Speeches
Transcript of Ambassador Wood’s Media Roundtable
December 27, 2007
Ambassador Wood: I want to start out by welcoming you all and saying how pleased I am to be here with you. I also want to wish you a very happy holiday season.
I am sorry that we don’t get together more frequently. It had been my intention to get together with you all more frequently, but somehow or another events just got ahead of me. But I hope that you’re all finding our public affairs section and our press section to be a useful source of information and commentary, as well as the embassy’s web page. We try to keep that very up to date, very quickly, with my statements and U.S. government statements so that you have the accurate quotes. That should be available almost immediately after I give a speech or after something happens in Washington.
We are very proud of the U.S. policy in Afghanistan. We are very proud of the accomplishments of U.S. policy in Afghanistan. We are very proud of the progress made by the people and government of Afghanistan. So we think we have a good story to tell and we want to tell it.
The purpose of this gathering today is really to look back at the year 2007 and look forward to the year 2008. But as always in Afghanistan, there are many current events, and feel free to ask any question you want to ask during the question and answer period.
Just to start out with a few remarks, I think that 2007 was a good year. In some ways it was a difficult year, but it was a good year. You may recall that in the summer of 2006 the allies and the Afghan government got together to prepare for the year 2007, because there was concern about the Taliban’s fighting ability in 2007. As a result, all of the allies and the Afghan government increased their focus on national security. In particular, the United States allocated to training and equipping the Afghan army and the Afghan police more in the year 2007 than we had allocated in the previous five years combined. I think that you are already seeing the results of that assistance.
The Afghan army is growing rapidly in numbers, and capability, and professionalism. They have played absolutely central roles, leading roles, in a number of military operations in the last three months. Most recently, the professionalism of the Afghan army was crucial to the success and the liberation of the Musa Qala District of Helmand. They have also demonstrated a high level of professionalism and capability in Kandahar, in the north, and in the east.
The training and equipping program is going well, and we believe that by the end of next year, by the end of 2008, the Afghan army will have reached its target of 70,000 troops. Study is going on as we speak with the goal of developing the army beyond that 70,000 number, but right now 70,000 is the target.
What this means is that every day the Afghan army is playing a larger and larger role in protecting the Afghan people from the aggressors against them.
The United States also provided more assistance in 2007 to the Afghan police than it had provided in the previous five years. As you know, for a variety of reasons the challenge of developing the police has been slower than that of developing the army. In large part this is because the police have more varied tasks than the army has, it is more closely related to the communities and therefore dependent on the communities, some of which are not very strong, and had some legacies from the past that it had to overcome. But we are also very optimistic about the police.
The police have shown great bravery on many occasions. The police have suffered higher casualties than the army because they have been deployed in smaller units, with less reinforcements, than the army. The police have also been the victim of corruption in many cases. The police had an uneven leadership in many cases.
During the course of the year, a number of reforms have been put in place by the Afghan government and the international community to help the police. The most important of these has been the pay and rank reform. The pay reform has made the salaries of the police more or less equivalent to those of the army. And in the process of putting in that reform, there was also a review of police officers and officials to confirm that those officers and officials had the qualifications to receive the higher salaries. That process is just about completed, and I can tell you that it is my view that you have a stronger police, a more capable police, a better trained police, and a better led police than you had before.
In addition, just two days ago a new initiative for training the police was begun. In key districts, over time, the police will be removed from the district, substitute police will be put in, and the police that are removed -- both the police officers and their leaders -- will be put through a new course of training which we believe will dramatically increase their capabilities. Those units will also receive new equipment and be trained in communications and command and control techniques. Then they will return to the districts from which they came and the process will begin again with another district. This will happen for roughly five districts every two months.
Another set of districts will be put through what is called a Fast Track program. In this case, the police will receive the same training but they will not be removed from their districts. They will receive their training in those districts. Therefore there will be no disruption in those districts at all during the training process.
