ISAF must expand to areas of insecurity, say experts

The decision by the United Nations Security Council to expand the International Security Force for Afghanistan (ISAF) beyond the confines of the capital, Kabul, has evoked cautious optimism among regional analysts who want to see the force address the country's most pressing security needs. "Potentially, it's very significant," Vikram Parekh, a senior analyst for the International Crisis Group (ICG) in Kabul, told IRIN. "Everything now depends on how the actual expansion and deployment is carried out." While welcoming the decision, he cautioned that the strength of the force, where it would be stationed, and exactly what it would be mandated to do, had yet to be decided, pending the arrival of a Security Council delegation to the capital later this month. "It all depends on what the Security Council decides after their delegation comes to Kabul," he said. Ahmed Rashid, the author of a major best seller on Afghanistan and a regional analyst, described the decision as tardy, but "extremely significant" for improving the beleaguered nation's security situation. Their comments follow the Security Council's unanimous decision on Monday to expand ISAF, citing the importance of extending the Afghan government's authority throughout the nation of 28.7 million, and providing security for reconstruction and humanitarian efforts. At present, vast areas of the Central Asian state are off limits due to insecurity, thereby hampering urgently needed reconstruction efforts. NATO, which assumed command of the 5,000-strong multinational force on 11 August, had earlier recommended that troops be moved out from the capital, but said that Council authorisation would be needed. The Council's resolution stressed "the importance of extending central government authority to all parts of Afghanistan" and authorised expansion of ISAF's mandate "to allow it, as resources permit, to support the Afghan Transitional Authority and its successors in the maintenance of security in the areas of Afghanistan outside Kabul and its environs, so that the Afghan Authorities, as well as the personnel of the United Nations and other international civilian personnel engaged, in particular, in the reconstruction and humanitarian efforts, can operate in a secure environment". While pleased with the move, Rashid remarked that NATO should have announced more than just peacekeeping troops being sent to the northern city of Konduz first inasmuch as Konduz was one of the more peaceful areas of the country. "What are needed are troops in the south, where the Taliban resurgence is taking place. Many Afghans will feel let down by this judgment, whereas the warlords will feel impervious to the announcement," he told IRIN. Parekh cited Mazar-e Sharif as one of two areas where troops should initially be deployed, given recent fighting there. "I think in Mazar-e Sharif there is actually an agreement between the two factions of having an international security force deployed," he said, adding by effecting such a deployment, and doing it well, would serve to improve security, and make it possible to implement plans for the disarmament process. The other area identified by the analyst for potential troop deployment is the southern city of Kandahar. "I think a marginal presence in Kandahar might allow international aid agencies to begin planning or carrying out activities in a broader range of areas than they are at present," he said. As for additional issues an expanded ISAF might face, Parekh maintained he did not envisage there would be major security concerns for an international presence in northern and central Afghanistan. "There is broad-based popular support among the population for a peacekeeping presence. The question is how many people you want to commit on the ground," he said. Meanwhile, the same could not be said about the south of the country, which has experienced a spate of insecurity over the past two years. In most parts of southern Afghanistan, there were legitimate security concerns which had surfaced in response to a number of attacks on aid workers, government officials and military police. "That needs to be addressed differently," he stressed, adding that any force entering the area now might be regarded as a military target. "That's the main obstacle one has to be concerned about," Parekh said. As for how many troops would potentially be deployed, that too was a question remaining to be addressed. "Two thousand more troops would be grossly inadequate, while 10,000 would be more serious. Everything that has happened now has to be qualified," he said. Hours earlier, Manoel de Almeida e Silva, the spokesman for the United Nations Assistance Mission for Afghanistan (UNAMA), told reporters at a press briefing in Kabul on Tuesday that while UNAMA had welcomed the Security Council's decision to expand ISAF, it warned that Afghans would be disappointed if the deployment did not take place sufficiently early and appropriately to meet the Afghan people's aspirations and their country's security needs. "Now that Security Council has granted authorisation for expansion of ISAF, it is very important that member states provide ISAF with the necessary means to expand beyond Kabul," he said.