Flexible scheme

JOHN CHERIAN

Member-countries agree to a phased transfer of responsibility to Afghan forces before the withdrawal of troops in 2014.

Afghanistan was the major item on the agenda at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit held in Lisbon for two days from November 18. It is no secret that the majority of NATO members want to withdraw their troops at the earliest from that country. Public opinion in their countries is strongly against the war in Afghanistan. Near the summit venue, thousands of protesters shouted, "Peace, yes. NATO, no!"

United States President Barack Obama and other senior heads of state in the West had earlier in the year mentioned 2014 as the deadline for the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan. But in recent months Obama has had an apparent change of mind given the military facts on the ground in the country.

Military surge

Despite his much-hyped military surge, the Taliban has held its ground and seems to be in fact expanding its influence to areas where its presence has been insignificant. To add to Obama's and NATO's problems, President Hamid Karzai has once again become vocal in his demand for a speedy withdrawal of foreign forces and a halt to the targeting of civilians in NATO's counter-insurgency operations.

However, at the summit, despite their misgivings, America's European partners publicly supported the Obama administration's latest game plan in Afghanistan. They agreed to a phased transfer of responsibility to the Afghan forces before starting the military withdrawal in 2014. At the same time, NATO leaders issued a warning that the 2014 deadline was not sacrosanct and was dependent on the Afghan Government making sufficient progress in maintaining security.

Public opinion

Talking to the media at the end of the summit, Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen stated categorically that NATO forces would stay on after the transition 'in a supporting role' in Afghanistan. In order to mollify European public opinion, Rasmussen said that he did not visualize NATO's International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) playing a combat role in Afghanistan beyond 2014.

Many NATO member-countries have already withdrawn their troops from Afghanistan. Others have insisted that they will be completely out of the country by 2014. The US' closest ally, Britain, has said that the last of its combat troops will be out by 2015. A long-term security agreement between NATO and the Afghan Government was signed during the summit. NATO officials have been saying for some time that a large number of NATO troops will stay behind after 2014 to prop up the Karzai Government and to train Afghan forces. "To put it simply, the Taliban or anyone else who wants to wait us out, they can forget it. We will stay as long as it takes to finish the job," Rasmussen told reporters.

His views may not find many takers in European capitals. Before the Lisbon summit, the newly appointed French Defence Minister Alain Juppe had said that Afghanistan was "a trap for all the parties involved there".

Hand over areas

Juppe, who has served as Prime Minister earlier, also said that his country was determined to hand over areas under its military control to the Afghan forces as soon as it could. Nicolas Sarkozy Government has indicated that it wants to remove all French troops from Afghanistan before 2012 Presidential election. More than 70 percent of the French public oppose war in Afghanistan.

NATO-Russia bonhomie

During the summit, NATO also signed an agreement with Russia to expand the supply of war materials for NATO troops through an overland route from Central Asia. It will be a setback for NATO if the transportation of arms and supplies through the attack-prone Pakistani route becomes untenable.

The agreement illustrates the increased bonhomie between NATO and Russia. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was a special invitee to the summit. Medvedev said that Russia was 'bolstering' its relationship with NATO in order to build a 'strategic partnership'.

NATO was founded in 1949 in response to the alleged threat posed by the USSR. Logically it should have disbanded after the collapse of the Socialist bloc and the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact - the military alliance of communist countries led by Moscow.

New enemies

At present, NATO is trying to stay relevant by conjuring up new enemies all over the world. First it was the Balkans, now it is Afghanistan. The next stop could be either Somalia or Sudan.

Obama, on his part, has defended the counter-insurgency tactics that have led to the death of thousands of innocent civilians in Afghanistan.

While describing Karzai's criticism of civilian deaths "as entirely legitimate", he said that the Afghan President should also understand that US troops were being shot at and that they 'needed to protect themselves'.

Obama, however, expressed confidence that the US would be able to start downsizing its troops by July 2011 as he had publicly pledged. "We are in a better place now than we were a year ago," he said. But he also warned that "making progress between now and next summer was the key".

US Defence Secretary Robert Gates has said that only a fraction of the U.S. troops will be left behind in 2014 and that they "would be in a train-and-advice role" of the kind that the US has taken on in Iraq. More than 50,000 US troops still remain in Iraq. Besides, the US has constructed huge military bases in Iraq. Its aim is to ensure permanent military occupation of both Iraq and Afghanistan for long-term strategic reasons.Head of British Armed Forces General David Richards recently said that US/NATO troops might have to stay in Afghanistan for the next 30 to 40 years. -The Hindu