These two programs, which have been planned during the course of 2007, have been planned with the Ministry of Interior and with Minister Zarar, and we are all very enthusiastic about them. I would like to compliment Minister Zarar and Deputy Minister Mangal for their hard work in making these programs work.
You all know how the fighting season went. It was a year of intense fighting, as the Afghan security forces, supported by the international forces, did not remain in a defensive posture but instead went out and looked for the enemy, and they found the enemy. And in a series of small but important confrontations, the forces of the Taliban suffered reverse after reverse. Of most importance, many of the field commanders of the Taliban were either killed or captured in the course of these confrontations. The most prominent commander lost was Mullah Daudullah, but many commanders of small units, medium sized units, and large units found themselves under intense pressure, and were either killed or captured in the course of military operations. As a result, the military success that the government of Afghanistan and the allies had been worried about in 2006 by the Taliban did not materialize.
This had several interesting consequences. One consequence was an increase in foreign fighters in the field in Afghanistan. We don’t know why there were more foreign fighters this year than previous years, but we can think of a couple of reasons that might explain it. The leadership of the Taliban may have felt that they had lost so many leaders that they could not replace them easily with Afghans, or they may have felt that morale among their troops was falling, and they needed leaders of a more ideological character. It is difficult to know.
Another consequence, however, was the sad consequence of an increase in terroristic activities by the Taliban. As you know, the number of land mines, the number of IEDs, the number of suicide bombs, the number of kidnappings and the number of atrocities, abuse of the population, have all increased greatly this year. The most prominent of these events while I have been here was the kidnapping of the Korean men and women and the tragic bombing in Baghlan. But as professional reporters, you are all fully aware of literally hundreds of other abuses that were committed. The targeting of school children, the hanging of young men, threats against families, and a variety of other actions.
The only point I would make is that these terroristic actions and atrocities by the Taliban are signs of its weakness, not its strength. It means that in large parts of the country the Taliban have despaired of winning the loyalty of the people and are now trying to intimidate them. I consider this to be a deterioration in the Taliban’s position, but I also have to say that unfortunately terrorism achieves its objective. It creates terror.
As a result, even though the Taliban is weaker, the army is stronger, the police is stronger, and the government is stronger, sometimes because of terrorism we don’t feel as though they are stronger. But, as I say, I am optimistic. I believe that 2007 has gone well. And I believe that we must not only retain hope and determination, but retain confidence, because things are going well. The lights in the shops are on in Kandahar and in Kabul after dark. There is economic activity going on that wasn’t going on before. The IMF estimates that the economy is growing by 13 percent -- the fastest growing economy in South Asia. More children are in school today than have ever been in school in the history of Afghanistan. Access to medicine is better than it has ever been in the history of Afghanistan.
The government of President Karzai is paying every day more attention to governance in the provinces. During the eight months that I have been here, communication between provincial governors and the capital city has improved dramatically. This improved focus and improved communication is illustrated by the creation of the Office of District and Local Government in the presidency. We think this new focus on local government, in a country where most of the people don’t live in the capital city, or even in the four or five big cities, is an important step. We think that step, in conjunction with the improvement of the police who are also, of course, deployed locally to communities, over time is going to produce better and better governance in the districts and in the provinces.
Not all of the news of the year 2007 was good news. I have already mentioned one problem, the increase in terrorism by the Taliban. A second problem is the increase in drug cultivation and trafficking.
As you know, drug cultivation increased by 17 percent in 2007. Because it was a good agricultural year with good rains, yield per hectare also increased by 17 percent so the crop as a whole increased by 34 percent. That is the bad news on the drug side.
The good news on the drug side is that there is increased attention to this problem. More and more Afghans are realizing that drug cultivation and trafficking are not only contrary to Islam but are also a threat to stability in Afghanistan. In Musa Qala, Afghan and international forces found a reported $500 million in street value of drugs warehoused in the district. No clearer proof can be found of the cooperative relationship between the Taliban who used to dominate Musa Qala and the druggers who were using Musa Qala as a storehouse and center for distribution.
