Speeches

Amb. Wood speaks with NBC Nightly News about the Current Situation in Afghanistan

Ambassador William Wood
Carole Grisanti, NBC Nightly News
May 5, 2007

QUESTION:  The past few months since the world’s been focused back on Afghanistan the generals --  NATO, American -- have been putting out the message that we’re back on track and we’re winning.  Obviously they can’t say we’re not winning, nor would they.  So your assessment.  What is the reality?  Is it somewhere in the middle? How are we doing?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  Our policy in Afghanistan is a comprehensive policy and certainly security is a big part of that.  On the security side, we are winning, absolutely.  There was some nervousness about Taliban activity during the spring and I think that that nervousness has been proven to be unjustified.  The Taliban is having a very rough spring.  The military is making enormous progress.  The recapture of Sangin, the heart of the opium poppy cultivation in Helmand Province was taken in a joint U.S.-ISAF-Afghan operation just a few weeks ago.  We’re winning.

QUESTION:  You’re winning.

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  But let me keep going because it is a comprehensive policy.

The economy, GDP has more than doubled in four years.  More than 80 percent of Afghans are within access of medical care.  Literally millions of Afghans are in school, including women who weren’t in school before.  So on the security side we’re winning, but the security side only exists to give space for the other programs, the other projects, and the other projects are moving forward too.

QUESTION:  But are not all of these good words, as you’ve just mentioned -- building roads, building bridges, schools -- and everything positive that has been done, is it not undermined by bad governance on the local level, endemic corruption?  It’s not reaching the people?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I think unquestionably there are problems.  I also think that the overwhelming bulk of our assistance and the overwhelming bulk of international assistance is going where it should go.  We really have extraordinary examples of good governance to point to.

I was in a province along the border with Pakistan this weekend.  The Governor who represents the central government and modern governmental structure is reaching out actively to the tribal leaders, to the shuras, to the elders, to the religious leaders and establishing a link between the modern vision of government held in Kabul and the traditional and informal leadership in the villages and the districts.  That’s really the key, to create modern government but also connect modern government to the people.  I think that’s going on in the areas where governance is working.  There are certainly areas where governance is under attack, by corruption, drug trafficking, the Taliban, terrorism.  But I’m optimistic.

QUESTION:  What about the hearts and minds battle?  We’re not quite winning there.

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  The most recent polls I’ve seen say that more than 60 percent of Afghans, cutting across all ethnic groups, cutting across all linguistic groups, support the Karzai government.  We’re supporting the Karzai government.

Again, there are problems.  This is a new government.  It is perhaps Afghanistan’s first really modern government.  It doesn’t yet have a track record.  It is trying to respond to 30 years of invasion, violence and anarchy.  So there are lots of problems but I think there are lots of successes.  Again, I’m optimistic.

QUESTION:  President Karzai is called the Mayor of Kabul.  He’s now even losing the capital, if we can believe what you read.  He’s probably at the lowest level that he’s ever been.

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I don’t subscribe to that appellation.  That certainly won’t make it as a quotable.

As you know, President Karzai just last week traveled north to visit mass graves in the commemoration of the violence that occurred during the Soviet period.  He has been traveling around the country.

Again, I only know that in my brief period here, during my travels around the country when I mention the government of President Karzai I get a very very positive reaction from the audience.  So both at the level of polls and at the level of personal experience, I think his government is respected.  I think people want his government to be a success.  Again, it’s a new government, it’s a new constitution.  The price in Afghanistan for guessing wrong has been high for decades so I think the people are a little tentative, but I have no doubt at all that they want President Karzai to be a success and I know that he’s working hard to be a success.

QUESTION:  I just read actually yesterday that according to some Afghan government officials, and I think it came out of the Finance Ministry here, that the billions of dollars spent here by the U.S. and international community are in fact having a very limited impact on the Afghan people.  Do you subscribe to that?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I absolutely don’t subscribe to that.  Indeed --

QUESTION:  Are you aware of that report that came out?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I heard something about it.

