Afghanistan: the Road to Nationhood - Part II

"On Development Aid, Stability and Unification"


by Dr Sam Holliday


The visit of US Defense Secretary Robert Gates to Afghanistan, on 8 December 2009, unfortunately suggests that US policy will not basically change. Or if there is to be a change toward decentralization of power, it was well hidden.


Gates spoke of continued support for Harmid Karzai and the building, training and retention of the security forces controlled by the central government, Afghan Army and the Afghan "National" Police.


Gates stated that the US was not going to abandon Afghanistan as it did in 1969 and that money for "development" would continue to flow. He mentioned the need to clean up government corruption, without recognizing that money for "development" was one of the causes of corruption.


The visit of Gates suggests more of the same. New visibility and vigor perhaps, but still a failure to address the fundamental problems.

Because of the fragmented nature of Afghanistan any centralized government able to maintain stability would have to be strong, nationalistic, authoritarian, and corruption free; therefore, the foreign-funded government of Hamid Karzai, protected by westerners and promoting Western ideas of politics, economics, diversity, and human rights has been unsuccessful.

To have both stability and democracy would require much greater common identity among the Afghans, something that would take, under the best of circumstances, several decades to develop. Since the US will not support the kind of centralized regime now required, it is necessary to move to a more decentralized structure.

This will make the various levels of governance in Afghanistan more responsive to the people. It might not be government of, by and for the people but it will be a move in that direction from the current ineffective, corrupt centralized structures.

It will be difficult to shift to greater decentralization since the US foreign policy establishment and the United Nations think in terms of a top-down control to achieve economic and political "development". They want a single point of contact; they are accustomed to dealing with state-to-state relationships; they expect the US and Europe to expend blood and treasure to "develop" others.


They see "development" as making others more like themselves.

Decentralization will no doubt consolidate the power of Rashid Dostum, an Uzbek, Mohammad Mohaqeq, a Hazan, Abdul Rasul Sayuyaf, a Pushtun, Abdullah Abdullah, a Tajik, and their likes within the provinces. While many of these leaders have defects in Western eyes, they are capable of providing a security shield against the Muslim extremists within their our provinces—if they think it is in their interests to do so.


Getting local leaders to provide the needed security shield for the people is an essential first step to stability. Then it would be possible to influence the course of events toward a more desirable outcome. Without this first step there is no possibility of long-term stability.


Therefore, the focus of US and NATO efforts should be shifted to making local leaders, local militia, and local police more effective and efficient. If this is done the cost will be less and the benefits will be greater. XXXXX


Dr Sam Holliday is Director of the Armiger Cromwell Center


All publications copyright © 2008 Armiger Cromwell Center. Permission is granted to forward this article by e-mail to friends or colleagues on a fair use basis. For reprint permission, contact Armiger Cromwell Center at armigercc@comcast.net

Read also part I in this series, "Losing the War is Not an Option", by Arend Jan Boekestijn

Also by Dr Sam Holliday

-  American Diplomacy: "Aghan Federation"
- Armiger Cromwell Center: click "Afghanistan*New

All posts by Sam Holliday on Politeia

Related dossiers:

- "The Afghan Front"

- "Pakistan's Double Bubble"

- "The Finer Points of Warfare"

- "The Propaganda Hirabah"

- "Narco Wars"

Afghanistan: the Road to Nationhood - Part I

Image via Wikipedia

"Losing the war is not an option"

by Arend Jan Boekestijn (original article in Dutch)

Pundits are fond to cite George Orwell lately: the fastest way to end a war is to lose it. Afghanistan has divided the West. We have acted so recklessly that it appeared at times as if losing the war was indeed the object. But it would have dire consequences for Western security.

For those who are taking pleasure in debunking Obama: losing the war in Afghanistan is no option. As long as Europe seeks strength in diversity, appeasement and cashing in on peace divident we shall have to settle for Obama. Defeat is nothing less than an affirmation of the jihadists' view that the decadent West has no staying power.

Failure would be a colossal encouragement to even widen the front. In case you're not so sure: defeat in Afghanistan means that the Pakistani jihadists, who won't rest until they've appropriated the national nuclear arsenal, will be able to use Afghanistan as a hide out. To use the word defeat in such a situation, reveals a shocking deficit in responsibility.

