US wasted billions in failed Afghan stabilisation efforts: official
The US wasted billions of dollars trying to stabilise fragile parts of Afghanistan from 2001-2017 and some efforts caused more harm than good, a US government watchdog said on 24 May.
A report by the office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) found that Washington had set unrealistic expectations for itself after the US-led invasion in 2001 and overestimated its ability to build and reform government institutions.
Special Inspector General John Sopko said as he presented the report in Washington: ‘Despite some heroic efforts to stabilise insecure and contested areas in Afghanistan between 2002 and 2017, the programme mostly failed.
‘This happened for a number of reasons, including the establishment of a set of unrealistic expectations about what could be achieved in just a few years' time.’
The report found that the military pressured aid groups to build schools and infrastructure in areas that were still being contested by the Taliban, leading to the failure of many projects.
The document states: ‘Opportunities for corruption and elite capture abounded, making many of those projects far more harmful than helpful.’
The SIGAR analysis found that Washington had set expectations and programmes not properly tailored for Afghanistan, and noted that successes in stabilising Afghan districts rarely lasted longer than the physical presence of coalition troops and civilians.
SIGAR noted: ‘Under immense pressure to quickly stabilise insecure districts, US government agencies spent far too much money, far too quickly, in a country woefully unprepared to absorb it.’
More from Defence Notes
-
![What role could holographic and 3D capabilities play in the warfare of tomorrow]()
What role could holographic and 3D capabilities play in the warfare of tomorrow
Holographic and 3D technologies have been lauded by some for their ability to provide technical and operational advantages for military training and planning. But is the hype truly justified?
-
![Unfolding the Golden Dome for America: Seven things you should know about the programme]()
Unfolding the Golden Dome for America: Seven things you should know about the programme
Shephard talked to multiple experts about the most pressing concerns and considerations regarding the air defence system advocated by President Trump.
-
![Industry welcomes UK Strategic Defence Review, but pressure remains on future defence investment plans]()
Industry welcomes UK Strategic Defence Review, but pressure remains on future defence investment plans
While industry reception to the SDR has been positive, questions still remain from analyst and trade associations about what this could mean for future investment and the future UK Defence Industrial Strategy.
-
![UK Strategic Defence Review puts emphasis on autonomy, airpower and munitions]()
UK Strategic Defence Review puts emphasis on autonomy, airpower and munitions
The UK’s Strategic Defence Review (SDR) was launched as one of the first acts of the UK’s new Labour Government in June last year. The review has recommended a major big-picture reform of the country’s forces.
-
![Foreshadowing of UK defence review suggests it is light on programme details]()
Foreshadowing of UK defence review suggests it is light on programme details
The UK’s Strategic Defence Review (SDR) was designed to answer two questions: What is needed to fix UK defence and make it fit for the 2040s, and what do you get for a fixed financial profile? The SDR outlines that work still needs to be done on specifics.
