On
Afghanistan,
UNSC Looks
Forward to
NATO
"Non-Combat"
Mission
By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
December 3, more
here --
Given the new
bilateral
agreements
between
Afghanistan
with NATO, and
separately
with the US,
some were asking:
a new UN
Security
Council
resolution
needed?
Back on
October 9,
German Defense
Minister
Thomas de
Maiziere said,
“We would want
to have a UN
resolution, a
resolution of
the U.N.
Security
Council.”
And on
December 11
they got a
resolution,
which looks
forward to a
"non combat"
mission. But how
does it relate
to US forces
in
Afghanistan?
US President
Barack Obama's
December 11
War Powers
letter to the
Congress said:
"Following
the completion
of the ISAF
mission at the
end of 2014,
the mission to
help train,
advise, and
assist the
ANSF and
Afghan
ministries and
institutions
will continue
through the
follow-on
NATO-led
Resolute
Support
Mission.
Today, there
are
approximately
15,000 U.S.
forces
inAfghanistan.
The U.S. Armed
Forces are on
track to draw
down to
a Force
Management
Level of 9,800
by early
2015... By the
end of 2016,
U.S. forces
would draw
down to a
small presence
at our embassy
in Kabul,
focusing
primarily on
security
assistance
activities.
The United
States would
continue to
work with our
Afghan
partners to
pursue the
remnants of
al-Qa'ida and
more broadly
to work with
our partners
in the region
to continue to
detect and
disrupt
extremist
threats."
As
the deadline
drew near, and
it emerged
that contrary
to what was
previously
announced the
US does
envision
conducting
some combat
operations in
Afghanistan
after the end
of the year,
the question
was whether a
resolution
could be
adopted in the
Security
Council.
Inner City
Press on
December 3
asked the
ambassadors of
both Russia
and the United
Kingdom about
it. Russia's
Vitaly Churkin
told Inner
City Press,
“there is
anther
complicating
element. The
American
operations in
Afghanistan on
basis of the
bilateral
agreement with
Afghanistan
are not
covered by
this NATO
Afghanistan
arrangement,
and therefore
will not be
covered by
this possible
Security
Council
resolution.”
He said, “the
American seem
to have
changed their
minds.
Originally
they announced
that after
this year they
would not
engage in
combat
operations.
Now there are
reports that
after all they
do envision
the
possibility of
some combat
operations. I
think that in
that context
there also
needs to be a
concern, will
NATO be able
to stay within
announced
scope of just
training and
supporting the
Afghani
forces?”
Churkin
said that some
in NATO now
says that a
resolution is
not absolutely
necessary but
that “this is
required by
some counties,
both members
of NATO and
non members of
NATO who
theoretically
would like to
participate.
But they have
their
requirements
and we have
our
requirements
on the
Security
Council,”
including a
substantive
end of mission
report, and
future
reporting to
the Security
Council.
He concluded
that there are
too many
unanswered
questions to
say with
certainty that
the Security
Council will
be able to
adopt a
resolution. He
said, “there
are curtain
requirements,
we believe,
which need to
be met. The
first
requirement is
that before we
encourage in
any way a new
operation we
need to be
updated on the
results of the
previous
operation. At
this point
there is no
assurance that
we’ll receive
a substantive
report. Not
just a short
sentence that
they have
completed
their mission,
but one
containing an
analysis of
what has been
accomplished
and what has
not. This is
the first
requirement.
Another
requirement is
that we
believe that
the Security
Council cannot
simply produce
a text of a
resolution and
let the
process go
into the blue.
We need
reports to the
SC. And for
some reason
NATO countries
are reluctant
to give us
assurance that
they are going
to report
their
activities to
the SC.
Without
periodic
reports to the
SC we believe
it’s rather
strange to
endorse
something and
than to forget
all about it.”
Moments later,
Inner City
Press asked UK
Ambassador
Mark Lyall
Grant about
it, as he
headed to the
Permanent Five
members'
meeting room,
into which his
Australian
counterpart
Gary Quinlan
had already
gone in. Lyall
Grant told
Inner City
Press that
some do want
such a
resolution,
and that
there'll be a
discussion.
Now on
December 12,
after a
December 10
consultation
at the
Permanent
Representative
level, the
adopted
resolution
"welcomes the
agreement
between NATO
and
Afghanistan to
establish the
post-2014 non-combat
Resolute
Support
Mission, which
will train,
advise and
assist the
Afghan
National
Defence and
Security
Forces at the
invitation of
the Islamic
Republic of
Afghanistan.”
The
resolution
“affirms its
readiness to
revisit this
resolution in
the context of
the Council's
consideration
of the
situation in
Afghanistan.”
We'll see.
Watch this
site.
Watch this
site.
, 
