By Pamela Hess - WASHINGTON, Feb. 25 (UPI) -- U.S. forces will not participate in the international peacekeeping force in Afghanistan, said the American general in charge of the five-month old war there on Monday, but it will likely offer advisers to the British-led force of roughly 4,000 peacekeepers and will train an indigenous Afghan military force to keep order.
"I do not believe we will be involved in peacekeeping operations in Afghanistan," said Gen. Tommy Franks, the general in charge of U.S. Central Command, at a news conference in Tampa Monday.
Franks conceded that Afghanistan remains "murky and troublesome" but said responsibility for the country's stability rests with Afghanistan itself.
"The future of Afghanistan is going to be in the hands of the Afghan people," Franks said. Helping Afghanistan build a national militia on its own is one of the key aims of the Bush administration.
"We're sure that the right thing to do is to have an Afghan national army. We're not at all sure what size it should be or exactly where it should be. We know that we want to begin the forming of this Afghan national army as quickly as we can. ... What we want to do is get ourselves set up with an Afghan national army that is able to serve the country of Afghanistan through time, with border security, police functions and the like."
On Sunday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told NBC's "Meet the Press" that only the Afghans could ensure peace and stability in their country.
"And we have to help them do that and help them figure out a way to do that," he said.
Rumsfeld said his preference was that the peacekeeping force not be expanded at the expense of developing an Afghan national army.
"Should we spend the time and money and effort in training now to expand the International Security Force, which ultimately will leave and create an unstable situation when they leave unless there is something to take their place? Or should the time and money and effort and training be spent now to create that national army? And that's the discussion that's taking place," he said.
On Tuesday, a military envoy from U.S. Central Command will return to headquarters in Tampa to make recommendations as to what should be done to secure Afghanistan.
"I'm not precisely sure exactly what the ingredients of the future will look like," Franks said. "We're sure we're going to want to have an Afghan national army, because that then becomes the tool whereby the executive authorities in Afghanistan are able to maintain control and establish their own stability.
"The precision of exactly how that will be accomplished is what I think we're all thinking about. I think that's what we're studying right now."
The report from Maj. Gen. Charles Campbell, the chief of staff of the United States Central Command, may recommend the expansion and deployment of a larger ISAF.
"We know that the ISAF force inside Kabul has done a great job," Franks said. "So the question that flows from that is should that ... should the business of ISAF be exported, should it be expanded elsewhere inside Afghanistan?"
There are 3,700 soldiers associated with the ISAF but they are limited to Kabul. Britain heads the force until April 30 when Turkey is scheduled to take the helm.
Interim Afghan leader Hamid Karzai has asked that the force be deployed to other population centers like Mazar-i-Sharif, Kandahar and Herat -- pleas that are apparently no longer falling on deaf ears.
"I am basically reflecting here a demand, a request of the Afghan people" for more security assistance, Karzai said at a news conference with British Prime Minister Tony Blair Feb. 1.
Karzai said anywhere between 10,000 and 70,000 peacekeepers would be needed to secure the country. By comparison, there are roughly 40,000 peacekeepers in Kosovo.
Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan, said in Kabul Sunday the United States now shares his concern that warlords would undermine Karzai's authority to restore order and establish a central government.
"I believe the warlords do not want to go back to war -- but if the Afghans want to go back to war, there is not an international force big enough to stop them," Khalilzad said. "Our concern is that because of the lack of trust and security, warlords might do things that lead to war, so we're looking at various options to limit the prospect of war among the various armies."
Karzai's hands are full -- not just with rebuilding his war-ravaged country's civilian institutions and economy but maintaining his power in the face of ethnic rivalries and tribal warlords.
On Feb. 16, for instance, American aircraft bombed "enemy troops" who attacked forces loyal to Karzai's government near Khowst. A second strike occurred on Sunday, according to U.S. Central Command.
According to local reports, however, these enemies were not al Qaida or Taliban -- the targets of the U.S. war in Afghanistan -- but local warlords who opened fire on Karzai's men after they tried to stop an intertribal battle in the eastern province.
"We need a national defense force as soon as possible so that we can completely stop these incidents of warlordism," Karzai warned in early February. "We have gone through 20 years of war and disaster and the country is full of arms."
Copyright © 2002 United Press International
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=25022002-050813-9018r
| 
Online Stats: 
