Afghanistan needs more troops

The refusal by NATO countries to commit further troops to Afghanistan is a failure both to accept responsibility and take advantage of a situation. It is essentially cutting and running from a salvageable situation. The troops already here are left stranded, unsure of their nation's position with regards to the country and with regards to them. To Afghanistan it is a shrug of indifference.

How else can the refusal be seen but a failure to make a decision? If there is no intention of staying, no intention of helping a hopeful and willing people build a country that is not the playground for extremists, then why leave any troops here at all? If there is any intention of stabilising the country by providing the security upon which development can take place, it is clear that more troops are needed.

Attacks gain intensity every day, covering more and more ground. Murderous intent is spreading beyond the southern provinces. Two days ago the governor of Paktia was killed in a suicide bomb, and when his funeral was targeted four people died. Three days earlier, a car bomber shocked the usually peacefull Kabul when he attacked a Humvee 200 feet from the American Embassy in Kabul.

These are successes for the fighters who would return Afghanistan to a land of religious intolerance, oppression of women, suppression of education, and terrorist recruitment and training. That is not what Afghans deserve. Most Afghans are happy for the coalition presence and considering the history of invaders and the strength with which they have been opposed, that fact alone is a sign of the possibilities that exist here.

It is precisely this sort of inaction that allowed the Taliban and insurgents to regroup and flourish.

The insecurity in the south has repercussions far beyond the thousands of deaths, innocent, coalition, or insurgent. Lack of access to healthcare has seen Polio cases rise six fold over the past year in the south.

As local, ethnic, and tribal militias see the stability of the country disintegrate they are more likely to stake out their own land and territorial battles will once again scar the land.

In a country of 25 million, there are around 10 million AKs. In weapons collection programs, obsolete ammunition and clumsy weapons have been collected in abundance. Few AKs or their ammunition sits in disarmament depots. These guns have for the most part gone cold, but they are still loaded. Every hint of instability brings another rifle out of the home and onto the street. In a war, it's primarily every man for himself.

That same mentality is affecting business and development. Instead of having faith that economic progress will benefit people, those in charge of administering finances are more willing to keep money in their own pockets. This is admittedly also fuelled by an attitude cemented over two decades. The fact that the same thinking is engaged in these supposedly peaceful times says a lot.

There will be effects which we feel at home. The poppy harvest this year will see Afghanistan produce more than 90% of the world's heroin. The UN estimates that figures for overdose deaths will rise along with the supply. NATO troops, unable to provide protection from drug lords and stability for farmers to develop alternate livelihoods, have decided not to focus on the poppy problem and yet it is at the centre of the instability.

In a world where instability is a source of conflict, and ideology a way of organising and categorizing fighters, access to resources is what conflict is over. The resources here are the vast revenues to be gained from the heroin trade. Stability would diminish that income for a world wide network of traffickers, some of whom are Afghan officials.


Instability is also increasing the dependency not only on the projects of foreign organisations, but on their very presence. Many of the educated Afghans, or at least the English speaking ones, are employed by UN agencies, NGOs and contractors. The economy remains stunted through fear of investment in an unsafe region, as corruption prompted by short-term mentality of war flourishes. Infrastructure projects are put on hold because contractor safety can't be guaranteed and because factions fighting for power block the development plans. As long as the instability that is at the root of these continues, there will be no outlet for Afghans employed by foreign services. As aid money gradually dwindles out, these Afghans, among whom the best will towards the west exists, will be joining the queues outside embassies, clamouring to escape.



Afghanistan is the opportunity that these leaders have to prove that they believe in their values beyond the narrow constraints of the systems that gave them power. At stake is the success of democracy, of tolerance, and freedom. If there is any belief that these are goods that apply outside Europe, the hope must not be allowed to fade.