It is wiser to learn of ones mistakes. In Afghanistan the US and NATO have chosen for a light military presence. This forced the Afghan President Hamid Karzai into making deals with warlords that were in their economic tribal interests. Some were even included in the Government: keep your friends close, but your enemies closer.

Like half a century ago in South Vietnam, when President Ngo Dinh Diem was given to understand that he must democratize, Karzai was driven to an act of similar political suicide given the lack of a loyal opposition. This weakened his position even further. Karzai is quite literally consumed by paranoia. At night he rides his chauffeur driven car through Kabul, hoping to discover what is really going on.

Finally Karzai's political system was made to absorb such insane amounts of aid, that corruption, endemic in this patrimonial system, rose to alarming levels. In Africa many political systems have been corrupted by development aid, but that is insignificant compared to the intervention in Afghanistan. The mistakes in Africa were multiplied hundred fold.

And yet, in all this gloom over this fest of follies and flubs there's some reason for optimism. First of all, it is encouraging that Obama, like his predecessor George Bush, albeit reluctantly, chose for a surge. Admittedly, 30,000 extra troops is minimal, and half of what General McCrystal's requested, but Obama has come through in spite of severe opposition in his own party.

It is very well possible that 30,000 troops are too few to force a breakthrough in the war, but that sounds hollow from the mouth of an inhabitant of a continent whose contribution is only minimal compared to the American effort. Why doesn't Europe do more?

Secondly, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has shaded somewhat Obama's assurance that withdrawal would go ahead in the summer 2011. That will only happen if the circumstances allow. This is not without significance, because the famous 3-D approach - Defense, Diplomacy and Development - can only succed if the West shows fortitude.

We are talking here of a decades long involvement, not just a few years. Anyone who believes the West will never be able to muster the staying power may be right, but should stop complaining about severe damage to the alliance and a potentially fatal defeat in the fight against political Islam. It's not an attractive perspective. Moreover, alternative presence on the ground, like cruise missiles and drones, offer even less chance of success. Whether we like it or not, we won't fix this problem without boots on the ground.

The question is also if the economic crisis will allow America the cost of a major contingent after 2011. If not, we're in deep trouble as the EU is still unable to act militarily. The word 'still' reflects politeness rather than realism. There is no cause for joy over the economic resilience of Obama's country either.

Neither is there about Obama's inquisitiveness. But he steered wisely clear of mentioning democratization in the same breath as failing states. That's a bonus. Anyone who witnessed the blood-curdling spectacle of the Afghan election can rest assured. Ballots without functioning institutions and a loyal opposition - in other words, without a civil society - are a recipe for instability and in-fights.

Elections in closed societies are of a different nature than we're accustomed to. In civil societies temperatures may rise, but they lead to legitimization because the new Government reflects the results of the ballot box, irrespective how disastrously difficult a governing coalition may be formed.

In the absence of a civil society the dynamics of the ballot box potentially undercut the understanding between the leaders of the oligarchy not to use force. As a result few can resist the temptation of vote-rigging. And that is precisely what happened in Afghanistan. When the second candidate withdrew, the Americans had no choice but to endorse Karzai. His legitimacy is at an all time low.

Above anything else Afghanistan needs stability and order. Only then there's the chance of a meaningful relationship between the center and the periphery. It is up to us to shield the Afghan regime from becoming a safe-house for those who wish to destroy Western civilization. Jihadists from Pakistan using Afghanistan as a launching pad to topple the regime in Islamabad, is also a hazard that must also be averted.

Before we can safely speak of stability we need to ask ourselves why we're training an Afghan standing army. For Karzai? I don't think so. He's a dead man walking. A military corps will only bring stability if it reflects the existing balance of power, giving it legitimacy in the 19th Century meaning of the word. This will not enthuse everyone in the West.

The American proposal to finance tribal militias is very dangerous, but not inept. A tribal balance of power at the provincial and central level is not trivial. The alternative, training Afghan armed forces, is not without its problems either. The current army is tribally unbalanced and it is no wonder upto a third has deserted. It's fairly easy for the Taliban to infiltrate such an artificial construct.

Stability will only be possible in Afghanistan if the Westminster model is neatly tucked away, to gather dust somewhere in a nondescript drawer. Think tribal, practical, undeterred, and bide your time. All other options, democratization, abandonment or just providing development aid, will lead to an instable order, at odds with vital Western interests.

