Iraq & Afghanistan
Iraq
Two events that dominated the news from Iraq as 2006 ended guaranteed that Iraq would remain one of the “central fronts” in the administration’s “Global War on Terror” (GWOT) in 2007. First, Saddam Hussein was executed by the new Iraqi government on December 30. Second, fatalities at year’s end were the worst they had been all year. December’s losses – 113 – were the highest for any month in 2006, were the third highest monthly total for the entire war, and pushed overall U.S. fatalities since March 19, 2003 to 3,002.
Of course, thousands of others have died since March 19, 2003 – Iraqis as well as troops from the numerous countries that sent (and still have) troops in Iraq. The number of Iraqis reported killed varies significantly from source to source. Among non-governmental organizations, the conservative Iraq Body Count project estimates that civilian deaths in Iraq since the U.S. led invasion in March 2003 now exceed 57,700. Iraq Coalition Casualty Count (ICCC) lists more than 16,400 Iraqi civilians and nearly 2,100 Iraqi security personnel killed just in 2006, with more than 1,000 of these fatalities registered each month in the second half of the year.
As Iraqi civilian casualties mounted through the summer, the country’s Ministry of Health once again reversed course and stopped giving monthly fatality totals. The rationale sounded like something from the Pentagon: such information contributed to poor morale among the public while encouraging insurgents. This left the UN representative’s Iraq office as the only official source for civilian casualties across the country. Baghdad dismissed the UN counts as “riddled with inaccuracies.” More likely, Baghdad’s rejection stemmed from embarrassment: UN statistics for the first 10 months of 2006 registered 1,000 or more fatalities every month except January, February, and May. Three months were particularly brutal: August (2,966), September (3,539), and November (3,709). The UN also notes that 1.6 million Iraqis are internally displaced and another 1.5 million are refugees, mostly in neighboring countries.
But the most devastating estimate of Iraqi fatalities is the 2006 interview-study done under the auspices of the Johns Hopkins University and published in the British medical journal Lancet. The study estimated that since March 19, 2003, Iraq had suffered 655,000 more fatalities than would have occurred had the U.S. invasion and occupation never happened.
Afghanistan
Perhaps the kindest comment about Afghanistan is that the Taliban and its allied fighters from al Qaeda and other terror organizations have not recaptured the Taliban’s “capital” of Kandahar. But insurgent forces, concentrated in the south and the east along the Pakistan-Afghan border, continued to inflict a progressively heavy toll on Afghan army units and on NATO forces that replaced most of the U.S. troops that had been operating in the border areas. The NATO contingent of approximately 20,000-22,000 troops includes about 8,000 U.S. troops while the other 12,000 U.S. soldiers are under separate U.S. control. More than 4,000 deaths are attributed to insurgent actions that rose progressively during 2006 to more than 600 per month.
While 37 countries have troops in Afghanistan, only three – Canada, Britain, the Netherlands – have no restrictions on where their troops can be assigned. Predictably, these countries have suffered the largest number of fatalities after the United States. Unwelcome news came from France late in 2006 when Paris affirmed it would pull its 200 Special Operations personnel from Afghanistan in 2007. Nonetheless, in October 2006, acting under a renewed UN mandate, NATO assumed responsibility for most operations in Afghanistan, including 25 provincial reconstruction teams (PRTs) helping Afghans rebuild their country.
Adding to the pressure on allied forces is the truce between Islamabad and the tribal elders and sheiks who control most of Pakistan’s province of Waziristan. Under the agreement, the Pakistani army leaves security and governance to tribal officials who, in return, agree not to extend the traditional offers of food, drink, and shelter to “visitors.” What has emerged is a chain-letter effect. The Pakistani tribal heads are not constrained by Islamabad’s military; the Taliban are not pressured by the Waziristan chiefs, which leaves them free to cross the border and employ more car bombs, since there are more opportunities to get autos into Afghanistan, and conduct attacks on government, NATO, and U.S. forces. Intelligence reports continue to cite increases in the fighting strength of the Taliban and increased intimidation of rural villagers – armed incursions, destruction of schools and health clinics, and assassinations of government officials. In fact, with 4,000 civilian deaths attributed to terrorist violence or coalition operations, 2006 was the most lethal year since the Taliban lost political power at the end of 2001. U.S. fatalities in 2006 came to 98, one less than in 2005. Since October 2001, when Operation Enduring Freedom commenced, 357 U.S. military personnel have died in Afghanistan; coalition dead total 159.
In late January 2006, another Afghan donors’ conference convened in London. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, noting that the U.S. had already poured more than $10.3 billion into reconstruction in Afghanistan, said that President Bush’s Fiscal Year 2007 budget would ask Congress for $1.1 billion more. In all, the London conference elicited new commitments of $10.5 billion by the 70 countries in attendance. In return, Kabul presented a five-year “Compact” of domestic reform and development aimed at improving the quality of life of ordinary Afghanis rather than committing resources toward institution building. One significant challenge to this (or any) government plan is weaning Afghan farmers away from opium production.
