John J. Metzler

UNITED NATIONS — As the clock ticks down to an American military pullout from Afghanistan in late 2014, civilian deaths in the troubled country have ticked up as Taliban insurgents focus on “soft targets” and set the scene for wider intimidation in the wake of a Western pullout.

The number of Afghan civilians killed in the first half of this year jumped by 23 percent to 1,319 (with 2,553) injuries according to the UN Assistance Mission. The killings spiked owing mainly to the use of deadly improvised explosive devices (IED’s) which the UN report described as the “indiscriminate use of IED’s and the deliberate targeting of civilians by anti-government elements is particularly alarming and must stop.”

The UN Mission Director of Human Rights Georgette Gagnon explained, “The growing loss of life and injuries to Afghan women and children in 2013 is particularly disturbing…deaths and injuries to women and children increased by 38 percent.”

The UN report outlined that insurgents “caused 74 percent of all civilian casualties and pro-government forces caused 9 percent, while 12 percent were un-attributed” or caused by unexploded ordinance.

Gagnon warned poignantly, “Rising civilian causalities in the first half of 2013 paint a frightening picture for the Afghan people.”

What bodes then for this beleaguered South Asian country in a virtual state of conflict since the Soviet invasion in 1979?

Presidential and provincial council elections are slated for April 2014. According to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, “Afghan led and Afghan managed 2014 presidential and provincial council elections are central to Afghanistan’s stable and sustainable political transition.”

Indeed free, fair and transparent elections are a key element in either strengthening the Kabul government best political change to ride the wave of domestic political acrimony and uncertainty as well as the nearly certain spike in Taliban insurgent attacks which will follow the Western pullout.

Even at this point the NATO-backed International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) has over 87,000 troops from 49 countries. The bulk of the multinational military force is made up of American (60,000), British (7,700), German (4,400) and Canadian (950) troops. Other states such as Spain, Italy and Hungary are among the participants. The real issue remains that countries with tough and hardened combat units such as the USA and British are now down-shifting operations.

Thus by setting a clear timetable and ticking clock for military withdrawal, the Obama Administration has satisfied political promises but scorned serious military concerns about the actual capacity and capability of the Afghan military and police to weather the transition. While the Afghan National Army now stands at 187,000 strength, one can reasonably assume many units are not ready for prime time.

As in Iraq, the U.S. pullout signals loss of commitment. Yet even from an American viewpoint the reasons are understandable, clear and somewhat justified. Nonetheless, Washington and the Kabul government would be wise to allow for a specific post-withdrawal agreement which would limited number of U.S., NATO and troops in country to support specific missions and to allow for a more stable post pullout transition.

Beyond facing the Taliban insurgents, the ISAF units have been particularly effective in fighting and neutralizing Al Qaida terrorist elements. Reducing pressure on Al Qaida remains a foolhardy and shortsighted program.

Thus what to do given the political hand of cards? Clearly what Afghanistan needs is a free and fair election so that her own citizens feel their government is worth supporting. As significantly the country must have a clear status of forces agreement so some key American and allied troop elements remains in country, contrary to the haphazard last minute arrangements in Iraq which have come back to haunt us after all the loss of life, blood and treasure.

As the Western pullout nears, the political skies darken. Ominously the Taliban and Al Qaida terrorists may have significant strength to disrupt Afghanistan. Only a reasonably legitimate government in Kabul with sufficient foreign force on call, may be able to stem the tide.

John J. Metzler is a U.N. correspondent covering diplomatic and defense issues. He writes weekly for WorldTribune.com. He is the author of Transatlantic Divide ; USA/Euroland Rift (University Press, 2010)

  Afghan civilians suffer as clock to U.S. pullout ticks down, Ban Ki-Moon, Georgette Gagnon, Taliban, UN Assistance Mission