Mediaboss Marketing

Christopher Miller, pictured on Sept. 24, became acting defense secretary after President Trump fired Mark Esper. Miller is perceived as more loyal to Trump than Esper. Joshua Roberts/Pool/Getty Images hide caption

Christopher Miller, pictured on Sept. 24, became acting defense secretary after President Trump fired Mark Esper. Miller is perceived as more loyal to Trump than Esper.

After a purge at the Pentagon, former national security officials are worried about the fallout if President Trump were to launch an unprovoked military action against Iran or make big changes in Afghanistan in his waning days in office.

That's in addition to the ways that President Trump's refusal to concede and to give President-elect Biden access to intelligence materials are already damaging national security.

"The scenario most national security people are worried about is a military strike on Iran's nuclear facilities," says Kori Schake, who served on George W. Bush's National Security Council and also in senior posts at the Pentagon and the State Department. "Because the 'maximum pressure' campaign that has been the signature of Trump administration foreign policy has very little positive result."

Four senior officials at the Pentagon, including Defense Secretary Mark Esper, were fired or resigned on Monday and Tuesday. Trump loyalists took their place. Two senior officials at the Department of Homeland Security were forced to resign this week as well.

Speaking to Mary Louise Kelly on All Things Considered, Schake says "a number of serious national security people are really worried" that Trump's purge "is putting malleable people in place in order to end his administration with a bang."

Schake cautions that she's skeptical herself that an attack on Iran will happen, mainly because it would require coordination with U.S. allies who would oppose it.

Nicholas Burns, who worked in various jobs including under secretary of state for political affairs during the George W. Bush administration and on the National Security Council for Presidents George H.W. Bush and Clinton, agrees that foreign policy experts are worried about a preemptive Iran strike.

Another fear in the national security community is a rapid withdrawal of forces from Afghanistan, he tells All Things Considered.

"President Trump might try to accelerate the Afghan peace talks, to end the war there, and therefore to withdraw the American military forces in such a way that would be disadvantageous to the Afghan government," Burns says. "I mean, the fear is that President Trump won't be tough minded enough in negotiating with the Taliban."

Top generals and civilians have argued that the situation is currently too volatile to leave Afghanistan quickly.

Both of those scenarios Iran and Afghanistan "would have a direct impact on our national security a year from now, two years from now, and certainly have an impact on President-elect Biden's team as they come in in early 2021," Burns says.

Listen to the full audio interview with Kori Schake and Nicholas Burns at the audio link above.

See original here:
Former National Security Officials Worry What Trump Could Do In Iran And Afghanistan - NPR

Americas large military presence in Afghanistan may be finally coming to an end after almost 20 years at war.

Decisions on when and how the U.S. will significantly reduce its presence will play out early next year, national security analysts say. Almost 800,000 U.S. troops have been deployed to Afghanistan over the last two decades, and more than 2,400 died fighting a war widely ignored by the American public.

Washington laid out the conditions for an exit in a February agreement with the Taliban. That agreement said all U.S. troops would be out in 18 months if the Taliban honored a commitment to fight terrorist groups, particularly Islamic State, and not to attack international forces.

We are likely to see the two alternatives that the U.S. is choosing between are: either a major reduction in the context of peace talks, or a major reduction without regard to what follows in its wake, Johnny Walsh, a senior expert on Afghanistan at the United States Institute of Peace, said in an interview. I do not think there is a world where we spend many more years robustly engaged in Afghanistan.

Banaras Khan/AFP via Getty Images

Activists of the Jamiat Ulema-e Islam Nazryate party rally in Quetta on March 1, 2020 to celebrate the U.S.-Taliban troop-withdrawal accord and timetable.

Ending the roughly $1 trillion, two-decade war would be significant after the U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan has been particularly durable: Presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump both pledged to end the conflict and, so far, failed.

President-elect Joe Biden said he would maintain a small troop presence of about 2,000 in Afghanistan, likely special operations forces focused on counter-terrorism missions. As vice president in 2009, Biden unsuccessfully resisted military leaders push to deploy tens of thousands of U.S. troops to Afghanistan. That meant in 2010, there were about 100,000 U.S. troops in that country.

