US, NATO mark end of 13-year war in Afghanistan
LYNNE O'DONNELL, Associated Press

KABUL, Afghanistan (AP) — The war in Afghanistan, fought for 13 bloody years and still raging, came to a formal end Sunday with a quiet flag-lowering ceremony in Kabul that marked the transition of the fighting from U.S.-led combat troops to the country's own security forces.

In front of a small, hand-picked audience at the headquarters of the NATO mission, the green-and-white flag of the International Security Assistance Force was ceremonially rolled up and sheathed, and the flag of the new international mission called Resolute Support was hoisted.

U.S. Gen. John Campbell, commander of ISAF, commemorated the 3,500 international soldiers killed on Afghan battlefields and praised the country's army for giving him confidence that they are able to take on the fight alone.

"Resolute Support will serve as the bedrock of an enduring partnership" between NATO and Afghanistan, Campbell told an audience of Afghan and international military officers and officials, as well as diplomats and journalists.

"The road before us remains challenging, but we will triumph," he added.

Beginning Jan. 1, the new mission will provide training and support for Afghanistan's military, with the U.S. accounting for almost 11,000 of the 13,500 members of the residual force.

"Thanks to the extraordinary sacrifices of our men and women in uniform, our combat mission in Afghanistan is ending, and the longest war in American history is coming to a responsible conclusion," U.S. President Barack Obama said in a statement issued in Hawaii, where he is on vacation with his family.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, who took office in September, signed bilateral security agreements with Washington and NATO allowing the ongoing military presence. The move has led to a spike in violence, with the Taliban claiming it as an excuse to step up operations aimed at destabilizing his government.

ISAF was set up after the U.S.-led invasion as an umbrella for the coalition of around 50 nations that provided troops and took responsibility for security across the country. It ends with 2,224 American soldiers killed, according to an Associated Press tally.

The mission, which was initially aimed at toppling the Taliban and rooting out al-Qaida following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, peaked at 140,000 troops in 2010. Obama ordered a surge to drive the insurgents out of strategically important regions, notably in the southern provinces of Helmand and Kandahar, where the Taliban had its capital from 1996 to 2001.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid called Sunday's event a "defeat ceremony" and said the insurgents' fight would continue.

"Since the invasion in 2001 until now, these events have been aimed at changing public opinion, but we will fight until there is not one foreign soldier on Afghan soil and we have established an Islamic state," he said.

Obama recently expanded the role of U.S. forces remaining in the country, allowing them to extend their counter-terrorism operations to the Taliban, as well as al-Qaida, and to provide ground and air support for Afghan forces when necessary for at least the next two years.

In a tacit recognition that international military support is still essential for Afghan forces, national security adviser Mohammad Hanif Atmar told the gathered ISAF leaders: "We need your help to build the systems necessary to ensure the long-term sustainability of the critical capabilities of our forces."

Afghans have mixed feelings about the drawdown of foreign troops. With the deteriorating security situation, many believe the troops are needed to back up the Afghan effort to bring peace after more than three decades of continual war.

"At least in the past 13 years we have seen improvements in our way of life — freedom of speech, democracy, the people generally better off financially," said 42-year-old shop keeper Gul Mohammad.

But the soldiers are still needed "at least until our own forces are strong enough, while our economy strengthens, while our leaders try to form a government," he said.

NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has said that Afghanistan's 350,000-member security forces are ready to take on the insurgency alone, despite complaints by officials that they lack the necessary assets, such as air support, medical evacuation systems and intelligence.

On Sunday, he said that ISAF's mandate was "carried out at great cost but with great success."

"We have made our own nations safer by denying safe haven to international terrorists. We have made Afghanistan stronger by building up from scratch strong security forces. Together we have created the conditions for a better future for millions of Afghan men, women and children," he said.

As Afghan forces assume sovereignty, the country is without a Cabinet three months after Ghani's inauguration, and economic growth is near zero due to the reduction of the international military presence and other aid. The United States spent more than $100 million on reconstruction in Afghanistan, on top of the $1 trillion war.

This year is set to be the deadliest of the war, according to the United Nations, which expects civilian casualties to hit 10,000 for the first time since the agency began keeping records in 2008. Most of the deaths and injuries were caused by Taliban attacks, the U.N. said.

Two teenage boys were killed late Saturday in the eastern Wardak province when a rocket was fired near a children's volleyball match, an official said. Another five children, ages 11 to 14, were wounded by shrapnel, said the governor's spokesman Attaullah Khogyani. He blamed the Taliban.

In Kapisa, also in the east, Gov. Abdul Saboor Wafa's office said eight insurgents were killed Saturday night in an army counter-insurgency operation.

