Afghanistan conference

Events in Afghanistan over the past few days have brought into focus what many experts and observers have been discussing for many months now: Eight years since the Taliban were ousted from power, the battle to restore peace and stability in Afghanistan is still as far away from being won as ever.

In some ways, the struggle to build a democratic state and eradicate extremist insurgents from the war-torn nation is more difficult now than at any other time since Afghanistan's own Northern Alliance liberated Kabul in November 2001.

Western efforts to support and promote democratic reform in Afghanistan have been undermined by widespread corruption, highlighted by the recent discredited and disputed presidential election while NATO forces find themselves increasingly under attack by a resurgent Taliban.

NATO casualties are at record levels, civilian casualties are on the rise despite NATO's best efforts and public doubts about the war are growing in many of the 42 countries that make up the 100,000-strong international force in Afghanistan.

Airstrike brings problems into focus

Friday's deadly airstrike by NATO planes on two hijacked fuel tankers in the Kunduz province in the north of the country, which killed scores of civilians as well as Taliban fighters, has sent shockwaves not only through Afghanistan but through the international community. The result being that the discussion over the future of Afghanistan and the involvement of Western nations there has turned from a constant low hum to a loud, frantic chatter.

In an attempt to find solutions to the ever-increasing challenges in Afghanistan, the leaders of Britain, France and Germany unveiled proposals on Sunday for another international conference later this year to discuss the next phase of the mission in the areas of governance and development while also setting new targets for transferring security responsibilities to the Afghan authorities.

Afghanistan has been the subject of numerous international conferences since 2001, the most recent coming in June this year when Western leaders met their Afghan counterparts in Paris. But while early meetings after the fall of the Taliban - most notably those in Bonn, Berlin and Tokyo - were seen as being tremendously important, subsequent conferences, according to experts, have been mere formalities. With the situation in Afghanistan as serious as it is, and with public support waning, most observers believe this latest conference has to deliver more than just the usual pledges of support and funding.

Action needed as Taliban resurgeance gathers pace

"Since the conference in Paris when we saw a real change with the international community showing a high level of unity, the situation in Afghanistan has been rapidly going downhill," Daniel Korski, a senior policy fellow and Afghanistan expert at the European Center for Foreign Relations, told Deutsche Welle. "The insurgency shows no sign of abating and while the insurgents may not be able to take territory or control swathes of land, the truth is they feel as though they're winning.

"It's not very clear what a new international conference can achieve in this context," he added. "What we heard the German chancellor talk about this weekend was focusing on how we can transfer more security responsibility onto the Afghan forces but that's not something done particularly well at a conference, that's something that has to be done on the ground. If the West, or more specifically the Europeans, start communicating that they'd rather talk about how to get out of Afghanistan, that may send some unfortunate signals."

Set definite targets or face reality and leave, says expert

Dr. Ian Davis, the director of defense watchdog NATO Watch and a senior advisor at the International Security Information Service Europe, believes that the international community is not only mired in a complicated military situation but also stuck in a diplomatic cycle.

"It's very difficult to see where they can go with this planned conference," he said. "We've been in Afghanistan for eight years now and we tend to be going round in circles. The main commitment again appears to be security as a basis for improving governance and development but every time they come out with this, within a few days you get an incident like the airstrike on Friday.

"So will another international conference make a difference? It's difficult to see how it will. I think again the emphasis will be on security, development and governance, as with previous conferences, and then there will be a discussion on aid but there will be less enthusiasm for this than before because of the levels of corruption we've been seeing. So I'm not sure how this new conference will help," he said.

"If the international community is not going to come up with substantial measures and stronger milestones and objectives then they should start considering a timetable for withdrawal."

Conference should address the war at home

Daniel Korski believes the conference should address not only the impact of Western involvement in Afghanistan but the impact it has on the public in countries participating in the mission.

"This has been a very difficult week for foreign ministers," he said. "They've been talking up a very unpopular war ... I think in a number of different countries we're now seeing a real shift in debate from an uncomfortable opposition to the war, albeit a quiet one, to a vociferously clear 'let's get out now' chorus from certain sections of the political establishment and that's a big problem for European foreign ministers."

"I don't think this is the turning point of the war but I think we'll look back at this event as the time when the conflict not on the battlefield became harder but when the war in the minds of the European public became harder," Korski added.

Author: Nick Amies
Editor: Rob Mudge