Wed06192013

Last updateMon, 17 Jun 2013 10pm

LOS ANGELES Wednesday, June 19th 2013 7:51

 

GOVERNMENT HELPED WIN THE WEST

 

 




Taking Stock Header


Neighborhood Politics header

 

  

In case you missed it - front pg. header

 

superplanner header

Horse named after Kobe Bryant in dramatic win at Hollywood

243 heart-pounding videos … in less than 10 minutes

Ellen DeGeneres’ commencement speech … also, less than 10 minutes

Snowden pole dancer girlfriend … Lost at Sea

Bill Maher New Rules: House of Lards



 

Afghanistan: The Long and Winding Roads

Font Size

ANOTHER AMERICAN WAR WITHOUT END - In late 2008, Andrew Wilder set out on a hunt for answers in Afghanistan. For years, Wilder, a former development worker who had recently settled into a post at Tufts University, had watched with dismay as billions of American assistance dollars poured into programs in Afghanistan designed to help win “hearts and minds,” and bring stability to the troubled nation.

New highways stretched hundreds of miles across the country, gleaming hospitals and schools sprang up in remote villages and just about everyone seemed to have a cell phone.

The “hearts and minds” strategy, known as counterinsurgency, or COIN, called for a delicate balance of military pressures and civil incentives: military action against the enemy, combined with generous programs designed to win over the gratitude and trust of the people. If U.S. forces could free volatile regions from the Taliban’s grasp, policymakers in Washington believed, then, together with development experts, they could earn the support of local Afghans by keeping them safe and building a lasting economy and reliable government institutions.

But something wasn’t working. Afghanistan remained as volatile as ever. President Hamid Karzai’s government was in disarray, the nascent Afghan army and police force continued to buckle under the weight of their responsibilities, and a resurgent Taliban attacked seemingly at will.

Within Washington policy circles, it had become clear that development plans had not done their part to improve stability, but planners couldn’t agree on what to change. Some thought the projects had to get bigger and bolder. Others, including many in the U.S. military, believed the answer lay in more discreet efforts — improving water and electricity reliability, or empowering ground-level commanders to dispense funds on smaller initiatives.

Through $25,000 “quick-impact projects,” like providing work for military-aged males digging irrigation canals, the thinking went, money could be deployed “as a weapons system,” in the words of one 2009 U.S. commanders manual.  (The Rest of Joshua Hersh’ Afghanistan perspective … including the doubts about its conclusion and the chance for success … here.)
-cw




CityWatch
Vol 10 Issue 83
Pub: Oct 16, 2012

 

Share
Jack Humphreville Promo 1