Biden will end the forever wars in Afghanistan and the Middle East, which have cost us untold blood and treasure, according to his campaign website. As he has long argued, Biden will bring the vast majority of our troops home from Afghanistan and narrowly focus our mission on Al-Qaeda and ISIS.

Trump, meanwhile, has laid the groundwork for an exit strategy as his and Bidens views intersect on Afghanistan. He called for an end to the era of endless wars, pushed for a drastic reduction to about 4,500 troops by the end of this month and has suggested all troops could come home by the end of the year. His national security adviser, Robert OBrien, however, insisted that there will still be 2,500 Americans there come January 2021.

We are effectively leaving, said Anthony Cordesman, the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. If its down to figures Ive seen like 2,000 to 2,500 by this spring, it wont matter because theyre so small that you cant sustain a meaningful combat support role.

Daily enemy-initiated attacks in Afghanistan were 50% higher from July to September compared with the previous quarter, according to the latest report by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction.

Attacks over the three-month period were also characterized as above seasonal norms by U.S. military leaders in Afghanistan. There were 2,561 civilian casualties, including 876 deaths and 1,685 injuries, during the period 43% more than the previous quarter, though 36% less than the same period in 2019.

There is a good chance that you can go down pretty low, perhaps to the low four-digits or high three-digits, and still be able to do some counterterrorism and to prevent the Taliban from comprehensively winning the war, Walsh said.

But there is a cost of every troop reduction, Walsh said. At some point the U.S. will lose the ability to rescue provincial capitals or help major operations. Smaller troop numbers mean counterterrorism would be less effective, with fewer capabilities, and you can train fewer Afghan security forces, he said.

Regardless of intent, there will be some challenging first six months to a year for the Biden administration because a potentially Republican-led Senate would make it hard for Biden to pursue his foreign policy agenda, Loren DeJonge Schulman an adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security (CNAS), said during an event to address the national security future under a Biden administration.

Congress is already setting some restrictions for troop reductions in Afghanistan. The House defense authorization bill for fiscal 2021 (H.R. 6395) calls for the administration to submit interagency reports and certifications before drawdowns below troop levels of 8,000 and 4,000. The secretary of defense may waive the reporting requirement if it is vital to U.S. national security interests or necessary because of an imminent and extraordinary threat to military service personnel.

The Senate defense policy bill (S. 4049) warns that a precipitous withdrawal of troops without effective, countervailing efforts to secure gains in Afghanistan may allow violent extremist groups to regenerate, threatening the security of the Afghan people and creating a security vacuum that could destabilize the region and provide ample safe haven for extremist groups seeking to conduct external attacks.

Congress hasnt finished a compromise version of the annual defense policy legislation, but leaders expect to vote on the final version in early December.

President Barack Obama, who pledged to end the conflict, announced three troop surges in 2009 including an additional 30,000 personnel in December that brought the total to its high point of 100,000, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Obama said he would begin withdrawing those forces by 2011. He later decided to keep 9,800 troops in the country in 2015, reversing a vow to reduce the number to 1,000, the CRS reported. By the time Obama left office, about 8,400 troops were still deployed.

Trump was a long-time critic of the conflict before being elected in 2016. But in his first year he announced a new Afghanistan strategy that re-emphasized the U.S. commitment and provided no firm timeline for a withdrawal.

My original instinct was to pull out and, historically, I like following my instincts. But all my life Ive heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office, Trump said in an address on the strategy in August 2017.

The Pentagon is on track to have 4,500 troops in Afghanistan by the end of November, Pentagon spokesman Maj. Rob Lodewick said in an emailed statement.

But Lodewick said the military wouldnt speculate on future troop numbers or timelines, including Trumps tweet saying troops could leave by Christmas, because any additional drawdown will be based on conditions in the country.

The Department of Defense continues prudent planning to achieve the commander-in-chiefs intent of ending the war in a responsible manner that protects our forces, aligns with our coalition partners and secures U.S. interests, Lodewick wrote. The biggest condition currently impacting the peace process is the level of violence perpetuated by the Taliban.

The U.S.-Taliban agreement signed in February stipulates that the full withdrawal of U.S. forces in May 2021 is dependent on reduced violence. Gen. Scott Miller, the top commander in Afghanistan, recently warned that Taliban attacks could derail the peace talks.