But it is not simply the linkage of the Taliban to the drug trade that is the problem. Drug cultivation and trafficking is contrary to Afghan law. So when it happens, it undermines rule of law. It produces large amounts of revenue, which is a source of corruption, and feeds warlords and other illicit power centers whose only interest is in a weak Afghanistan, so that they can continue to do their business. The violence and the lack of governance that the drug trade produces also discourages development and private investment.
Lastly there is, of course, the human tragedy of addiction, both inside of Afghanistan and in the major consuming countries.
In response, the Afghan government and the international community will be increasing their efforts at interdiction, at eradication, and at providing alternative development assistance. By the end of this fiscal year the United States will have provided more than a half a billion dollars in alternative development assistance.
I know that you all believe that our policy in Afghanistan is strongly oriented toward eradication, but I would note that our assistance for eradication is only three percent of our total assistance and is only ten percent of our non-security assistance. That is over the last six years.
I would note that this has been an exciting political year in Afghanistan. Political groups are forming and reforming. There is a lively political discussion in the press, and we support that political discussion. As we build up to elections in the year 2009, we can expect to see more political activity.
Of course, in any politically active environment, there are going to be disagreements. We, the United States, do not believe these disagreements are a sign of weakness, but a sign of strength. And although we have no political positions, because it’s not our role and it’s not our right, as interested spectators we are fascinated by the discussion. It’s also been a fascinating year from an international perspective. We have seen steadily improving relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan, marked especially by the bilateral jirga and by President Karzai’s current visit to Islamabad.
We have also seen improvement in relations with Afghanistan’s neighbors to the north, marked most spectacularly by the opening of the bridge to Tajikistan. The United States was proud to help build that bridge. We hope that it will mark a return to Afghanistan’s traditional role as the gateway to South Asia and the country in the middle through which all goods and services must pass between the sea and South Asia. The Joint Coordination and Monitoring Board, which met a few months ago, was focused on regional economic integration, and we believe that that offers good opportunities for development for Afghanistan, for Pakistan, and for South and Central Asia. And work to improve trade relationships is going on right now.
Iran remains an ambiguous neighbor. Unquestionably Iran is providing money to finance projects of importance to Iran inside Afghanistan. But there have also been instances in which weapons from Iran were found to be going to the Taliban, and some difficulties along the border. We’ll have to see how that develops.
I thank you for your patience, but I have tried to sort of walk through what I thought were some of the major developments of the year 2007 in the security area, in the economic area, in the political area, and in the diplomatic area.
With that I will thank you very much and open it up for questions.
Question: I want to ask you, as you say the drug cultivation has been increased in 2007 in Afghanistan. What new measures are you going to take in 2008 in order to bring a decrease in the drug cultivation and smuggling in the country?
Ambassador Wood: I think there are two major changes for the next year. First is a dramatically increased interdiction effort. That is to say an effort to capture drug traffickers, to capture drugs in transit, to go after labs, to go after precursors. A law enforcement effort.
There is also, as you know, a dramatically increased program of incentives called the Good Performers Initiative to provide additional assistance to provinces that reduce or eliminate the drugs cultivated in those provinces.
Alternative development assistance will continue at the same high level it was provided before, and eradication efforts will also continue as before.
Question: I must ask you, what is your position on talking to the Taliban, wherever they may be?
Ambassador Wood: We’ve been very clear about this and I think that an interview I gave on Tolo TV has been on the web site for some months now.
The United States is in favor of a serious reconciliation program with those elements of the Taliban who are prepared to accept the constitution and the authority of the elected government of President Karzai, who wish to return to a peaceful and legitimate life. The only place where we have a concern would be members of the Taliban with a close connection to al-Qaida. The reason being that al-Qaida is an international threat, it’s a global threat, and we don’t believe there should be separate peaces with al-Qaida. I think as long as it remains a global threat it requires a global response.
