Perspective of Withdrawal

More Influence

The current dissention between Berlin and Washington arose from the US demand that Berlin station a much larger contingent of German troops in southern Afghanistan. Berlin has so far refused and announced Wednesday the deployment of combat troops in Northern Afghanistan - in the German zone of occupation. This means that the units will be under the command of the German Brig. Gen. Dieter Dammjacob, commanding officer of the local ISAF (International Security Assistance Force). As the German Defense Minister, Franz-Josef Jung announced, the German "Quick Reaction Force," scheduled for deployment, could well take part in combat missions in the south of the country. But the condition is the explicit approbation from Berlin. This exposes the German/US-American contention, concerning the deployment in the south, to be nothing more than a power struggle, in which Berlin seeks to strengthen her influence over the way the war is being waged. Up to now this has been decided principally by the US military.[1]

Don't Overstretch

While the German government is insisting on claiming its prerogative, influential politicians and political advisors are warning not to overstretch the bow - also in view of the US presidential candidates, whose positions vary from the policies of the outgoing president, which is of significance for the future. The probable Republican candidate, John McCain wants "to increase the troops and remove the restraints they are under" in the Hindu Kush.[2] The Democrats are not expected to create such an open confrontation with Germany, yet the word is out that they are also uncompromising on the question of a stronger German participation in combat.[3] The Atlanticist oriented politicians, such as the organizer of the Munich Security Conference, Horst Teltschik, and the foreign policy expert, Hans-Ulrich Klose (SPD) are particularly in favor of stationing German troops in the south. US military officials are threatening to withdraw their troops from NATO command to place them under US command. The German press conciliatingly points out that already "German soldiers - communication, command services - have been operating nearly without interruption since the fall of 2006 in Kandahar, in the south."[4] The Bundeswehr's Tornados are also flying a disproportionately significant number of sorties over the combat area.

Extreme Risk

While the German-American dispute continues, influencing also the Munich Security Conference on the weekend, an abatement of Afghan insurgency is nowhere in sight. Following recent reports on the escalation in the Hindu Kush,[5] the London based "Senlis Council" provided yet another last week. In November 2007, the think-tank had already concluded that Islamist insurgents ("Taliban") have a "permanent presence" in 54 percent, a "substantial presence" in 38 percent and "light presence" in only 8 per cent of the Afghan territory. To prove this assessment, the "Senlis Council" presents a United Nations map showing the various regions of Afghanistan and indicating the potentially dangerous areas for people working for western aid organizations. The "low risk" area is getting smaller, while the so-called aid workers are confronting "high" and even "extreme" risk in a growing portion of the country.[6] According to the think tank, holding presidential elections in the spring of 2009 will require huge financial efforts. Whereas the forces, on hand at the time, could provide security for the elections in 2004, in 2009, election security will also require a substantial increase of NATO troops.

15 Dollars

For the "Senlis Council", which is not in the least opposed to the military intervention, the dramatic worsening of the situation is due to the failure of the western occupying powers. According to the report, the rich donor states' promises of aid "are simply not materializing" in large swathes of the country. "In an already uncertain and tense environment, this sort of breach of trust breeds anger and resentment." Despite having lived in a war situation for nearly thirty years, "many families have seen their livelihoods destroyed swiftly in the last six."[7] The insurgents can "increasingly" abandon methods of intimidation or use of violence, because they can increasingly rally more sympathizers, reports the think tank. The analysis, published Wednesday, mentions the case of an Afghan woman who had lost her husband and all but one of her children in a US bombing attack: "She was given US $15 by the US, but visited by the Taliban who said prayers with her and presented her with a cloth bag containing US $400."

Legendary Politeness

Only two researchers at the Free University of Berlin's (FU Berlin), "Special Research Section" arrived at results deviating from the unanimous situation assessments made by the international experts. According to the study, produced by the political scientist, Prof. Dr. Christoph Zürcher and Jan Koehler, presented to the press also on Wednesday, "the Afghan population" views the "engagement" of the western occupiers "more positive than is realized here in Germany."[8] Three-fourths of the respondents of an opinion poll announced that where they live, the level of security has gotten "much better" since 2005. The poll had been taken around the beginning of 2007 - before the current escalation - and was limited to but four most "low risk" provinces in the country, according to the "Senlis Council." Not even the Bundeswehr agrees with this assessment. Since last fall, alone, more than 30 rockets have been fired at their camp in Kundus.[9] Still these political scientists claim to have learned that 80 percent of the Afghan population attribute the alleged enhancement of their level of security to the western occupiers, who themselves are increasingly coming under fire. The authors did not discuss, whether the "legendary Afghan politeness," described in their analysis - "which makes it unlikely that a direct criticism of foreign forces would be expressed" - could possibly have had something to do with the results in their analysis.[10]

Interested

Also not mentioned was the organizational context of their study, praised as "independent" by the German government. "We are cooperating with the Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development (BMZ)" confirmed the author Christoph Zürcher: " In spite of difficult conditions, we were able to carry out our field research and were given access to important data, thanks to support from the BMZ. On the other hand, the BMZ is interested in our results."[11] Zürcher's Afghanistan analysis was prepared within the framework of the "Special Research Section 700" (Governance in the Framework of Limited Statehood"), in which the FU Berlin is cooperating, among others, with the German Institute for International and Security Affairs, a think tank with very close ties to the government. The objective is to analyze foreign measures taken in "failing states" such as Afghanistan. "The researchers will be no lack of things to do: functioning states are becoming more rare than is commonly supposed," is heard at the FU Berlin. "Depending on which criteria grid one applies, up to one-third of all states are seen as in danger."[12]

Collapse

According to the scientific researchers in Berlin, Afghanistan would surely be among them. But it is questionable, how much longer they will be able to carry out their "field research". Like the western occupiers, the Soviet army was able to "initially stabilize the situation around Kabul and force the mujahedeen back to the mountains" writes the former state secretary of the Defense Ministry, Lothar Rühl. "But the eight-year war of intervention ended at the beginning of 1989 with the Soviet withdrawal followed by the collapse of the communist government in Kabul."[13] Rühl, who explicitly draws parallels to the current occupation, further writes: "after a brief period of relative calm, the Afghan civil war continued and ended with the tyranny of the Taliban."

[1] see also Kampfeinsätze
[2] John McCain: In alter Freundschaft; Süddeutsche Zeitung 07.02.2008
[3] "Bei den Republikanern ist das Rennen mehr oder weniger gelaufen"; Deutschlandfunk 06.02.2008
[4] Jung: Einsatz auch in anderen Regionen Afghanistans möglich; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 07.02.2008
[5] see also Koloniales Modell, Ohne Tabu and Aufstandsbekämpfung
[6], [7] The Senlis Council: Afghanistan - Decision Point 2008; London, February 2008
[8] Internationales Engagement in Afghanistan: Erfolgreicher als gedacht; www.sfb-governance.de/news/C1_Pressekonf.html
[9] Den Charakter des Einsatzes besichtigen; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 01.02.2008
[10] Jan Koehler, Christoph Zürcher: Internationale Akteure in Afghanistan; Pressekonferenz am 6. Februar 2008
[11], [12] Wenn niemand regiert. Ein Forscherteam untersucht den Einfluss externer Akteure auf den afghanischen Staat; www.fu-berlin.de 10.02.2007
[13] Lothar Rühl: 2008 - Jahr der Krisis; Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung 27.12.2007