Afghanistan: The War Continues

Until recently, it was easy to forget that our soldiers are still fighting a stubborn insurgency not only in Iraq, but in Afghanistan as well. This article in yesterday's Washington Post highlights what it calls the "half-forgotten" struggle:

"When Spec. Nick Conlon and the other members of his infantry battalion learned they would be deployed to the Afghan province of Zabol this spring, many expected their worst enemy to be boredom. In preparation, Conlon stocked up on more than 20 DVDs, such as "Alien vs. Predator," "X-Men" and "Daredevil."

But in the three months since the battalion set up camp in this isolated, mountainous region of southeastern Afghanistan, Conlon has not had time to watch a single movie. Instead, the battalion has found itself at the center of a heated though somewhat forgotten war that is still underway 3 1/2 years after the extremist Taliban militia was ousted from power."

For the most part, the Bush administration's strategy in Afghanistan has been to slowly consolidate the power of Hamid Karzai and the central Afghan government, as well as slowly curtail the power of the war lords to prevent them from tearing the country apart again. In addition to that, US, Afghan and Pakistani soldiers have, in fits and starts, hunted for Osama Bin Laden somewhere in Afghanistan/Pakistan. This strategy is the result largely of the obsession with Iraq, as US forces have largely been removed from Afghanistan to engage in the much more difficult issue of handling the Iraq insurgency. But the fight with remnant Taliban forces is far from over:

"The Taliban forces, estimated at anywhere from 2,000 to 10,000 fighters, cannot hold territory against U.S. forces. But the battalion in Zabol has been attacked more than 10 times since March. During one bloody seven-hour clash in Zabol in May and in a series of pitched firefights across the south and east since then, the Taliban has revealed itself to be a hardy, resilient foe equipped with machine guns, rocket-propelled grenades and mortars."

Such a fierce insurgency in Afghanistan is challenging the Administration's strategy. It seems that, as with Iraq, it was anticipated that the holdout Taliban forces would be destroyed in the months after their overthrow. But they've lingered for nearly three years now, seemingly gaining strength as the months have gone by, to the point at which they have inflicted unprecedented casualties on American and Afghan forces in recent months. Of course it is impossible for the Taliban to challenge our military or the Afghan government for dominance, but allowing the current situation to fester into one which presents some challenge to the government's claim of legitimacy would be bad enough. Of course, the worsening situation in Iraq means that there are simply no more troops available to operate against the Taliban. Our strategy now is to holdout for as long as we must to allow the Afghan government to establish firm control of the country, before packing up and leaving.

Of course, the success of our approach depends on how willing the American people are to tolerate casualties. To this point, Americans have had little reason to think about Afghanistan because progress has appeared steady if slow, the Taliban seemed weak even if not completely destroyed and most importantly, casualties have been low and far out-shadowed by casualties in Iraq. While progress continues, the Taliban nonetheless seem to be growing progressively stronger, and fights between them and our forces are proving to be more deadly for our soldiers. If and when the body count begins to rise to levels that are appreciable in the mind of the American public, it may be time to begin reconsidering the strategy in Afghanistan.