Flawed US strategy

THE downing of a US helicopter with 30 Americans and eight Afghans on board in the eastern province of Wardak is a significant blow to the US-led war effort. It wasn`t just that the incident,
which the Taliban have claimed responsibility for, made Saturday the single deadliest day for US troops in Afghanistan, but also the profile of the troops who were killed. With the American media reporting that 22 of the dead Americans belonged to the Navy SEALs, the US has lost some of its most elite and high-profile warriors imaginable — and the Taliban will almost certainly gain a psychological boost. Down in the south, in Kandahar, the Taliban have notched up three significant assassinations this year — the brother of President Karzai, Wali Karzai, a deputy governor and the Kandahar police chief — putting serious question marks over American claims that the foreign forces have checked the momentum of the Taliban and produced a fragile recovery in parts of Afghanistan.

Saturday`s incident will also likely produce fresh scrutiny of the night raids so beloved of Gen Petraeus and resented by the Afghan government and the public at large. Night raids are part of a US military-led attempt to decapitate the Taliban leadership by targeting senior-level and mid-ranking Talban leaders in Afghanistan. The raids are particularly relied on in areas where the US does not have a heavy concentration of troops, such as in eastern Afghanistan, which includes the site of Saturday`s incident in the Wardak province. But the raids go to the heart of an apparent conflict in US strategy in Afghanistan: night raids are part of Gen Petraeus`s push for `total victory`, whereas the US is now inching towards some kind of settlement with the Taliban as American troops are set to head for the exit door.

Does it make sense to whack over the head the very interlocutor the US will have to engage going forward? More importantly, the night raids have proved to be very unpopular with the Afghan public. In eastern Afghanistan there are numerous reports of protests against the night raids. President Karzai has publicly called for an end to the raids and labelled them as one of the main irritants in relations with the US. In some ways, the raids are analogous to drone strikes in Pakistan`s tribal areas. But there is one crucial difference: in Afghanistan, no senior Al Qaeda or Taliban leader has been killed in the raids yet. So, if a policy has limited military dividends and high political costs, does it make sense to continue it? And now, in the wake of Saturday`s incident, can the military cost be said to be worth it, especially if the Taliban try their luck to see if they can chalk up more victims?
Via Dawn