I absolutely don’t subscribe to that. In a meeting just last week of the Afghan Development Forum President Karzai himself noted that this year 40,000 Afghan babies were born healthy who would not have been born healthy if the statistics of the previous year had continued.  That’s 40,000 lives who hopefully will grow to be robust, happy, prosperous Afghans.  In the most basic human terms, that’s success.

QUESTION:  Another increasing problem, President Karzai was quite adamant about it last week, the rise in civilian casualties, collateral damage by coalition forces.  How do you respond to this?  This is once again losing hearts and minds, and this is undermining everything else that’s been done around here.

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  Civilian casualties are a tragedy in any conflict, wherever, whenever.  In recent cases I could say with absolute certainty the coalition has followed its rules of engagement, and indeed where the coalition was carrying out operations as planned, there were not civilian casualties.  The most recent case of civilian casualties was a result of coalition forces being attacked by local bands, being caught by surprise and having to respond outside of a plan. 

Where the coalition is able to conduct operations according to its plan, there are not civilian casualties.

QUESTION:  But sometimes their response is quite exaggerated like in Nangahar a couple of weeks ago.

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  In the most recent case when coalition forces came under attack ISAF forces did respond robustly.  I think all of the allies would want the coalition to respond robustly if their forces came under attack in ambush by those who are the enemies of the Karzai government and those who are the enemies of what we are trying to accomplish here.

Again, when the operation goes as we plan it to go, we can avoid or minimize to the maximum the danger of civilian casualties.  When we are faced with an ambush or other violence requiring extreme reaction we are going to try to preserve the coalition forces.  That doesn’t mean we discount in that case civilian casualties, it just means we don’t have as much control over what’s happening in the battlefield as we would like to have and the possibility of civilian casualties is increased.

QUESTION:  What happened to the much heralded spring offensive?  I mean some months ago we thought we were in for the second Battle of the Bulge.  Was it, in your opinion, hyped on both sides?  Coalition, NATO, us?  We hyped it to get more resources, more troops on the ground.  The Taliban hyped it for their own psychological reasons, to persuade the local population.  What’s your assessment of the spring offensive?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I think there are a couple of things going on.  First, I believe the allies evaluated the situation properly and in a timely way.  As you know over the last six months we have significantly increased both security and economic resources here in Afghanistan. 

Second, I think that the Taliban is making a major effort at the moment and that major effort has failed, precisely because they are coming up against coalition forces who themselves have been reinforced.

Thirdly, I think that we’re seeing the Taliban resort to tactics that would not be their preference.  I think they’re moving into --

QUESTION:  Start again, it’s not a problem.

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  Thirdly, I think that the Taliban has fallen back on terroristic tactics that are not traditional Afghan tactics.  Suicide bombings, IEDs are not traditional tactics and have not been over the last decades in Afghanistan.  These are terroristic tactics that have primarily as their victims the civilian population.  That’s not the target of an insurgency.  Normally an insurgency attempts to win the hearts and minds of the populace in order to attack the government military forces.  Here, because they are failing at government military forces they are forced to fall back on terrorism and target innocent civilians.  That is being appreciated throughout the society and it’s being rejected throughout the society.

QUESTION:  Are you familiar, yesterday there was yet another interview by Gulbuddin Hekmatiar where he said that roadside bombs, suicide bombers, whatever, cost about $100 to make and they can keep going with this insurgency forever because they actually have the money and it’s very cheap to finance it.  How do we beat that mentality?  How do you beat an insurgency with conventional warfare and a high tech army?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  First, I’m not particularly confident of the tactical advice of Mr. Hekmatiar who has shown over decades that the welfare of Afghanistan was lowest on his list of priorities.  I think that the key is to win the hearts and minds of the Afghans not for the United States, not for the coalition, but for the government of Afghanistan.  To help the government of Afghanistan establish a responsive, democratic government with strong institutions under rule of law, to extend development and humanitarian care, to give above all the Afghan people hope so that they will make the tough decisions that they need to make and confidence to carry them through.  I think that’s happening.  That’s the way you [inaudible] insurgents like Mr. Hekmatiar.