Question: The resources for the police, for more police forces is not to develop and grow as fast as those expected. What are the measures that you would like to take in the year 2008 in order to speed the reform and develop the police forces? Because Afghan people have a lot of expectations from police forces and they are the hope, they give hope to the other people.
Ambassador Wood: I completely agree that a professional, honest, strong police force is very important to a society. We, as part of the international community, can assist by providing training and equipment and that training includes management techniques for better communication and better response and better organization and better discipline. But in the end it is up to the government of Afghanistan to make the hard decisions necessary to improve the police. And it has been making those decisions. Its acceptance of the pay and rank reform which I mentioned earlier was one of the most important decisions. A better police force resulted.
Just about two months ago, the Ministry of the Interior announced the transfer of more than 25 upper mid-level officials. We believe that was a good decision. I am aware of the replacement of a number of other chiefs of police and other police officials just within the last few weeks, because they resisted reforms.
So this is a complicated process and it’s going to take time. The police, according to the polls, have the confidence of the people, the majority of the people. The police in Kabul and the police in other major cities play an important role in providing security and stability and confidence to the people. And they are doing a better job every day.
In 2008 we intend to continue our support for improved police, including with high levels of assistance. We expect to give police and rule of law assistance of almost $1 billion in 2008. This new program that I described that started just two days ago will be an important innovation that will work its way through 2008. I know that President Karzai is paying very close attention to the police, and of course his direct involvement is absolutely crucial to this process. This doesn’t mean that the job has been done. It doesn’t mean that there will not be occasional problems. But I am confident that a good process is underway and that just as the Afghan army has improved steadily, the police will be improving steadily. When we have this conversation at the end of next year, you’ll be pleased.
Question: Do you believe that contact with [inaudible] Taliban can be [inaudible]?
Ambassador Wood: I have been in a number of countries where there was an insurgent or a terrorist threat. I know that the issue of dealing with that threat through a reconciliation process is an extremely complicated one. You’re obviously referring to the current controversy relating to two European members of the international community here. We were not part of that so I cannot comment directly, and I refer you to both the government, the European Union and the United Nations in this regard, but I can say a couple of things.
First, in any situation like this, coordination and transparency and communication among the good guys is absolutely necessary. Second, I am absolutely confident that the European Union and the United Nations were acting with absolutely the best of intentions. They are good friends of Afghanistan. Third, this is an extremely difficult subject and requires the closest possible coordination. I don’t know what coordination took place. Obviously the government of Afghanistan does not feel there was sufficient coordination. I am not in a position to judge, but coordination with the government of Afghanistan is obviously a first step for any of us in any of our endeavors in Afghanistan. There seems to have been some sort of a misunderstanding in that regard.
Again, I want to emphasize that the European Union and the United Nations are good friends of Afghanistan. They are operating with the best of intentions. They are providing resources. Their people are running risks here. This is a particularly difficult field which requires particularly close communication, particularly close dialogue, and apparently that didn’t take place. And I regret that there seems to be this misunderstanding between groups that are good friends, that share the same goals, and who want to move forward together -- the government of Afghanistan, the European Union and the United Nations.
Question: The question is the UN decides about 70,000, the numbers of the national army, while we have 70,000 of Afghanistan army positioned across the border of Pakistan, which is [inaudible]. The second part of the question was you also said we have focused on fighting poppy cultivation and drugs in Afghanistan, but in the year 2007 we had, as you said, 34 percentage of increase in the cultivation of poppies and drugs in Afghanistan while the focus has been going on for the past five years. What do you think was the reason of the increase despite all the force and activities?
Ambassador Wood: Regarding the size of the Afghan military relative to the Pakistani military, I really have no comment except to say that when two countries are friends, having each of them strong is a good thing. When two countries are enemies, having each of them strong can be a bad thing. The important thing is that both Afghanistan and Pakistan face a common threat which I think both presidents spoke about today in Islamabad. I think they are moving more and more toward cooperation to address that threat, and I think that’s a good thing.
