Encouraging Signs in Afghanistan

What if the West's war in Afghanistan is in the process of being won? It has become standard practice to presume that this isn't possible and that immersion in a quagmire followed by ignominious retreat is guaranteed.

Much of the discussion among policy makers and commentators has priced in a debilitating stalemate or defeat. But what if these presumptions turn out to be plain wrong?

There are some encouraging signs of progress becoming visible on the horizon in Afghanistan. Operation Moshtarak in Helmand province got under way in mid-February, with a combined force in the region of 15,000 taking on the Taliban.

It has had some success with various insurgent strongholds taken. Under the direction of ISAF (the International Security Assistance Force) the force is around 60% Afghan.

In Pakistan, the renewed focus on cooperation and assistance from American drones appears to be producing a dividend. One of the most experienced Pakistani commanders in the frontier war with the Taliban, Major Gen. Tariq Khan, told the Times of London that his force of 45,000 has inflicted significant casualties, killed the Taliban leadership and captured bases. Earlier this week Gen. Khan showed off to journalists the recently captured network of caves on the Afghan border reported to have sheltered Osama bin Laden's deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri.

A British defense official said: "The kill-rate is right up. Pakistan remains a problem as it is profoundly unstable, and we do need to keep improving our support for what its government is doing. But there's much to be positive about."

This is all quite different from the unmitigated gloom of a few years ago.

Of course, there are plenty of respected voices prepared to say that apparent progress on both sides of the Afghan-Pakistan border is a mirage. Adam Holloway, a British MP and former soldier who served in Iraq, Bosnia and Afghanistan, has spent time on his own in the country and thinks the die is already cast.

He fears that previous mistakes mean it is too late to defeat an insurgency with deep roots in hatred of outside influence and any central government. What we think of as the Taliban in Afghanistan, but which is actually hundreds of small interrelated groups fighting in their locality, he claims has just opted to melt back into the population for the duration of Operation Moshtarak.

And there are also those who have had enough of the war, full-stop. Following the collapse of the Netherlands' government last month over its attempt to continue a deployment of 2,000 troops it is likely that the Dutch will withdraw this summer. NATO's secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, felt compelled earlier this week to try and calm Afghan nerves. It wouldn't trigger a rush for the exits: "I can assure you that the alliance will stay committed."

But there has been such widespread fatalism for so long about the prospects in Afghanistan, that there is a danger any progress goes unrecognized. That electorates continue to believe the dual myths of Western impotence and incompetence and cannot compute any kind of victory.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal has been central in this regard in lifting morale. His appointment as head of ISAF and commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan signalled a newly ambitious approach. He demanded extra troops but emphasized that winning is a possibility. A realistically optimistic commander can make a big difference in battle and over the course of a war.

In this way, improvements in the Afghan military situation can and have been made, particularly since Iraq is no longer the focus for American forces. When that might is brought to bear and combined with better use of intelligence, improved cooperation with Pakistan and the painstaking work of training the Afghan army it has an impact.

I accept that the prospect of a little success carries dangers, too. There may be progress, but it doesn't mean the Americans or their partners should delude themselves into thinking about leaving any time soon.

Forces will be required for decades to hold territory and create the space for Afghan civil society and institutions to develop (they haven't had much success on that front to date). But it isn't preordained to be a disaster: Victory of a kind is possible.

Sarkozy's intervention
Never let it be said that French President Nicolas Sarkozy lacks ambition. On a visit to a Eurocopter plant near Marseilles on Thursday, he confided in workers that he has had it up to here with currency fluctuations, foreign-exchange imbalances and their impact on competitiveness. Earlier this year he called monetary disorder "unacceptable."

Now, he says he has plans to sort it out, by proposing an overhaul of the international monetary system. Precise details, at the time of writing, are thin on the ground.

"If the U.S. dollar loses 50% of its value to the euro, how can it be possible to make up the loss of competitiveness?" Mr. Sarkozy asked.

"At the G-20 by the end of the year, I will try to organize a new international monetary system. We can't go on like this," he said.

On hearing the phrase "I will try to organize a new international monetary system," it is tempting to think dismissively: very best of luck with that, let's see how far you get.

But his latest intervention is a reminder that Mr. Sarkozy is a politician with imagination, utterly unafraid to express himself with vivid directness. He's restless, mercurial, driven and doesn't see his time in office in managerial terms.

Still, if you are expecting the birth of his new international monetary system any time soon, I suggest that you don't hold your breath.
WSJ