What should the Netherlands do? Forget about being a leading ISAF nation, but recoup, and go back to the area where vital interests are at stake: the Greater Middle East. And to those who think that the West lacks the political will to endure this fight over longer stretches of time, I can only advise you to seek refuge under the bed.

Arend Jan Boekestijn is a historian, associated with the University of Utrecht, the Netherlands. His book "De Prijs van een Slecht Geweten" (The Price of a Bad Conscience") (Uitgeverij Aspekt) will hit the bookstores today.

NRC: "Dutch politician asks if aid really aids"

In a new book, former politican Arend Jan Boekestijn joins the choir of people challenging the usefulness of development aid. >>>

Read also part II in this series, "Of Development Aid, Nation-Building and Unification", by Dr Sam Holliday

Related dossiers:

- "The Afghan Front"
- "Pakistan's Double Bubble"
- "The Finer Points of Warfare"
- "The Propaganda Hirabah"
- "Narco Wars"

Related:

- Pat Dollard
- Michael Yon

- The Armiger Cromwell Center (click Afghanistan*New)

- ISAF (NATO) Official Page

This Week's Madhouse: Wilders, Winter, Failed Philosophy

There seems to be an epidemic going on within the Postmodern West, in which valid and factual criticisms of Islam, made by politicians like Susanne Winter in Austria (bottom update) and Geert Wilders in the Netherlands are being outlawed as per the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) demands. The following question to our political leaders imprints itself on my consciousness:

Is progress temporarily suspended until Eurabia has managed to catch up with the rest of humanity, or is it your intention to keep the backward course until we've actually reverted to a level of development, on par with the pre Enlightenment age?

Our position, that the Amsterdam Court of Appeal's decision this week to prosecute Geert Wilders for - in short - insulting Islam, is encouraging the forces of chaos and radicalism, is almost immediately vindicated by today's news.

• A well know Muslim hate preacher in a speech at Rotterdam University has called for Wilders "to be flogged".
• One of the parties who pressed the charges - an anti racism platform - is now calling for the outlawing of all regular political discourse involving non-whites: the prosecution of a Wilders Free Party member who voiced accusations at the Netherlands Antilles Government this week of corruption, a known fact.

In the meanwhile relativist thought does its destructive work on the souls of the people on West Street. What strikes me in TV interviews and polls is that ordinary people have taken up a position as if Wilders' point is, to willfully and spitefully hurt poor, ordinary Muslims, either out of cold, electoral calculation, or because 'he just hates Muslims' (much like the Left hate George Bush and Muslims hate Jews).

It's as if it's just Wilders' hateful character, and that he might just as easily have swapped his perverted, vicious opinion for a warmer and fuzzier one, had he not had such an unpleasant, fascist personality. Do you see what's happening here?

It is almost as if it's a matter of civility, of etiquette. That is the result of the relativist position that denies the existence of objective reality. Everything is taken as filtered and tainted by the subjective, personal perspective.

The followers of this philosophy believe that the result will be, respect and tolerance for each and every position (the sole exception is made for the white, male 'power structure's narrative, which is uniquely evil). And reality being what it is, to appreciate it all, means to love none. In effect, it is the philosophy of Nothing that once again at some point in the foreseeable future, will end in human drama.

Over on Pajames TV Michael Ledeen in "Faster Please" has a fascinating interview with award-winning milblogger Michael Yon. They talk about the War on Terrorism and recent developments in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Netherlands is one of the coalition countries presently entrenched in Afghanistan. It is this small country's heftiest mission since the Korean War. But the national narrative looks at the Afghan undertaking almost entirely in terms of development aid. The highly trained military are seen as glorified development workers, commonly referrred to as 'soldiers'.

While the Russians have been denying the coalition access to infrastructure to assist operations in Afganistan, only this morning Yahoo!News report that the ice is thawing: "Russia sees its relations with NATO improving and wants the military alliance to succeed in Afghanistan, to reduce the regional threat".

The Taliban meanwhile kept busy blasting their way backwards through time by blowing up four boys' and one girls' school in Pakistan's scenic Swat valley. It's no reminder to the Dutch public in general that the failed state of Afghanistan, if left unchecked, can still be a major threat to the region and the world at large.