I can only presume that the reason for the increase in drug cultivation is first, greed. It pays money. It is contrary to Islam. Even the Taliban admits that it is contrary to Islam as they use drug cultivation and drug profits to finance their activities.
In the UN study done this year, they noted that the largest drug producing province in Afghanistan was Helmand, which is also the richest, one of the richest agricultural provinces in the country and could grow other crops. There are other alternatives for the people of Helmand. This does not mean that I’m blaming the individual farmers. I’m not sure that the individual farmers have a choice. This is the problem with simply having a program of alternative development. It is not clear to me that the insurgents and the warlords and the illegitimate power centers who profit from drugs will allow the farmers to renounce drug cultivation, which is why you also need stronger measures. But in the end I’m afraid that drug cultivation is a result of greed and a willingness to break the law, undermine the government, and create addicts both in your own country and in the major consuming countries. If those characteristics didn’t exist there would not be drug cultivation.
Question: Mr. Ambassador, can you characterize the video teleconferences that President Bush and President Karzai are holding and what the benefits are for such close communication? Also why they are taking place with such frequency now but they did not before.
Ambassador Wood: I can only say that President Bush and President Karzai have communicated for many years on a fairly regular basis and I really can’t speak about the details of any particular method of communication or the frequency. I can only say that they have communicated frequently as two leaders who have hard decisions to make, who make hard decisions, and who respect each other a great deal.
Question: A question about two UN employees, as you commented earlier. President Karzai has announced that he is supporting any process that brings peace, any process for peace, but it’s said that these two UN employees were helping Taliban and that’s why the Karzai government announced their activities were threatening in terms of activities of Afghanistan. May you comment on that?
Ambassador Wood: I am afraid my only comment is that you’ll have to ask that question of President Karzai. The United States was not directly involved in any aspect of this issue and our only reaction is that we are sorry that close friends seem to have had this misunderstanding.
Question: I want to talk about the Taliban again. We’re quite tired, every year we hear of international military successes when actually the Taliban are having success. We keep hearing that a lot. The Taliban position on the ground, it’s improving. President Karzai says he’ll talk to the Taliban, but he’s implied that the U.S. government is holding back on going further in the reconciliation process. It hasn’t been used [inaudible]. So is it not time to really look at a proper peace process, not just with rank and file Taliban, but really with the leadership in Pakistan, with Taliban in Pakistan. And is it not the case that the U.S. is holding back on that?
Ambassador Wood: First, it is not true that the United States is impeding any initiative that we are aware of by the government of Afghanistan in the area of reconciliation. The rest of your question was so speculative and argumentative I really don’t have any place to grab it, so I really think I’ll just leave it there.
Question: Is it time to do a bigger peace process? Do a larger level of outreach to the leaders?
Ambassador Wood: I’ve given you exactly our position on reconciliation and you can see how that matches up with your question. I’m not going to speculate on --
Question: It’s not speculation. Is it not time to go beyond the basic reconciliation process? Is it not time to reach out to the leadership?
Ambassador Wood: The United States will support a reconciliation process with those who will accept the constitution and the authority of the elected government of Afghanistan. If you believe that senior levels of the Taliban are prepared to do that, then you have your answer. If you believe that senior levels of the Taliban are not prepared to do that, then you also have your answer.
Question: Economic problems give the chance to Taliban to recruit and provide human resources. At the same time foreign investment in Afghanistan, especially the United States traders, investment, has decreased in Afghanistan. At the same time those Afghans who would like to jointly invest with American businessmen in Afghanistan, due to the problems of visa in American embassy here could not get there and could not facilitate this process. It has heavily affected the security and economy. What are your comments on that?
Ambassador Wood: First, as I said, the economy is growing at 13 percent in real terms this year, which makes it the fastest growing economy in South Asia.
