US President Barack Obama is stepping up the war in Afghanistan by sending an additional 30,000 American troops there in the first half of 2010, on top of the 68,000 already there. Other Western countries have around 40,000 troops in Afghanistan. Soon, the Western troop deployment will exceed peak Soviet occupation levels of 110,000-120,000 in the 1980s. However, as I have suggested previously, even this may not be enough.

Earlier today, I wrote a report on Business Monitor Online outlining the implications of Obama’s decision. One of the things I touched upon was the parallels between the US war and the Soviet war in the 1980s:

Key Advantages The US Has Vis-à-Vis USSR In Afghanistan

• The US-led coalition has suffered around 1,500 troop deaths in the eight years since its invasion of Afghanistan. By comparison, the Soviet Union lost around 15,000 soldiers (some say a lot more) in its nine year occupation.

• The Taliban has limited external support. By comparison, the Afghan Mujahideen had the financial and material backing of the US, UK, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, China, and other countries.

• The US-led coalition has killed far fewer civilians (estimated in the thousands) than the Soviets did (estimated at a million). Soviet disregard for civilian casualties was a major factor boosting opposition to its occupation.

• The US is generally believed to be more liked by Afghans than the USSR was.

• The US has international support in its Afghan endeavour, whereas the USSR did not. Crucially, Pakistan is a US ally, whereas it was not allied to the Soviet Union in the 1980s.

Key Disadvantages The US Faces Vis-à-Vis USSR

• Afghanistan’s population has roughly doubled since the 1980s to around 30 million. This means a much bigger potentially restive population and a bigger pool of potential recruits for radical groups.

• The US is under far greater pressure than the Soviet Union was to minimise troop and civilian casualties.

• The USSR had the backing of the 300,000-strong Afghan army, whereas the NATO-trained Afghan National Army (ANA) is only 95,000-strong. Proposals to raise ANA and Police forces to 400,000 are likely to take many years to realise.

• The USSR had much easier logistical access to Afghanistan, which was its neighbour. US access to Afghanistan is more complicated due to its dependency on third countries.

• The Soviet Union relied on conscription and controlled the media. This limited the role of public opinion in shaping the war (although relaxation of media controls under glasnost subsequently increased public scrutiny of the war).

• When the USSR withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, it left behind a fairly well-armed government that was stronger than the present Karzai administration. Even so, the pro-Soviet Najibullah government collapsed in 1992, leaving the Mujahideen triumphant.

Overall, it is clear that both superpowers had advantages and disadvantages. Nonetheless, the probability of success is still stacked against the US.

Tags: Afghanistan, casualties, Mujahideen, Obama, Soviet war, Taliban, troop surge
Posted in: Asia, General, Geopolitics, Political Risk, US
RSSFree email updates