QUESTION:  It’s now commonly accepted that the Taliban go back and forth between Afghanistan and Pakistan and the border regions are just infested.  Are we disappointed with Musharraf?  Should he be doing more?  Could he be doing more?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I think that both Afghanistan and Pakistan could be cooperating together better.  I think that President Karzai believes that President Musharraf could be doing more; I think President Musharraf believes President Karzai could be doing more.  I think we’re seeing progress on that point.  The two presidents had a very successful meeting in Ankara just a week ago.  They issued their first joint public declaration ever.  They are planning to have a joint jurga which is two popular assemblies, which is a popular assembly of the two peoples, in August.  These are all positive steps.  I think we see cooperation between the two improving and I think that’s good news for the good guys and bad news for the bad guys.

QUESTION:  With all due respect, Mr. Ambassador, I don’t think the Ankara, from what I hear, the Ankara Summit was a success at all.  They barely spoke.  It was organized by the Turks, and not much came out of it.  Is that not --

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I am afraid I don’t agree.  I think it was a successful summit.  That doesn’t mean to say that they didn’t disagree.  Adults disagree.  Presidents who have the interests of their own nation at heart first and foremost, disagree.  That doesn’t mean you can’t bridge the disagreements, reach cooperative arrangements.  That’s what happened.

They each brought their national perspective in, they each represented their nations professionally, and they each found ways to bridge gaps.  That’s the key.

QUESTION:  One of the major problems here, as you so well know, is Afghanistan, the narco states.  It’s financing the insurgency.  It seems that most of the West’s efforts to control it, eradicate it, marginalize the warlords, really has limited success so far.

Now with your background in Colombia, and you're in charge here, and you’re confronted now with the same problem.  Can you sort of shed some light on how you plan to tackle it, handle it, or what you’re going to do?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  First, I agree that the illicit narcotics trade in Afghanistan is a threat to everything we and the Karzai government are attempting to achieve in terms of good government, in terms of responsive government, in terms of a corruption-free society, in terms of development, in terms of human safety, in terms of a violence-free society.  Something’s got to be done about the narcotics trade.

There is a consensus among the allies and the Karzai government, in a number of aspects of this.  There is a consensus in favor of seizing the drugs in shipment.  There is a consensus in favor of targeting high value targets, leaders of the drug trade.  There is a consensus in favor of going after precursor chemicals.  There is a consensus in favor of hunting down drug labs and dismantling them.  There is a consensus on going after money laundering. 

There is some disagreement about eradication.  There is some disagreement about the role eradication should play versus the very extensive alternative livelihood programs that we have made available to those who will renounce drug growth and turn toward legitimate activities.  We’re still working on completing that consensus through all aspects, but I think there is a strong effort going forward and I think it’s going to get stronger every day.

QUESTION:  With your background, what do you propose?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  Again, I propose that we reach a consensus.

QUESTION:  When, in your opinion, would it be time to maybe shift strategy a bit and focus more on nationbuilding than a military solution?

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I don’t believe anyone is seeking a military solution.  I believe that the security component of our policy, of the coalition’s policy, of the Karzai government’s policy exists precisely to create space for the nationbuilding that you talk about.

Again, the capital, the government, it’s very important.  The government’s reach to the provinces through the governors.  The governors’ relationship with the local communities.  These are really the fabric of democracy.  Government that people can feel in their lives and feel is making a difference in their lives.  That’s the goal.  And as more and more infrastructure projects, as more and more quick impact development projects, as more and more humanitarian projects come on-line, I believe that the people are feeling that the government’s making a difference in their lives and that difference is a good difference.

QUESTION:  Anything else you would like to add?  That was my last question.  If you have anything else to say on who’s winning the war --

AMBASSADOR WOOD:  I don’t think so.

# # # #