This has also been a deadly year for Afghanistan's security forces — army, paramilitary and police — with around 5,000 deaths recorded so far. Most of those deaths, or around 3,200, have been police officers, according to Karl Ake Roghe, the outgoing head of EUPOL, the European Union Police Mission in Afghanistan, which funds and trains a police force of 157,000.


-- (c) Associated Press 2014-12-29

Afghanistan can hold the Taliban off with their own armed forces but not so long as the Taliban can resupply men, equipment, and materials from their Pakistanian bases. If Pakistan won't force its sovereignty over the Taliban to the extent that the Taliban infiltration into Afghanistan stops, Afghanistans's only chance at survival as a free country is a security agreement with either India or China. India is the most likely partner given the political system in Afghanistan.

I recently left after spending over 10 years working in Afghanistan (2003-2014). Sad to say, talking to the troops, the locals and watching the news, nothing much has changed over that period. The biggest change I've noticed is now that there are fewer foreign troops, there is less reporting of what is actually happening. The former British/American base in Helmand province was under attack by the Taliban for 3 days before I saw the first news article about it ! There are many more incidents happening around the country, but without the foreign troops, there are fewer and fewer foreign journalists to report them.

For years, the majority of the civilian casualties have been caused by the Taliban. On one hand they claim they are fighting to "drive out the foreign invaders" (hypocritically, a lot of their fighters are foreigners themselves). Then on the other hand, they blow up crowded markets full of innocent women and children, with no foreign troops within a hundred miles ! The atrocities they commit are typical of what you'd expect from lawless criminals who answer to no one but themselves. They use religion (their version of it) as justification for all manner of crimes. In that they are not much different than the Christians during the "Dark Ages", and during those centuries of colonization and conversion of the "heathen masses". The main difference is that they have better weapons, communication and mobility these days.

The future for Afghanistan ? More of the same. They have virtually NO economy. Their existence is almost entirely dependent on foreign aid (which makes up approx. 95% of their economy). Foreign governments foot the bill for their military. Foreign governments pay for their police. Foreign governments build their roads, bridges, schools and hospitals. As the troops leave, so do the foreign investors who are not going to risk being left to swing in the breeze without their protection. Karzai famously tried to push foreign NGOs to use Afghan police and army to protect their projects and dispense with hiring foreign security staff. That went over like a lead balloon as the Afghan police/army were more likely to just steal everything and leave the workers unprotected any ways ! Of course, that same Karzai also whined that much of the foreign aid wasn't going directly through him, so he couldn't dish it out to friends and relatives (and skim a lot off the top of course). It really burned his butt that contracts would be let out for offer and awarded to the best bidder (more or less) and he wasn't making anything off of them. (The same Karzai who appointed his brother as governor of the Kabul bank and then did nothing as that same brother was allegedly embezzling millions so he could buy luxury condos in Dubai. The same Karzai whose other, now deceased, brother was allegedly heavily involved in the drug trade while he was the governor of Kandahar province.)

Their military is under paid, weak and heavily infiltrated by the very people they are fighting. Their different police forces are just as bad. Their government is corrupt and positions are filled based on political connections more than competency. Provinces are ruled more by the warlords with the largest (private) militias than by the elected governors. Today's "loyal generals" will be tomorrow's "Taliban Commanders" if they thinks their chances of success are better by switching sides. It won't take long for the Taliban to be back in control of everything if the government can't appease the warlords and the only way to do that is to give them ways to scam as much money as they possibly can (from an almost non-existent economy that is largely based on subsistence agriculture and illegal drugs).

13 years of (this) war, thousands of soldiers killed, 10s of thousands of civilians killed and for what ? It is truly sad to look at old pictures of Kabul from the 60s and 70s and then look at it now. Despite billions and billions of aid and foreign investment over those years, the country is no better off than it was before the invasion. Look at some other war devastated countries like Japan, (West) Germany and China 13 years after WW II. Vietnam 13 years after the end of that war. Bosnia/Croatia/Slovenia 13 years after the breakup of Yugoslavia (and subsequent Balkan war). Then look at Afghanistan.

The reasons for it basically boil down to one thing. The same thing that kept Europe from progressing for centuries. Will it take centuries for the same thing to happen in Afghanistan (and surrounding countries) ? Or will it take a war that makes the 2 previous World Wars look like kindergarten playground fights ? As long as the population are kept poor, uneducated and ground under the heels of armed zealots, there won't be any progression, only regression.

This smacks of the same BS as when Pres Bush declared a US victory in the war in Iraq...many years ago...the fighting has been non-stop and has recently intensified...ditto awaits Afghanistan...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2010/06/14/us-afghanistan-minerals-idUSTRE65D0OH20100614

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/17/afghanistan-mineral-wealt_n_615449.html

a low estimate of why we do what we do.

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED !! Congratulations.

Off-topic post removed.

Wonderful news! Now the world can continue on its road to peace and prosperity!