This is not a blind or blanket commitment and remains contingent upon the Taliban upholding their own commitments to the agreement, Lodewick wrote.

The U.S. spends $5 billion a year just to keep civil society functioning, in Afghanistan, said Jason Dempsey, an adjunct senior fellow at CNAS. We do need a reset. Weve gone four years with no real strategy at all.

Congress appropriated about $978 billion, or an average of $49 billion annually, for the war in Afghanistan from fiscal 2001 though fiscal 2020, Brown University tallies of war costs have found.

Historically, troop levels in Afghanistan and the contracting dollars spent to support them are highly correlated, a BGOV analysis shows.

Each U.S. soldier, sailor, airman and Marine in Afghanistan generates about $184,000 in annual defense contract costs, principally for a variety of support services, according to the analysis. Any drop in contract spending is likely to lag behind the fall in troop numbers by several months. Some of the decline may be offset by increased spending to support Afghan forces as they adapt to fighting with less U.S. involvement.

To contact the reporters on this story: Roxana Tiron in Washington at rtiron@bgov.com; Travis J. Tritten at ttritten@bgov.com

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Robin Meszoly at rmeszoly@bgov.com

Here is the original post:
An End to the $1 Trillion War in Afghanistan May Be on Horizon - Bloomberg Government

LONDON, Nov 12 2020 (IPS) - As if four decades of war were not enough, then came the pandemic.

For each of the past five years, Afghanistan has been identified by the United Nations as the worlds deadliest country for children and, despite progress made in peace talks between the government and the Taliban, child and youth casualties from the ongoing conflict continue to mount in 2020.

Education itself has come under fire, with hundreds of attacks on schools and teachers. A 2018 joint report by the Afghanistan Ministry of Education and UNICEF, estimated that as many as 3.7 million children in Afghanistan were out of school, 60 per cent of them girls.

Against this backdrop, Education Cannot Wait (ECW) the global fund launched at the 2016 World Humanitarian Summit to deliver quality education for vulnerable children and youth in countries affected by armed conflicts, forced displacement, climate-induced disasters and protracted crises selected Afghanistan as one of the first countries to roll out a Multi-Year Resilience Programme (MYRP). The in-country Steering Committee formed to oversee implementation of the programme appointed management of the MYRP to UNICEF as a grantee.

Sarthak Pal, ECW project coordinator for UNICEF in Kabul, says Afghanistans MYRP was designed to focus on out of school children, by setting up community-based education (CBE) classes close to where they live. Classes are arranged mostly in private homes and sometimes in mosques for those who cannot make the long journey to the nearest school.

Most of these out of school children live in remote, rural and hard to reach places, Pal told IPS from Kabul. Pal explained that focusing on out of school children was a context-specific choice for Afghanistan, and may differ from MYRPs in other countries with their own unique contexts.

Watch video Keeping education alive in Afghanistan

The first year of the MYRP with teaching starting in May 2019 saw some 3,600 classes established in nine of Afghanistans 34 provinces. This required newly recruited teachers, 46 per cent of whom are women, to teach 122,000 children. Nearly 60 per cent of the enrolled children are girls.

When Education Cannot Wait came to Afghanistan in 2018 there were 3.7 million out of school children. These were the children and youth left furthest behind. Today, results from our multi-year resilience investment in Afghanistan are among the most promising in our global investment portfolio, especially for girls access to education now reaching the target of 60 percent of our investment. This shows how we can achieve education outcomes for the most marginalized children and youth in complex crisis settings by bringing together humanitarian and development actors under the leadership of the Ministry of Education. The children and youth of Afghanistan, the Afghan girls, deserve no less, said the ECW Director, Yasmine Sherif.

One new pupil in the classes is Khalid*, an eight-year-old boy with a permanent foot disability, who was displaced by conflict from Afghanistans Kunar province to Nangarhar province. Previously deprived of education by war and poverty, Khalid now attends a CBE class with access to free education and books. His teacher praises his enthusiasm and creativity and says Khalid has gone from being illiterate to learning how to read, write and draw.

