Mission Accomplished: NATO's ISAF Operations at Home & Abroad

From de Veer Magazine
Jump to: navigation, search
The end of Operation Enduring Freedom and the beginning of Operation Resolute Support, NATO HQ, Kabul, Afghanistan. Courtesy: Janine Fabre

By Ann-Marie de Veer
Saturday 3 January 2015

On Sunday 28 December, just three days before the official cessation of NATO hostilities in Afghanistan, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) commander General John Campbell held a secret ceremony in the sports stadium of the NATO HQ in Kabul to mark the end of their warmongering activities. The event, bereft of the media attention that such an occasion would normally merit, for fear of reprisals by the Taliban, brought their failed occupation to an ignominious end.

The irony of Campbell's remarks at the event were telling:

Together we have lifted the Afghan people out of the darkness of despair and given them hope for the future.
Campbell's inglorious exit from Afghanistan is proof that even ISAF are afraid of a resurgent Taliban who are in de facto, if not de jure, control of the nation. The Afghan people have not so much as been 'lifted out of the darkness' as 'hoisted into the sun': creating a host of easy targets for the Taliban to pick off at will. They are neither alleviated of their despair nor do they have any hope for the future.

Campbell went on to remark to those assembled at the ceremony:

You've made Afghanistan stronger and our countries safer.
The strength of the Afghan nation is, at best, considerably weaker than it was before their intervention. All ISAF have done is to replace one group of warlords in Kabul with another and, in doing so, they have created yet more enemies who not only endanger the Afghan people but are keen to exact their revenge on those who facilitated it. None of the countries involved in the ISAF mission are any safer, on the contrary, they have all made themselves a target for revenge and retribution by the Taliban and their affiliates.

So, who is responsible for this debacle?

As history records, the ISAF force is a NATO sponsored security mission in Afghanistan established by the United Nations (UN) Security Council in December 2001. Originally, their mission was to train the Afghan National Security Forces, help the country rebuild its key government institutions and to secure Kabul and the surrounding area. However, within just two years their remit had grown to encompass counter-insurgency operations throughout the whole country. The fact is, as is common knowledge and a matter of public record, the ISAF mission was simply a UN authorised extension of Operation Enduring Freedom (aka. Operation Infinite Justice), a unilateral declaration of war by the UK and the US on Afghanistan as part of their so called Global War on Terror. Of course, the Western Industrial Military Complex were very supportive of the new military operation as it would secure their revenue stream into the next decade or so having suffered greatly from the European peace dividend that began in 1989. Subsequently, the Taliban became the primary focus of the mission because they were known to be harbouring members of al-Qaeda: an organisation alleged, but so far unequivocally proven, to be responsible for the attacks on the World Trade Centre in New York, US.

Of course, the Taliban, who are both a political Islamic fundamentalist movement and, since their removal from power in 2001, a counter-insurgency force, were a creation of both the UK and US, amongst others, for geo-political control of the region. The movement, whose origins can be traced back to the Mujahideen in Pakistan, were trained and supported by the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency to counter the influence of the former Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) who were politically obligated to support the Afghan government of the day. In short, all of ISAF's foes in Afghanistan were of their own making.

That the UK and the US, primarily, plus many other regional and global regimes, funded, trained and armed the Taliban via ISI to fulfil their strategic geo-political objectives is also a matter of public record. However, ISAF's withdrawal in the face of a resurgent Taliban clearly demonstrates that their mission was not to annihilate them but to merely create the conditions for the Western Industrial Military Complex to profit from its ventures. That is, it is neither a geo-political objective of the UK, the US, the NATO War Machine or its willing accomplices, to bring peace and stability to the region, nor is it in their interests to leave behind a fully functioning nation state that has the potential to become a future foe.

Of course, the majority of the mainstream media have stated that the withdrawal of ISAF is simply political expediency: i.e. the electorates of the participating nations will no longer tolerate the return of their loved ones suffering from all manner of disabilities, both physical and psychological, nor the mounting pile of body bags, and have tacitly withdrawn their consent. The truth is much less palatable: public consent is not a serious consideration as the authoritarian despots who now run most of the Western regimes have found some new targets, they are called ISIL, Libya, Syria and Ukraine, and the Western Industrial Military Complex have been gifted yet another revenue stream for the next decade.

Clearly internal conflict and instability are key to the West's strategy in Afghanistan in creating a regime and a nation state wholly dependent on their continued support and intervention, aka. Operation Resolute Support. In addition, the creation of a state in constant turmoil who threatens the peace and stability of not only its own people, but also the safety and security of the ISAF contributor nations, is yet another of its aims.

Thus, a key objective of the ISAF mission, like almost all of the military operations undertaken by the West since the end of World War II, is to expand the systems of social control both at home and abroad. One of the core tasks of these ventures is to prevent any solidarity among the people, or political opposition, that could challenge the current status quo. If those who currently have privilege are to retain their positions of power and authority then a passive, obedient and subservient population is imperative. Therefore, the use of repressive, and oppressive, policies have become the norm: in the name of safety and security of the public, now threatened by enemies created abroad, most Western regimes have introduced the illegal mass surveillance of the people by their security services. Similarly, in the name of protecting the public from the threat of terrorists, again a creation of their military ventures abroad, they have militarised the police and security forces at home.

If ever there was any doubt about the nefarious motives of most Western regimes towards their own people before the ISAF mission, it has now been unequivocally exposed as the systematic erosion of the political and democratic rights of their own populations.

That the West's intervention in Afghanistan was to create a weakened state in constant need of support and intervention is obvious. What is not so obvious is the social engineering policies being implemented at home as a direct result of their military voyeurism abroad.

Thus, the NATO ISAF mission at home, and abroad, has been accomplished.

Nation states engaging in military voyeurism do so at the expense of their own populations.
Ann-Marie de Veer