TRUMP BOASTS OF NEW AFGHAN PLAN – BUT CAN IT WORK WHERE OTHERS FAILED?
▶ Surrounded by generals, the president must come up with a successful solution that eluded Obama and Bush
Donald Trump says decisions have been made on a new course of action for the US in Afghanistan, after he met generals at Camp David on Friday.
“Important day spent at Camp David with our very talented generals and military leaders. Many decisions made, including on Afghanistan,” Mr Trump teased in a tweet on Saturday.
He provided no further details on the strategy his administration would pursue in the 16-year war.
After the meeting, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said the president had been “briefed extensively by his national security team on a new strategy to protect America’s interests in South Asia”.
“The president is studying and considering his options, and will make an announcement to the American people, to our allies and partners, and to the world at the appropriate time,” Ms Sanders said.
Stephen Tankel, an adjunct senior fellow at the Centre for a New American Security think tank in Washington, said the administration’s delay in revealing its strategy for Afghanistan had not gone unnoticed by those in the region.
“This strategy is certainly overdue, well beyond when the administration said it would be ready,” Mr Tankel said.
He said that until the Camp David meeting, Mr Trump had seemed disengaged from Afghanistan, “which makes the delay in presenting a strategy worse because our partners and adversaries in the region have noticed”.
US secretary of state Rex Tillerson, defence secretary Jim Mattis and national security adviser H R McMaster were at the meeting, as were senior intelligence agency officials and military and diplomatic aides.
But the absence of Mr Trump’s son-in-law and adviser, Jared Kushner, suggested that Mr Trump was leaning towards the recommendations of generals in his government, who have been backing a modest troop increase alongside a political process.
Mr Kushner had been flirting with the idea of privatising American involvement in the war, swapping government troops for contractors in line with a proposal by Erik Prince, the founder of Blackwater, a private military and security service provider now known as Academi.
The plan would mean sending 5,500 contractors to be embedded with Afghan security forces, and appointing a viceroy to oversee the whole endeavour”, according to The
Atlantic magazine.
Mr Tankel said outsourcing the battle in Afghanistan was the “worst of all options” for the Trump administration.
“Whatever the potential marginal benefits of Erik Prince’s plan financially, the costs outweigh them,” he said.
“His scheme would wreak havoc on our foreign policy and military apparatus by alienating allies and partners and providing our enemies with a great recruiting material.”
Mr Tankel also questioned the loyalty of a private force.
“Is it for the US or for the highest bidder? That’s the problem with mercenaries,” he said.
He outlined three alternative strategies Mr Trump could take.
First, he could withdraw from Afghanistan entirely; second, he could delay making a decision for the foreseeable future; or third, he could increase the number of US forces in Afghanistan alongside a realistic diplomatic strategy aimed at reaching a political settlement.
The last option has the support of the generals around Mr Trump, including Mr Mattis, who led US central command before retiring in 2013, and Mr McMaster, who served with central command during the Iraq war in the early 2000s and led an anti-corruption and transparency task force in Afghanistan.
Mr Tankel said that the main argument in favour of a limited troop increase is that if it were open-ended and tied to a realistic political strategy, then it could help to press the Taliban for a negotiated settlement acceptable to the US.
The US has about 8,400 troops in Afghanistan.
Mr Trump, as have much of the American public, has expressed his fatigue over the longest foreign war in American history and the inability of two presidents before him to defeat the Taliban.
A recent poll conducted by the Morning Consult digital media company and Politico magazine showed that 23 per cent of Americans believe the US is winning the war in Afghanistan, while 38 per cent believe it is losing. The same poll showed that 37 per cent of Americans support a gradual withdrawal from Afghanistan, while 24 per cent support the status quo and only 20 per cent support an increase in troop numbers.
More than 2,000 US soldiers have died in Afghanistan and the civilian death toll is more than 31,000, figures from Brown University show.
Yet, with the emergence and rise of ISIL in the war between the Afghan government and militants and a stronger Taliban, “the major risk related to withdrawal is that Afghanistan once again becomes a safe haven for international terrorists”, Mr Tankel said.
“There are also concerns about rival nations filling the void or major refugee flows if Afghanistan collapsed,” he said.
Mr Trump may also be looking at replacing the top US commander in the war, Gen John Nicholson.
He was not at Camp David, and when Mr Mattis was asked if Gen Nicholson’s job was safe, his response of “ask the president” was not exactly a statement of confidence.
The administration’s Afghanistan review is also looking at America’s wider policy towards the country, beyond military involvement, including more investment in its natural resources.
“Mr Trump is right to ask tough questions” about Afghanistan, Mr Tankel said.
But he warned that “looking for an easy way out and having a knee-jerk opposition to anything that resembles a Barack Obama policy, are a bad combination in terms of strategy making”.
This strategy is certainly overdue, well beyond when the administration said it would be ready STEPHEN TANKEL Adjunct senior fellow at the Centre for a New American Security