The closest school is 4 kilometres away from where Khalid lives, too far for him to go, but now he has a classroom just 300 metres from his home. Both Khalids life, and the life of his family, have been transformed.

Khalids nine-year-old sister Hosna is able to attend an all-girls government school close-by. In the evening, Khalid and I study together at home and help each other in our lessons, she says, expressing how astonished she was by Khalids rapid improvement and capabilities. Khalid is so intellectually improved and motivated.

Bringing education closer to home helps secure the backing of both the community and the shuras (school councils), and is particularly effective in addressing barriers to girls education, such as long distances, a lack of female teachers and safety concerns. The role of School Management Shuras, or councils, has been important in building a sense of community ownership, although there are barriers to girls participation remains in some provinces.

ECW classes also reach children in camps set up for those displaced by conflict. Feizia Salahuddin quietly recounts in an IPS video how three of her siblings were killed. The 12-year-old girl also lost her mother. We face so many hardships here, she says. But then a smile appears when she describes going to ECW-supported CBE classes in Herat. I love to study. It makes me happy, she says.

An additional hammer blow to education this year came not from bombs or landmines but COVID-19. The government ordered all schools closed in March 2020, and CBE classes could only start reopening recently. Children affected by the impact of COVID-19 school closures now also faced increased vulnerability to recruitment by parties to the conflict, particularly boys. The crisis also exacerbated existing vulnerabilities of girls to child marriage and teenage pregnancy.

Dave Mariano, Head of Communications for Afghanistan for Save the Children International, an implementing partner for ECW, said the government had initially decided CBE classes could continue, but subsequently said teaching would have to continue via radio, television and internet, to which millions of children do not have access. Fortunately, classes eventually started to reopen with appropriate COVID-19 safety measures.

The reopening of CBEs required a lot of coordination to ensure that necessary provisions were in place to safely reopen, such as the availability of PPE, sanitisers, and even general public awareness on how to mitigate COVID risks through basic hygiene and other practices, Mariano told IPS.

Despite the challenges, UNICEF is already looking ahead to extend the MYRP, supported in this goal by the Ministry of Education and donors. Sweden is the largest in-country donor in Afghanistan, closely followed by Switzerland. However, UNICEF says the MYRP remains grossly under-funded with a 70 per cent funding gap across three years.

We are advocating that three years of MYRP is not enough. The primary school cycle in Afghanistan is six years. We cant leave the children half-way through. That is our main advocacy agenda now, said Pal.

ECW has given priority in Afghanistan to improving education for girls with a focus on female teacher recruitment. This is being achieved in Herat, where 97 per cent of teachers are women and 83 per cent of students in accelerated learning classes are girls.

For girls like Feizia Salahuddin, this means a chance to start rebuilding lives shattered by conflict and displacement, giving a sense that through a classroom and her textbooks, she is once more part of a community.

I get nervous when I get called to the blackboard, but my teachers and classmates support me, Feizia says. That is why I like them. They cooperate with me and teach me.

*Names have been changed in accordance with child safeguarding and communications policies.

Read the rest here:
Despite Conflict and COVID-19, Children Still Dream to Continue Their Education in Afghanistan - Afghanistan - ReliefWeb

KABUL, Afghanistan An Afghan-born U.S. Army veteran has turned to the military and online communities for help after years of waiting for officials to act on asylum applications he filed for his family in Afghanistan.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban hold your entire family responsible for whatever you do, Said Noor told Stars and Stripes in a phone interview from Texas.

The 32-year-old applied for asylum for his father, mother, six brothers and two sisters in June 2018, about four years after moving to the U.S. in 2014 on a special immigrant visa, which he was given after being threatened and attacked for working as a military linguist for several years.

Since then, he said, his familys situation has grown worse, but hes had little news from the authorities about the status of the applications.

We had to take my sister and little brother out of school. The family is just stuck in the house. Theyre not even able to go buy their own groceries; someone has to bring everything to them, he said.

Late last month, Noor posted a petition on the Change.org website, seeking help from lawmakers on Capitol Hill.

Because of my previous work and having proudly served in the US military, myself and my family have been constantly targeted by terrorists, he wrote in the petition.

