Some time still for Afghan Army to be really capable

US defense secretary Gates gives his assessment:

Gates: Afghan army could take lead in 2 to 4 Years

The Afghan national army could lead operations in Afghanistan in two to four years, with the U.S. playing a support role, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said during a May 8 interview, portions of which aired on CBS' "60 Minutes" Sunday.

As the handover of responsibilities to national forces in Afghanistan develops, it is likely to mirror security progress that unfolded in Iraq following the surge of U.S. troops there, Gates said during the interview, conducted with Katie Couric in Afghanistan's capital city of Kabul.

"I think what you'll see is the same kind of evolution here that you have seen in Iraq, and that is where the Iraqis have increasingly taken the lead and we have increasingly receded into the background," he said. "I think that's what will happen here over time."

The Afghan national army has about 86,000 troops with a "significant number" of battalions leading joint operations with U.S. and NATO International Security Assistance Forces, Gates said.

The defense secretary said the Afghan army is showing progress as the size of its ranks grows over coming years to the currently authorized number of 134,000 troops [size agreed in September 2008]. He also expressed confidence in the Pakistani army's ability to root out terrorist safe havens along its border with Afghanistan, but he used measured terms in providing his assessment, acknowledging that the situation is subject to change.

"War is inherently unpredictable, okay, and the enemy always has a vote," he said. "But I think that if things go according to the way that our commanders are planning and the strategies that we're following, that would be our anticipation."..

Gates, who has previously criticized the NATO contribution, reiterated his frustration at the disparity of force levels.

"I've been disappointed with NATO's response to this ever since I got this job," he said, pointing out that even excluding the U.S., the has almost 2 million men under arms. "Why they can't get more than 32,000 to Afghanistan has always been a puzzle to me [emphasis added]."..

Beats me too. More here at 60 Minutes:

Bob Gates, America's Secretary Of War
60 Minutes: Secretary Of Defense Robert Gates Talks About Iraq, Afghanistan And His Job

Video:


Watch CBS Videos Online

Update: From BruceR at Flit:

...

I still find estimates in the Gates range (3 years, +/-1), for army building anyway, to be credible. I always valued my discussions with American, British and Australian officers who'd done a tour in Iraq before their current Afghan go. I found it comforting that so many did say the challenges they were facing in Afghanistan now seemed very similar to their challenges they had run into in their specific areas of expertise in that country a few years before, areas that in the Iraq context had since shown marked improvement.

We may not like it, but we simply have to accept that because of choices that were made (rightly or wrongly) at the level of higher strategy, the real start of the rebuilding of national institutions in Afghanistan was retarded, and probably should really be dated at the earliest from 2005, around the time of Karzai's election, not 2002: two full years after the start of similar American efforts in Iraq. And recall Iraq's real low point, its worst year (so far) was 2007. Which is, my now-somewhat-informed guess is saying, about where we are in Afghanistan today: the dark before the dawn. That's not to say it couldn't get still worse -- we could absolutely still mess this up -- for as Gates takes pains to say, the enemy has yet to cast his vote. But any expectations we should have been doing much better, specifically in security-force-building at this point, given the paucity of resources assigned to the problem in its earliest years, are simply unrealistic.