Other than the Troofers' version of events, no lessons were taken from 9/11. So these occurances in the tribal regions do not trigger any correlation being drawn between failed states and flying bombs in the capital of Capitalism.

A consequence of waking up to reality is having to deal with unpleasant facts, something that would never do for the ever 'personal realization' driven hedonists of the late counter-cultural revolution.

As for Iraq, that Bush-neocon disaster nobody wants to talk about anymore since the highly successful surge, Yon explains how the most explosive region - Al Anbar province - has proved to be key to the pacification of the entire country. The marines, rather than being IED'd to pieces, are now actually bored to death.

And on a lighter note, Yon is going to serve Troofy film manufacturer Michael Moore with a lawsuit pertaining to copyright infringements.

Who could have thought that life amongst the atoms and molecules would be that hard?!

Update:

And of course - how embarrassing - the initiative to support Geert comes from the US ...

The Flaming Blog: "Support Geert Wilders"

The Flaming Blog is proud to present this site in order to help raise money for Geert Wilders, the Dutch parliamentarian being prosecuted for his outspokenness about the dangers of Islam and the Islamisation of the Netherlands and all of the west. Wilders is being prosecuted by his own countrymen, being called an extremist, a xenophobe and all other sorts of names while the true extremists and hate-mongers exist right under their noses. The Flaming Blog offers its full support to Geert. On this site, you will find tee shirts that will help raise awareness of Geert's plight and the plight of free speech in the West. All of the proceeds go to Geert's defense fund. We must stop his prosecution and the destruction of his party, the Dutch Freedom Party! (...) >>>

Also ... a Theo van Gogh design (left) - Theo, who already gave his life for freedom!

The International Free Press Society: "Policy Statement"

In recent years - and in particular since 9/11 - freedom of speech has been shrinking throughout the world. This is true not only in countries where this most basic freedom has been tenuous at best, but increasingly where it was first conceived and long enshrined: Europe, the United States and other countries where Western ideas of liberty have taken root.

It is time to confront and reverse the forces, both internal and external, that are now arrayed against free speech, time to organize not just locally and nationally, but also globally in recognition of the common danger imperiling all free societies. The sole purpose of The International Free Press Society (IFPS) is to defend freedom of expression wherever and by whomever it is threatened. (...) The stakes in this battle could not be higher. (...) >>>

- Filed on Articles in "In Defense of Liberty" -

President O: the Fall Out Begins

The reactions are coming in, fast and furious ...

Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group: "Colonel George Taylor, USAF, Had This to Say"

A Republic, if you can keep it. Looks to me like we can’t.

RedState: Obama Administration Survival Guide - Welcome To The Loyal Opposition"

The nation awakens today to a grim day (although less grim than it might have been, as the late Senate races come in and the prognosis for a decent-sized GOP resistance looks much better). But America has endured worse. Here's 12 ways I recommend that conservatives and Republicans prepare to face the next four years under President Obama (yeah, get used to that one) (...)

... RedState notices something else as well, which can also be witnessed all over the Dutch media (sometimes interpreting subjectivist PC lingo can be really, really hard: they've got me on this one - anyone?) ...

"Oh, so now it's OK to call him Barack Hussein Obama?"

Brace yourselves for what is coming. One CNN contributor just said (paraphrase): "I can now say what I couldn’t say before. We haven’t just elected a black president. We have elected a black president whose middle name is HUSSEIN."

... hmm, and it looks like Morning Bell has a few bats loose in the belfry ...

Morning Bell: "Congratulations, President-Elect Obama"

After a hard-fought campaign nearly two years in the making, last night a candidate was elected president of the United States. That candidate promised to “cut taxes for 95% of workers and their families,” expand the Army by 65,000 and the Marines by 27,000, and enact “a net spending cut” for the federal government. Lower taxes, a strong defense and shrinking the size of government. These are core conservative beliefs. Anyone who claims yesterday’s election was the end of conservatism simply was not paying attention to the campaign (...) >>>

... well, looks like the usual suspects didn't lose much time either ...

The Age: "Russia's Medvedev hits out at US"

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has blamed the United States for the world's problems and announced new missile deployments in Europe, calling on incoming US counterpart Barack Obama to mend Washington's ways.

