‘between the dragon and his wrath’, 1994–2017undefeated and more than 13,000 foreign troops, including 10,000 u.s.
soldiers, are still in Afghanistan under the banner of Operation Resolute
Support. American advisers continue to play an active role in directing
combat and advising Afghan security forces in the defence of key towns
such as Qunduz. The situation, however, quickly deteriorated following the
withdrawal and at the time of writing is now so serious that nato and the
usa are now sending troops back to Afghanistan. With no end in sight to
the conflict, the United States and nato seem to have effectively committed
themselves to propping up the Afghan government almost indefinitely.
Coalition dual roles and reconstructionFollowing the fall of the Taliban, some coalition forces assumed a dual role
as both part of isaf and as combat troops. isaf included contingents of
British and New Zealand troops in Kabul and Bamiyan, respectively, but at
the same time British regiments fought the Taliban in the Helmand, while
the New Zealand sas were deployed in an anti-terrorist role and supported
British anti-insurgency operations in the Helmand. To complicate matters
further, isaf was never officially a un peacekeeping force and the soldiers
did not wear the distinctive un blue beret or have un insignia on their
vehicles. Instead, isaf and combat troops wore the same combat fatigues
and flew the same national flag. Most Afghans, government ministers, as
well as the Taliban, saw no distinction between the two roles; as far as they
were concerned, isaf was never politically neutral.
isaf and coalition forces also exceeded their mandate under the
Bonn Agreement by engaging in civil reconstruction projects and by so
doing unwittingly politicized the humanitarian relief effort, civilianizing
the military and militarizing the civilians. 27 As isaf established bases in
provincial capitals, it set up Provincial Reconstruction Teams (prts), which
oversaw the rehabilitation of civil infrastructure, including government
offices, schools, clinics, bridges, roads and irrigation systems. The philoso-
phy behind the prts derived from u.s.–nato counterinsurgency theories
known as ‘hearts and minds’, which sees the military’s involvement in civil
reconstruction as another ‘weapon’ in the pacification of rural commu-
nities and combating insurgencies. However, the situation in Afghanistan
was very different from post-Second World War Europe, where the ‘hearts
and minds’ policy was originally devised. Local communities had long
memories of the oppression of the Soviet occupation as well as successive
governments who imposed their will at the point of a gun. They there-
fore felt threatened and intimidated when armed foreign soldiers in full