IHS Global Insight Perspective | |
Significance | This is the President's first major foreign policy review, highlighting the importance that the continued conflict in Afghanistan and serious security problems in Pakistan have among his priorities. |
Implications | The major thrust of the policy is to bolster Afghan forces, allowing them to take on the militant challenge while providing room for U.S. and allied forces to start scaling back their presence. The policy has a number of prongs, focusing on security, governance and institution-building, and development aid, but Obama has shied away from the grander nation-building rhetoric of which his predecessor was so fond. |
Outlook | It is hoped that this multi-pronged approach, supported by a considerable amount of money and resources invested into both nations, will reap dividends, but the President has stressed the complexity of the problem and warned of the scale of the challenge. |
The Obama Plan
The new plan—the culmination of wide-ranging consultation with the likes of the military, regional governments, partners, aid agencies and non-governmental organisations (NGOs)—offers an insight into how far the current administration will diverge from its predecessor on foreign policy. Obama previously criticised former U.S. president George W Bush for taking his eye off the ball in Afghanistan to instead focus attention on Iraq. Essentially, Obama has now reversed this and arguably his plan represents a more realistic appraisal of the situation. Notably, it is looking to contain Afghanistan's problems, prioritising countering Islamic extremism and seeking to stabilise the country in terms of security and governance to a point where the Afghan people can then take up the challenge. The plan makes no great claims to building democracy or prosperity, and in some respects looks more like a damage limitation exercise.
The other main difference to the Bush administration is a strong regional emphasis. This sentiment has been strengthening for some time, but the plan expressly calls for support from governments in the region and highlights the problems faced by both Pakistan and Afghanistan. In this respect, Pakistan is no longer the much-vaunted strategic ally that it was during the Bush era, albeit with tensions becoming increasingly evident towards the end of then-president General Pervez Musharraf's tenure. Instead, it is seen as part of the problem, but with the understanding that it remains onside and needs support to counter the threats. The emphasis on the obligations of regional governments and the use of benchmarks echo the Democrats' efforts to impose greater accountability in Iraq while in opposition. However, it is much more difficult for the United States to impose its will on Pakistan than it has been on the U.S.-supported Iraqi or Afghan governments. The United States is particularly keen to see Pakistan shift its military focus away from the stand-off with India and towards its lawless tribal regions. Beyond Pakistan, Obama is looking to the broader regional context, with more help solicited from the likes of India, Russia, China, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and the Central Asian states.
Key Policy Proposals
Among the key proposals are:
- to "disrupt, dismantle and eventually defeat al-Qaida in Pakistan and Afghanistan".
- to send an extra 4,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan to train Afghan forces (on top of the extra 17,000 already committed). Alongside this, the emphasis of activity will change towards training to bolster domestic security forces.
- to solicit help from NATO allies with this training programme, with the aim of creating an Afghan army totalling 134,000 troops and a police force of 82,000.
- to increase military aid to Pakistan in co-ordination with greater economic assistance from the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. The administration is expected to call on the U.S. Congress to pass a bill authorising the tripling of U.S. spending to US$1.5 billion over the next five years. However, Obama warned that this will not be a "blank cheque", with Pakistan expected to commit to tackling extremism within its borders.
- to create a 'contact group' that will bring together countries that have a stake in the region's future stability, including China, India, Iran and Russia.
- to improve civilian infrastructure by sending hundreds of U.S. advisers (agricultural experts, engineers, lawyers, etc) to support local counterparts nationwide.
Making the Case for Action
In a sombre speech, Obama described the situation as "increasingly perilous" and warned that new intelligence reports suggest that militants in the region are planning fresh attacks on the United States and on a number of other nations. This dimension should help the President sell the plan to the American people, who are understandably reluctant to see troops currently serving in Iraq redeployed to Afghanistan. Obama pointedly avoided the use of the term "troop surge", despite the similarity of the additional Afghan deployment to Bush's Iraq "surge" that arguably helped reduce violence there. Obama is also selling the mission to other governments, whose troop commitments are looking fragile. The costs involved are a major concern for all (some US$50 billion in the latest U.S. budget plan) at a time when economies are in deep recession and domestic programmes are being cut back. In a rather dramatic sound bite, Obama announced that "for the American people, this border region has become the most dangerous place in the world ... but this is not simply an American problem. The safety of the world is at stake." At the same time, while he did not lay out a timetable, Obama made it clear that he intends to draw down troop numbers after the current push. The hope is that the intervention will succeed in building Afghan security forces up to a level where they are able to counter the threats with more limited international support. Despite reluctance to boost troop numbers, there does seem to be broad political acceptance in the United States that Afghanistan cannot be abandoned at this point, given the terrorism dimension. The recent violence in Pakistan has served to refocus attention within the United States on the instability of the region.
The Response
The initial response from the Afghan and Pakistani governments has been positive. The Afghan government welcomed the proposals, particularly the recognition that militancy is a regional, not Afghan-specific, problem. Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi was similarly quick to respond; he did not comment specifically on the proposals, but he did state that Pakistan was prepared to play "an active, constructive role" in the U.S.'s plans. President Asif Ali Zardari addressed a joint session of parliament a day later and talked of Obama's plan as "positive change". He welcomed the broader emphasis of U.S. funding beyond the military assistance that accounted for the lion's share under Bush. Zardari also announced fresh concessions to the opposition that will be viewed positively by the United States as an effort to reduce dangerous domestic political instability. Additionally, the European Union (EU) announced that it is prepared to increase the numbers of troops sent from its member countries to Afghanistan in support of the U.S. plan.
Outlook and Implications
Obviously the big question—and unfortunately one that is impossible to answer—is will this work? Certainly, the Obama administration is hoping that a fresh injection of funds, resources and commitment, and a refocusing of objectives will reap dividends. No aspect of the strategy is particularly new; in fact, most, including bolstering Afghan forces, have been discussed for a number of years now, with the various pros and cons identified before. As such, Obama's speech represents something of a re-branding exercise, but it is encouraging to see that the administration is not neglecting the challenges at a time when the economic woes back home are demanding its full attention. Clearly, the President and his team are cognisant of the problems and complexities of the situation and, while there was some talk of benchmarks, they have widely steered clear of specific time-frames for results. Obama is well aware that the success of his foreign policy will to a large degree be judged on how the situation evolves in Afghanistan and the surrounding region. Given Afghanistan's long history of acute instability, this is a major risk that he is shouldering. Bush celebrated a quick "victory" in Afghanistan in 2001, but it soon became clear that the Taliban and al-Qaida were far from vanquished. Thankfully, the improved security in Iraq gives the United States some leeway to refocus its military resources, but the costs will still be difficult to shoulder in the current economic climate.