As a disabled veteran and a proud American, I am kindly asking you to help share this petition, so that together we can save (the) lives of my family, and get this petition to the right authorities to seek asylum for my family and bring them to the United States, he wrote.

His large family lives in the eastern province of Khost, where Noor was born. Khost borders Pakistan and is a stronghold of the Taliban-affiliated Haqqani network, which is also linked to al-Qaida and other extremist groups.

Noor gave up his Afghan passport and enlisted in the Army soon after arriving in the U.S. in 2014. He deployed to Afghanistan once during his four years in the military, where his hearing was impaired by a rocket attack.

He joined the military to show appreciation for the country he would do anything for, he said.

But it was his service as an American soldier that put his family in Khost in even graver danger than when he started working in Afghanistan as a linguist for the U.S. military in 2007, he said. The family was harassed and menaced back then, but the biggest threat to their lives came two years ago when Noor returned to Afghanistan as a U.S. citizen after separating from the Army.

We had a large get-together and somebody brought a motorcycle and parked it in front of my house, Noor said. When I stepped outside with some relatives and friends, it went off.

Noor believes he was the target of the blast, which killed five people, including two Afghan soldiers, and wounded over a dozen others, including Noor and four members of his family.

His brother Sayed Mohammad said the attack still weighs on his and the rest of the familys minds.

We still feel were in danger and weve started doing night surveillance of our property, Mohammad said in a telephone interview from Khost. All my brothers and I take turns, night by night.

The family worries not only about their personal safety but also the security situation in the country, particularly about what will happen in Afghanistan once international forces withdraw, Mohammad said. Under a deal signed in February by the U.S. and Taliban, all foreign forces could leave by May.

The recent firing of Defense Secretary Mark Esper and President Donald Trumps appointment of outspoken Afghan war critic, retired Army Col. Douglas Macgregor, as a senior Pentagon advisor have added to concerns among Afghans and Americans that the U.S. might accelerate the troop withdrawal, despite escalating violence around the country. Trump said last month that he wanted U.S. troops home by Christmas, although military officials quickly back-pedaled that statement.

The uncertainty over Afghanistans future and continuing threats against his family have left Noor feeling that the asylum applications for his family are at a critical phase.

As of Friday, nearly 1,600 people had signed his petition on Change.org.

He is a brother of ours and has served this great nation, wrote Brian Erickson of Pendleton, Ind., who added his name soon after Noor posted the petition three weeks ago. Show the veteran community that the government gives a damn about us and our loved ones.

Steven Morse of Quincy, Mass., was one of several signers who said they had served with Noor. Hes the definition of a true American who always chose the hard right over the easy wrong, Morse wrote.

Others, like Eileen Szczawinski of Shillington, Penn., said they signed because the U.S. owes Noor a debt of gratitude.

This man put his life on the line to help American soldiers, she wrote. Now its our turn to help him and his family.

Once the petition has reached its goal of 10,000 signatures, Noor plans to send it to Congress in the hope that lawmakers might speed up the asylum process.

A lot of people dont realize how bad the situation is in Afghanistan, Noor said. Some people desperately need to get of there. My family are some of those people because I put them in danger by supporting the U.S.

Zubair Babakarkhail contributed to this report.

wellman.phillip@stripes.comTwitter: @pwwellman

Said Noor poses for a photo while serving in the U.S. Army. Noor enlisted in the military after coming to the U.S. in 2014 on a special immigrant visa, which he was given for his work as a linguist in Afghanistan. He launched an online petition last month to garner support for his application for his family to be granted asylum in the U.S.COURTESY PHOTO

Excerpt from:
Army veteran seeks help as asylum petitions for family in Afghanistan languish - Stars and Stripes

Fatima Sultani, 18 a member of Hikeventures mountaineering team, excercises on a hilltop in Kabul, Afghanistan September 11, 2020. Picture taken September 11, 2020. REUTERS/Mohammad Ismail

US President Donald Trumps last-minute shuffling of senior personnel at the Pentagon, amid what is at best an uncertain endgame for his administration, has renewed speculation that he will attempt to complete the withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan before Christmas, or in any event before he leaves office.