Medvedev rounded on the United States for ills ranging from the global financial crisis to the recent war in Georgia, in a state-of-the-nation speech that was watched intently by his mentor Vladimir Putin, and omitted mentioning Obama by name. (...) >>>

The Right Perspective: "Taliban Calls On US Troop Withdrawal"

The Afghan Taliban has called on US-president elect Barack Obama only hours after his election victory,to withdraw troops from Afghanistan and usher in an “era of peace” in the world. “We want him (Obama) to change the policies of President (George W.) Bush. He could end the years-long war by withdrawing U.S. and allied troops from Afghanistan, ” Qari Mohammad Yusuf Ahmadi, spokesman for the Taliban, told the Pakistan-based Afghan Islamic press. “To those who tear the world down, we will defeat you,” Obama said in his victory speech in Chicago. >>>

... in the meantime the state coup against the private sector continues unabated ...

CNBC: "Pros Say: Obama Win = Oil Up, Dollar Down"

(...) Rules Will Be Rewritten - "Going forward, what the markets have to anticipate is going to be a substantial rewriting of the rules of the game. A real philosophical discussion about should the banking system be like a utility, paid like a utility, regulated like a utility, or should it have the entrepreneurial innovative drive that it has in the rest of the economy? And the way you set those rules up will define which of your views will make and will lose money going forward," Dr. Philippa Malmgren, president of Canonbury Group & former economic adviser to President George W. Bush, said. >>> also see video ...

CNBC: "Obama Has to Step Up to the Plate"

... oh, great - and the brothers of peace are weighing in as well with invective, racism and irresponsible journalism (that last one: welcome to the club) ...

Memri: "Initial Arab Media Reactions to Obama's Election"

"The Democrats Are Like a Snake That "Kill[s] You Slowly Without You Noticing" - "That Black Man" Will Never Change U.S. Policy" - "We Hereby Declare Obama the 44th President [Before It's Official]... Even If It Might Be Considered Irresponsible Journalism"
~


- Filed on Articles in "The Pomo Presidency," a continuation of "The Pomo White House" -

Pyro Terrorism Goes America

Further to our post on 26th October "The Wild Fires of Pyro Terrorism", with respect to the now infamous Pakistani secret service (ISI) developed remote bomb triggering devices, we have been informed that since 2004 the NATO forces in Afghanistan have noted the Taliban began using mobile phones to detonate car bombs and booby traps.

The contraptions have now surfaced in the US, while terrorist related websites apparently are calling for ' Forest Jihad': "Jihad is an art just like poetry, music, and the fine arts. There are people that draw and there are others that are jihadists. They both act upon inspiration.” Hm, reminds me of the perverted Postmodern aesthetics of blood, death and revolution ... reverting.

1389 Blog is reporting as follows:

1389 Blog: " California Theft Ring Bust Yields Remote-Detonated Bombs"

Triggered by cellular phones?

Remember all of the discussion in the summer of 2007 about wildfires in California and in Greece? Many people raised questions about whether some of those fires were, in fact, ecoterrorism. There was also some evidence that devices made from cellular phones may have been used to ignite wildland fires. This is plausible enough, considering that remote bombs triggered by cellular phones have been used in other terrorist attacks. But after the fires were extinguished, the story disappeared from the news.

These mysterious remote cell phone bombs have now surfaced - in California.

Undercover Op Leads To Cell Phone-Triggered Bomb

San Jose and Santa Clara police chiefs announced Wednesday the results of a massive sting operation in their cities. Operation Meltdown, as the joint effort was called, netted investigators hundreds of criminals, tons of stolen copper, dozens of stolen cars and weapons, and in one case, homemade bombs.

A Fremont man was arrested in October as part of Operation Meltdown. He is accused of trying to sell the officers improvised explosive devices capable of being denoted remotely by a cell phone. During a news conference at San Jose Police headquarters Wednesday morning, police showed a video, recorded by hidden camera, of the suspect demonstrating the technology to officers by detonating a bomb for them.

Operation Meltdown was begun in March 2007. Undercover officers from both departments opened a fake metal-recycling business in the city of Santa Clara called Jose Clara Co-Op.
Within days, San Jose Police Chief Rob Davis said, customers started showing up offering to sell what appeared to be stolen copper. Over the course of the next year, the undercover officers purchased 14 tons of copper with a street vale of almost $100,000. Soon after the officers began buying the copper, though, Davis said visitors to the recycling shop started offering to sell other stolen goods. The officers eventually purchased 40 stolen vehicles and 74 firearms, including 21 assault weapons.

