U.S. General Sees Afghanistan 'Deteriorating'
Jeff Seldin, Voice of America
The U.S. Army general picked to lead U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan warns the security situation there is deteriorating despite a valiant effort by Afghan forces.
Lieutenant-General John "Mick" Nicholson told the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday that terror groups like Islamic State and al-Qaida continue to see Afghanistan as an attractive sanctuary. He warned the U.S. may need to take a more aggressive approach.
"We still see attempts by terrorist organizations to get into Afghanistan," Nicholson said. "Do we have the right level of CT [counterterrorism] capability to deal with that?"
Of particular concern to U.S. military and intelligence officials is the spread of the Islamic State group, which has sought to establish a sanctuary in Nangarhar province, and a resurgent al-Qaida in Kandahar province.
The Taliban have also re-emerged as a threat, briefly seizing the northern city of Kunduz last year while also taking key districts in Helmand province. There are concerns, too, that the Taliban have hopes of retaking their spiritual home in Kandahar.
Nicholson assured lawmakers he would not let the U.S. sit idly by.
"We need to prevent Kandahar from falling into the hands of the Taliban," Nicholson said, adding he would "absolutely" recommend using U.S. military force to prevent the Taliban from retaking the provincial capital.
If approved by lawmakers, Nicholson would take over as the commander for U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan from Gen. John Campbell, who is expected to retire.
‘Crisis Situation’
The U.S. currently has about 9,800 troops in Afghanistan for counterterrorism activities and to train and advise Afghan security forces. But that number is expected to drop to about 5,500 by the end of the year, worrying lawmakers.
"I believe we are in a crisis situation," said Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain, a constant critic of the Obama administration's Afghanistan policy. "It makes no strategic or military sense to continue the withdrawal of American forces."
Republican Senator Kelly Ayotte also expressed alarm at the way the administration has telegraphed troop levels in Afghanistan to U.S. enemies.
"This has been a constant kabuki dance," Ayotte said. "We cannot afford to take on risks that allow obviously safe havens, again, for al-Qaida and ISIS engagement."
Nicholson said that, if confirmed, he would review U.S. troop levels during his first 90 days in command and make an appropriate recommendation, warning he saw the need for a long-term commitment.
Realistic Expectations Needed
But he also said the U.S. needed to have a realistic expectation of what can be achieved.
"This is Afghanistan. There will always be some level of violence in Afghanistan," Nicholson said.
"We're not trying to create a Western-style society here," he added. "We are looking at an adequate level of security to prevent the re-emergence of transnational terrorist threats."
Nicholson is currently the commander of NATO's Allied Land Command, based at Izmir, Turkey. He has served several tours of duty in Afghanistan and also commanded the Army's 75th Ranger Regiment and the 82nd Airborne Division.
Lawmakers praised Nicholson for his experience.
Nicholson's nomination could go before the full Senate for vote as early as next week.
Comments
LTG Nicholson:
"We're not trying to create a Western-style society here," he added. "We are looking at an adequate level of security to prevent the re-emergence of transnational terrorist threats."
Let's test this statement:
Theory One:
First, by pointing out that states and societies that are adequately organized, ordered and oriented more along modern western political, economic and social lines; these such states and societies, we believe, are not so much prone to terrorism.
And then by pointing out that, in fact, it is states and societies that ARE NOT adequately organized, ordered and oriented -- more along modern western lines -- that are, indeed, more much prone to/much more usable re: terrorism.
Thus, to suggest that (a) should we wish to "prevent the emergence or re-emergence of transnational terrorist threats" -- in Afghanistan or elsewhere -- what we must clearly do is, in fact, (b) "create Western-style societies" in these locales?
Theory Two:
Next, let us be honest enough to admit that attempts to create Western-style societies (think for example: girls schools, etc.) -- in such places as Afghanistan and elsewhere -- these such efforts are, exactly, what gives rise to transnational terrorist threats?
Thus, should we wish to prevent or scale back terrorism, we need only stop trying to impose our way of life, our way of governance and our values, attitudes and beliefs on others?
(Note that in both Theory One above and, indeed, Theory Two, there is no credible suggestion made that "we're not trying to create a Western-style society" in Afghanistan or elsewhere.
If such were, in fact, the case, then such exceptionally new things as (a) democratic governments and (b) "girls schools" would not, shall we agree, currently be found in these locales?)