Second, I would be very surprised if U.S. private investment here has decreased. Just the opposite. I believe it has increased, and in fact I know of several major projects that have been agreed to just in the last year. I can’t talk about them until the companies themselves want to talk about them.
Third, for those who qualify for a visa, visas are available. They are not available routinely here in Kabul, although one of the things that we did this year was for the first time we were able to offer visas here in Kabul in certain specific special cases, so we are moving toward a more normal posture in that regard.
I am optimistic about the economy. As you know, the United States has, you can divide our assistance into four or five categories.
Since 2002 the United States has provided Afghanistan with almost $7.7 billion in development and humanitarian assistance. The categories, in terms of categories, that is about $4.5 billion for reconstruction -- roads, energy, employment generation, agriculture, both large national projects and small local projects through the PRTs.
We have provided Afghanistan with almost $900 million to support democracy and governance -- training, building buildings in many cases, district centers, court houses, things like that.
We have provided more than half a billion dollars in alternative development. That’s in addition to the other agricultural and reconstruction development that we have provided.
We will have provided $143 million for rule of law support -- training and things like that.
Lastly, $1.6 billion for humanitarian support -- aid to refugees, medical care and education. Those are the big categories of our assistance. We think they’re being effective and we think the economy is growing, but we also think that people’s lives are improving.
Question: You mentioned about the day to day increase of capability with the Afghan National Army, but in action the opposition of the government is also increasing their capabilities and Afghan ANA hasn’t been able to confront them in the -- I mean simultaneously the enemies or opposition also is capable. Not only in the suicide bombing and terrorist activities but also in confrontation against the ANA and international community. But in reality it means they are not as capable as it seems.
What do you think in the policy or in strategies of the international community or Afghan government the problem in strategy and policies has been that the Taliban, despite having [international] forces in Afghanistan and the force of the Afghan government in the past six years, still remains as a challenge to Afghan government.
Ambassador Wood: First, I disagree with your premise. I believe that the superiority of the Afghan army and its international supporters is very clear on the battlefield. You know as forces were beginning to gather for the liberation of Musa Qala, the Taliban told its people they were going to have a glorious victory, and they didn’t. And during that same period they staged a number of diversionary attacks on small outposts outside of Musa Qala, around Sangin and other places. And even their attacks on small outposts failed.
I think there is no question that the Taliban is weaker militarily not only than the combined Afghan army and the international forces, but it is also weaker militarily than it was when it started out this fighting season in March of 2007.
Regarding your second question, the persistence of the Taliban threat I think is attributable to many factors and I can’t begin to name them all. I think that unquestionably one of them has been its ability to reconstitute itself outside the country. That is why we are so pleased by the commitment, by the statements of President Karzai and President Musharraf today in Islamabad to join forces against extremism. Violent extremism.
A second element, of course, is simply how tired the people of Afghanistan are after so many decades of conflict. The old governmental structures were swept away through six or seven different government changes through violence between the 1970s and 2001. The people are tired. They want to be left alone so that they can live their lives the way they want to live them. That’s what we want for them. Unfortunately, that’s not what the Taliban wants for them. So once again the people of Afghanistan, as tired as they are, must face a threat. They are tired. They deserve peace. Unfortunately, the Taliban will not give them the gift of peace at this time.
Question: Please tell me to what extent the United States believes that clandestine meetings with the Taliban, [inaudible] one way or another, to what extent do those sorts of techniques, in light of news reports yesterday that MI6 is holding secret meetings with the Taliban, to what extent does that play a role in the peace process, the clandestine meetings? I understand [inaudible], but it’s the secret meetings [inaudible].
Ambassador Wood: I have never known a negotiating process of this kind that started with a public meeting. Again, I think that’s not the issue. My understanding is that that’s not the issue. My understanding is that the issue is the degree to which these were coordinated efforts, and I don’t know the answer to that question.
Thank you all very much.