I went to a session at the University of Toronto's Munk Centre for International Studies today to listen to Arif Lalani, Canada's former ambassador to Afghanistan. He talked about defining success in Afghanistan.
My question was as follows:
How many Taliban are there today? How many were there five years ago? If there are more today, what does that say about the success of reconstruction efforts to date? If there are fewer, why are there still so many security problems there?
Lalani talked around it a bit. For example, he argued that what do numbers matter if there are 10 Taliban doing the same amount of damage? He noted that some Afghan men fight for the Taliban because they have no other job.
He wouldn't give a specific number, but did say that "it's probably fair to say there are more Taliban" today.
Whoa.
He made the argument that progress is being made in Afghanistan -- progress that doesn't get sufficient weight in news reportage. Let's say for argument's sake that things are getting better.
If so, why then is the Taliban also growing in strength?
Munk Centre director Janice Stein chipped in by saying that the number of Taliban would vary widely depending on season and whatnot. Fair enough.
I told Lalani that if NATO doesn't know the Taliban's strength or the number of hardcores versus 'soft' Taliban after nearly seven years on the ground, then I'm completely at a loss for words.
"I didn't say I didn't know," he said. Lalani then added he didn't know if he could tell me.*
* Afterthought: Am I the first journalist to ask him that question?
Actually, I've put the question to NATO, and they've never even told me they can't tell me. The question just sort of disappeared into the ether.
Here's a Globe and Mail story based on an appearance by Lalani before the paper's editorial board:
He acknowledged that sometimes it is difficult to define success, with almost daily attacks on soldiers and civilians by Taliban fighters, including the freeing of almost all the prisoners at the Sarpoza prison in Kandahar City in June.
However, he said Canadians must also understand that there have been a number of advances in education, health, infrastructure and even security. There are more than six million children – including girls – going to school and nearly 80 per cent of the population able to access basic health services. Thousands of children have been immunized for polio. Thousands of Afghans, many of them women, have started small businesses through a micro-finance program.
As well, the Afghan National Army is now 88,000 strong (the goal is 133,000). Challenges remain, including training and professionalizing the police force, which has 60,000 officers and needs 25,000 more. Mr. Lalani believe the international community should develop a rapid deployment police force, which could help train and advise police recruits. Presently, 25 Canadian police officers are assisting with this task, but few other foreign countries contribute officers to EUPOL, the European policing mission in Afghanistan.
The Taliban will continue their offensive in an attempt to destabilize the country in advance of presidential elections, scheduled for 2009, predicted Mr. Lalani.
“The Taliban is throwing everything it has at us and... we should expect a tough year ahead,” he said.
Meanwhile, I punched 'taliban numbers afghanistan' into Google, and it spit up the following:
The World Socialist Web Site had the following today:
The number of fighters at the disposal of the Taliban and Hekmatyar is the subject of wildly divergent estimates. The main Taliban commander, Jalaluddin Haqqani, may be able to call upon the services of 15,000 to 20,000 men. Hekmatyar, who has only returned to prominence in Afghanistan over the past four years, most likely commands a far smaller force. Despite suffering thousands of dead and wounded each year from US air strikes or in one-sided clashes with far better armed American and NATO forces, both wings of the insurgency have been able to sustain their guerilla operations. Islamist militants from other parts of the world are believed to be assisting the native Afghan insurgents—as they did during the Soviet-Afghan war. The estimates of how many range from 500 to as high as 8,000.
Those figures, however, are totally unsourced.
However, let's say there are 20,000 Taliban and other insurgents. At a ratio of 10 soldiers per insurgent, that means a total of 200,000 NATO and ANA troops would be needed. Are we at that number yet? If not, why not?
Some other stories of possible note:
AP via Yahoo Canada News, Aug. 24, 2008: Taliban tactics increasingly lethal; record number of western troops dying
The Independent, Aug. 22, 2008: Afghanistan spiralling back to days of Taliban, charities say
Asia Times Online, Aug. 22, 2008: Afghan numbers don't add up