It is difficult to understand what benefit he, or those around him, might believe would be derived from such an impetuous, damaging, and risky course of action. But proceedingindeed speedingdown that road would leave a lasting stain not only on the president and his administration, but on our nation. Doing so would end any hope for a decent and responsible peace agreement in Afghanistan, and would also put to rest any prospect that Trumps legacy might include taking credit for the Afghan peace process that he and his Afghanistan team took the lead in creating.

Right now, US forces are already at their lowest level since the early stages of the US and coalition campaign in Afghanistan. These forces are accompanied on the ground by declining, but still substantial, numbers of NATO and coalition forces. Those partner forces, it bears recalling, rely on the US military for key aspects of support that enable their presence. Were the order given to withdraw US forces completely within four to eight weeks, the result would be not an orderly, safe withdrawal, but an evacuation: hasty, ill-planned, and risky.

The deployment of our military force is a complex enterprise, requiring extensive infrastructure, equipment, and support. It cannot be turned on and off like a switch, and withdrawing is just as complicated an exercise. A complete but planned and orderly withdrawal (which we oppose outside the context of a peace agreement) would be damaging enough. The spectacle of US troops abandoning facilities and equipment, leaving the field in Afghanistan to the Taliban and ISIS, would be broadcast around the world as a symbol of US defeat and humiliation, and of victory for Islamist extremism.

Those who wish the United States harm will toast with champagne or tea, while those who wish the United States well will be dismayed and have their suspicions of Washington as an unreliable partner reinforced. Our allies would need to depart from Afghanistan under similar, ignominious circumstances, leading to heightened concern in many capitals about whether they would want to join the United States in coalition security efforts in the futuresomething vital to our own security.

And, to underscore the obvious, the United States would be consigning to an even more perilous fate the many Afghan men and women who share the US vision of a peaceful Afghanistana partner in combatting violent Islamist extremism and posing no threat to its neighborsand who have worked with us to advance that vision.

Currently, there is no need for an abrupt decision on withdrawal and the president can claim credit both for having lowered the presence of US forces in Afghanistan to historic levels and for opening the door for peace talks. It is ironic that anyone would consider it beneficial to the president or the country to imperil that legacy and US security, in the process dishonoring the sacrifice of the brave American men and women who fought there.

We hope that speculation about a rushed departure is unfounded, or that those who might be tempted by the prospect will conclude that the damage done would far outweigh whatever benefit they might anticipate. Let the president take credit for what has been achieved, and leave the next stage for Afghanistan to the next administration.

Ambassador James Cunningham was US deputy ambassador to Afghanistan in 2011 and US ambassador to Afghanistan from 2012-2014. He is also a nonresident senior fellow with the Atlantic Councils South Asia Center.

Ambassador John Negroponte was US deputy secretary of state from 2007-2009 and director of national intelligence from 2005-2007.

Ambassador Ronald E. Neumann was US ambassador to Afghanistan from 2005-2007.

Ambassador Hugo Llorens was US assistant chief of mission in Afghanistan from2012-2013 and charge daffairs from 2016-2017.

AmbassadorRichard Olson was US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan (2015-2016) and previously served at the US Embassy in Afghanistan (2011-2012) as well as US ambassador to the UAE andto Pakistan.

Ambassador Earl Anthony Wayne was US deputy ambassador to Afghanistan and coordinating director for development from 2009-2011. He is also a nonresident senior fellow in the Atlantic Councils GeoEconomics Center.

Thu, Nov 12, 2020

With the Taliban feeling increasingly emboldened, President-elect Biden must adopt a new and more practicable strategy for the region that is not based solely on military and security compulsions but includes future-oriented economic and political plans, working with international organizations and partners to achieve common goals.

New AtlanticistbyShuja Nawaz

Sat, Oct 10, 2020

An accelerated US withdrawal will effectively mean abandoning the fruits of two years of determined US diplomacy with the Taliban, Afghan partners in Kabul, our allies, and regional and international partners to get the Afghan parties to the negotiating table.

New AtlanticistbyJames Cunningham, John Negroponte, Ronald Neuman, Hugo Llorens, Richard Olson, and Earl Anthony Wayne

Originally posted here:
Rushing for the exits in Afghanistan would leave a lasting stain on America - Atlantic Council