An American Lion

Mr. Angry Badger is not pleased with the leadership structure in Afghanistan

Nick Horne’s resignation as the United Nations’ political affairs officer in Afghanistan didn’t exactly set off shock waves, but it does highlight one of the major problems that seems to have been swept under the rug:

In October, I resigned from my position as a political affairs officer at the U.N. mission in Afghanistan over policy differences with its leadership mostly concerning our handling of the election debacle. But I continue to believe that the U.N. mission is the best and only way to coordinate international support to Afghanistan. This latest magic trick won’t work any better than the last one. In fact, it may even be worse.

The idea of a high representative has been floated for a number of years. The logic is that the “light footprint” strategy pursued by the international community for the first few years after the fall of the Taliban, including the accelerated sovereignty of Afghanistan thereafter, was a mistake. While not assuming any executive powers, the high representative would signal a more critical and conditional relationship between the international community and the Afghan government.

The first and most obvious question to be asked is what and whom a high representative would represent. There are already several multilateral entities in Afghanistan. In addition to the United Nations and the local offices of its many agencies, Kabul hosts the European Union, European Commission, and NATO civilian representatives. Then there are the embassies, the U.S. Embassy being by far the largest. Coordinating positions among these various stakeholders is difficult enough. Anyone who has tried would no doubt tell you that what’s needed are fewer multilaterals, not more.

There is no military solution in Afghanistan. There has to be a political solution and it is more likely to be the right political solution with a reformed leadership structure in Afghanistan. Too bad we have an extremely weak and ineffective UN leadership. Replacing Ban Ki-Moon should be priority number one, and then, with what should be a more effective and competent UN leader, we can make positive changes in Afghanistan. And, no, I don’t think there are any lessons to be learned from the Soviet experience in Afghanistan. They fought an entirely different kind of enemy that has morphed into something new. Narco-trafficking money is financing the Taliban, and that creates a different dynamic.