Monday 27 December 2010

Deterioration In Afghanistan - UN Map Evidence

Internal United Nations maps show a marked deterioration of the security situation in Afghanistan during this year's fighting season, countering the Obama administration's optimistic assessments of military progress.
Two confidential "residual risk accessibility" maps, one compiled by the U.N. at the annual fighting season's start in March 2010 and another at its tail end in October illustrate the point above. The maps, used by U.N. personnel to gauge the dangers of travel and running programs, divide the country's districts into 4 categories: very high risk, high risk, medium risk and low risk.
In the October map, just as in March's, nearly all of southern Afghanistan—the focus of the coalition's military offensives—remained painted the red of "very high risk," with no noted improvements. At the same time, the green belt of "low risk" districts in northern, central and western Afghanistan shriveled.
The U.N.'s October map upgraded to "high risk" 16 previously more secure districts in Badghis, Sar-e-Pul, Balkh, Parwan, Baghlan, Samangan, Faryab, Laghman and Takhar provinces; only two previously "high risk" districts, one in Kunduz and one in Herat province, received a safer rating.
A Pentagon report mandated by Congress drew similar conclusions when it was released last month. It said attacks were up 70% since 2009 and threefold since 2007. As a result of the violence, the Taliban still threaten the Afghan government, according to the report. The White House's National Security Council declined to comment.
The director of communications for the U.N. in Afghanistan, Kieran Dwyer, said he couldn't comment on classified maps. But, he said, "in the course of 2010, the security situation in many parts of the country has become unstable where it previously had not been so. There is violence happening in more parts of the country, and this is making the delivery of humanitarian services more difficult for the U.N. and other organizations. But we are continuing to deliver."
U.S.-led coalition forces operate in Afghanistan under a U.N. Security Council mandate, and the U.N. works hand-in-hand with the coalition on building up Afghan government institutions. The Taliban have repeatedly attacked U.N. buildings and personnel, labeling the U.N. an instrument of American imperialism.
A senior coalition official, asked if security in Afghanistan has deteriorated this year, said that coalition forces "have taken the offensive and are making deliberate and steady progress, though progress right now is still fragile and reversible."
He highlighted advances in Kandahar, Helmand and around Kabul, and said that a new program to raise local police forces "will reduce the insurgents' ability to intimidate the population" in areas where regular troop density isn't sufficient to maintain security.
The assessments of the U.N. accessibility maps, based on factors such as insurgent activity, political stability, coalition operations and community acceptance, contrast with President Barack Obama's recent statements that hail the coalition's progress in the war.
"Today we can be proud that there are fewer areas under Taliban control and more Afghans have a chance to build a more hopeful future," Mr. Obama told American troops during a visit last month. Most of the 30,000 U.S. surge troops deployed this year were sent to the Taliban heartland in the southern Kandahar and Helmand provinces, where they have been able to capture key insurgent strongholds. Though no longer under uncontested Taliban control, most of these areas remain a war zone, with frequent shootings and bombings.

As the coalition focused on the south, the insurgents fanned out during the year to the north and the west. In recent months, the Taliban seized control in areas of dozens of districts in those previously secure parts of the country, taking advantage of the sparse international troop presence there.
Many non-government organizations operating in Afghanistan dispute that any progress has been made by the coalition this year. According to preliminary statistics compiled by the Afghanistan NGO Safety Office, which provides advice and coordination to NGOs working in the country, the number of insurgent-initiated attacks rose 66% in 2010 from the previous year.
"The country as a whole is dramatically worse off than a year ago, both in terms of the insurgency's geographical spread and its rate of attacks," said Nic Lee, director of the Afghanistan NGO Safety Office. "Vast amounts of the country remain insecure for the unarmed civilians. 
So much for Obama's rose-tinted 'review'. He reads out the Pentagon briefings as if they were factual.

4 comments:

  1. Proof and logic no longer matters.

    The fog of war always has a light rosy tint to it.
    At least to the masters of war that are wearing the spin meister glasses.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The Pentagon - particularly Gates - would tell you the last three months have seen significant gains. October is already too far in the past to compare, they say. But while Washington claims to understand its "gains" are reversible, it's acting like it's never seen the Taliban's down cycle.

    And if the Taliban did evacuate in the face of Obama and Petraeus's surge, there's a large degree of intelligence in this decision. It wasn't about to repeat the post-9/11 invasion, when its ranks were nearly exhausted by U.S. air-strikes. Though the Taliban has taken a few shots, it's also preserved the bulk of its fighting strength for next year.

    ReplyDelete
  3. 'Though the Taliban has taken a few shots, it's also preserved the bulk of its fighting strength for next year.' A key point. 2011 is the pivotal year IMO and I am sure the Taliban tacticians know this. There is the 10 year psychological threshold. Support in America will wane still further. Resources and logistics will loom larger for the western countries. Two or three large casualty hits suffered by NATO would see the whole sand-built house of spin collapse in months.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Who is to say that the Taliban will now not move to --lets say-- Tajikistan.
    Inside of the Grand Chess Game is a sub game.
    It is called hop-skip-and jump.
    This is what I believe is the strategy of the West.
    They will Hop [invade] a country.
    Skip certain necessities[winning hearts and minds].
    Jump [keep a boot print] in a certain country.
    And then hop to their next target.
    Iraq, and Afghanistan are boot prints for them.

    The main aim is still the natural resources, their transit [choke points], containing and encroaching Russia, and China.

    These are desperate last moves by a dying Empire that has nothing more to add to the world.

    ReplyDelete