Over the life of the operation, Davis said, 273 suspects were investigated, 63 of whom were arrested over the course of the investigation. Another 73 suspects were picked up during a sweep Tuesday. There are still another 70 suspects with outstanding warrants yet to be arrested…

Vehicle theft was also part of the picture, including some mighty fancy rides:
40 stolen vehicles were purchased. The vehicles include a BMW, Porsche Carrera, Nissan 350Z, Audi, Toyota MR2, SUV’s, sedans, motorcycles and a new Ford Edge SUV.
Who is involved?

The article mentioned that “many of the suspects were identified as gang members,” but no suspects were named, nor were the gangs identified.
In case you have any doubts:

Forest Fire Jihad Being Threatened on Terrorist Websites

U.S. officials monitoring terrorist web sites have discovered a call for using forest fires as weapons against “crusader” nations, in what may explain some recent wildfires in places like southern California and Greece.

A terrorist website was discovered recently that carried a posting that called for “Forest Jihad.” The posting was listed on the Internet on Nov. 26 and reported in U.S. intelligence channels last week.

The statement, in Arabic, said that “summer has begun so do not forget the Forest Jihad.”
The writer called on all Muslims in the United States, Europe, Russia and Australia to “start forest fires.”

The posting quoted imprisoned Al Qaida terrorist Abu Musab Al-Suri, as saying “Jihad is an art just like poetry, music, and the fine arts. There are people that draw and there are others that are jihadists. They both act upon inspiration.”

- Filed on Articles in "The Wild Fires of Pyro Terrorism" -

The Transatlantic Gulf of Soft and Hardware

In an article in the LA Times "Gates faults NATO force in southern Afghanistan" the US Defense Secretary said he believes NATO forces currently deployed in the region do not know how to combat a guerrilla insurgency, a deficiency that could be contributing to the rising violence in the fight against the Taliban.

In the interview, Gates compared the troubled experience of the NATO forces in the south - primarily troops from the closest US allies, Britain and Canada, as well as the Netherlands - with progress made by American troops in the eastern part of Afghanistan. He traced the failing in part to a Cold War orientation.

Since Robert Kagan's book "Of Paradise and Power" we better understand the psychological mechanism that says that if you have a hammer, you happen see a whole lot of nails, or the other way about, if you don't have a hammer you fail to observe all the loose nails lying around.

The fragmented Dutch political constellation demands that military missions carry the broadest possible parliamentary support. In order to get the Leftist parties aboard, the missions' aims often overemphasize peace related activities. Development efforts, civil engineering, and nation building projects render highly trained military personnel a sort of hybrids between construction handies, development workers and boy scouts, .

Another problem is evidently, in order to have peace, the war first needs to be won, which - heaven forbid - might actually involve killing terrorists! Those that do fully engage in winning the war, are viewed upon as bloodthirsty cowboys. This attitude constitutes 'supporting the troops'.

We also know of the heavy European reliance on post Cold War peace dividend. In fact, most European countries in the thralls of postmodernism imagine themselves to have passed beyond history altogether. They live under the illusion that war is a feature of pre-history, requiring some crude state of mind they have risen beyond.

Such twisted ideas resulting from the abdication of moral choices are not just delusional and dangerous, they are inviting aggression from states that are very much still a part of the Hobbesian world operating fully in the good old-fashioned tradition of power play. Some have been developing great plans for themselves and for the world.

Elsevier is reporting that - far from examining if the critique is possibly warranted - the Dutch Government is having nothing of it. Even the Atlanticist spokesman of the opposition Liberal party demands an explanation. The Minister responsible meanwhile has invited the American Ambassador in for a chat.

He's expressed hope for some misunderstanding, emphasizing the military's professionalism and experience. "The Netherlands after all, has participated in over fifty peace missions!" That last expression - I'm afraid - explains it all ...

- Related dossier: "OSINT From the Afghan Front" -
- Related website: Dutch/Australian NATO Task Force Uruzgan, Afghanistan (ISAF III) (MilBlog)

Update:

- Reuters: "Gates: Afghan shortfalls remain, no more U.S. troops"
- LA Times: "Netherlands summons U.S. official to discuss Gates' NATO criticism"

- Filed on Articles in "The Finer Points of Warfare", cat. Defence, The Military -