involved Sunni and Shia Muslims tearing each other apart in vicious sectarian feuds, with U.S. and British troops caught in the middle.

Afghanistan does not have the same toxic demographic mix - a fact MacKay took pains to emphasize...

The cornerstone of Ottawa's withdrawal plans involves training Afghan National Army and police to handle their own security in Kandahar.

With 288 combat deaths among NATO forces as of mid-December and an estimated 4,000 civilian casualties, 2008 has turned out to be the bloodiest year since the overthrow of the hard-line Taliban regime.

The number of Canadian soldiers who have given their lives since 2002 surpassed the psychological milestone of 100 in early December, a majority of them victims of indiscriminate roadside bombs and booby traps.

Although they can't guarantee it, the country's generals are hoping the introduction of battlefield transport helicopters, armed escort choppers and unmanned surveillance drones will reduce the steady flow of casualties in 2009.

The public angst and political outrage that characterized the war throughout much of 2006 and 2007 faded from view in 2008 after Prime Minister Stephen Harper engineered a bi-partisan compromise with the Liberals that extended the country's military deployment in Afghanistan until 2011.

Late in the year, even the New Democrats, the most vocal opponents of the war, dropped their demand that troops come home immediately in their own political compromise with the Liberals.

It may appear that the mute button on political opposition has been hit, but opinion polls have repeatedly shown the public remains ill at ease with the war and longs for the days when Canadian soldiers were peacekeepers instead of peacemakers [emphasis added]...

2) LA Times:

Agencies prep Obama for 'tourniquet' on Afghanistan
Many military leaders seek a new strategy to deal with the growing violence and advances by the Taliban and other extremists.

The Pentagon and U.S. national security officials are transmitting a battery of new information about the Afghanistan war to President-elect Barack Obama's transition team in hopes that the incoming administration will act quickly to prevent U.S. fortunes there from eroding further.

The effort underscores a sense of urgency about addressing an increasingly dangerous situation in Afghanistan. Many military leaders think a broad strategic shift is needed to reverse the growing violence and to turn back troubling advances by the Taliban and other extremists.

Obama's staff is being given detailed information on the findings of separate strategy reviews by the Pentagon and the White House National Security Council. The reviews cover proposals to beef up U.S. force levels, improve coordination among government agencies and overhaul U.S. foreign aid efforts, including to countries such as Pakistan.

"Right now there is a sense you need to apply a tourniquet of some kind," said a senior Defense official who spoke on condition of anonymity when discussing contacts with the transition team. "You need to control bleeding at the site of the wound, you need to stabilize, and you need to see what you need to do next."

After a record number of U.S. deaths in Afghanistan this year, national security officials consider it crucial for the new administration to act soon after taking office. The senior Defense official said Obama would have a limited time period to announce a new strategy for Afghanistan and build up the troop strength.

"Over time, it will be harder to put more stuff in," the official said. "You have a window where you can do dramatic things. But the opportunity to do dramatic things reduces over time."

During the campaign, Obama said he wanted to intensify the military's focus on Afghanistan, elevating the war to a primary Pentagon effort.

Obama was briefed in person last week by Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on details of war plans.

Among other issues, Mullen described the size of the units the Pentagon plans to send to Afghanistan and when they would be sent, Defense officials said.

There are 36,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Based on plans already made public, about 20,000 new troops will be headed to Afghanistan in 2009. They include an additional Army brigade announced by President Bush in September and as many as four more brigades under plans endorsed by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, who will remain in his post under Obama...

Too many U.S. troops could weaken the Afghan government's will to build up its armed forces and take more responsibility, Gates is said to believe.

"He supports the additional combat brigades and aviation brigade," the official said. "Beyond that, it will start to look less like an Afghan operation and more like an occupation."

Mullen is overseeing the Pentagon strategy review. Army Lt. Gen. Douglas E. Lute, appointed by Bush to coordinate war planning for the White House, is supervising the National Security Council review.

A third review is underway, overseen by Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of the U.S. Central Command overseeing forces in the Mideast. Obama will probably be briefed on the conclusions of that review too.

The Mullen and Lute reviews both conclude that any new strategy must examine Pakistan as well as Afghanistan, officials said. Both also discuss ways to increase cooperation between the Defense and State departments [emphasis added]...