Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

War in Afghanistan (2001–2021)

The War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) was a U.S.-led military intervention, initiated as on October 7, 2001, in direct response to al-Qaeda's , with the primary objectives of destroying terrorist networks and deposing the regime that provided them sanctuary. The operation evolved under NATO's (ISAF) mandate, involving troops from over 40 allied nations under authorization, transitioning to a and mission after initial successes in toppling the government by December 2001. Despite early military victories, including the disruption of al-Qaeda's core leadership structure and the killing of in 2011—though in —the conflict protracted into the longest in U.S. , spanning nearly two decades until the final withdrawal on August 30, 2021. Efforts to build Afghan security forces and institutions, backed by over $2 trillion in U.S. expenditures including reconstruction, faltered due to systemic corruption, ineffective governance, and Taliban resurgence, culminating in the rapid collapse of the U.S.-backed Afghan government and security apparatus in August 2021. The war's defining characteristics included high operational costs, with millions of U.S. personnel rotations, and controversial outcomes such as temporary gains in women's education and that were largely reversed post-withdrawal, alongside persistent critiques of strategic overreach in absent viable local buy-in. Empirical assessments, including those from oversight bodies, highlight causal factors like dependency on foreign aid and failure to address underlying tribal and ideological dynamics as key to the inability to achieve enduring stability.

Background and Prelude

Taliban Rule and Al-Qaeda Safe Havens

The , a predominantly Pashtun Islamist movement originating from factions, seized on September 27, 1996, thereby establishing de facto control over approximately 90% of Afghanistan's territory by early 2001 and proclaiming the . Their governance enforced a rigid interpretation of law derived from Deobandi and Hanafi traditions, incorporating punishments such as for , for , and public floggings, while prohibiting television, music, and kite-flying as un-Islamic distractions. Women faced comprehensive restrictions, including mandatory veiling, exclusion from public employment and education beyond age eight, and bans on unaccompanied travel, justified by the regime as preserving Islamic purity amid perceived moral decay from prior chaos. Cultural policies reflected this puritanical stance, culminating in the March 2001 demolition of the 6th-century Bamiyan Buddha statues—two monumental figures carved into cliffs—using anti-aircraft guns, tanks, and , after decreed them idols contravening monotheism; the destruction, completed by March 6, symbolized rejection of Afghanistan's pre-Islamic heritage. Economically, the Taliban sustained their rule through taxation of production, which expanded dramatically under their control from 1996 to 2000, with supplying over 70% of global by 1999 and generating an estimated $40–100 million annually in regime revenue via ushr () levies on farmers and traders, often laundered through networks that enabled anonymous, undocumented transfers evading formal banking oversight. Critically, Taliban protection extended to al-Qaeda, hosting Osama bin Laden after his 1996 return from Sudan and permitting the establishment of multiple training facilities across eastern and southern provinces. Bin Laden issued fatwas in August 1996 declaring U.S. troops in an occupation of holy lands warranting expulsion by force, and in February 1998 expanding this to a religious duty to kill Americans and allies wherever possible, framing it as defensive against perceived crusader aggression. These camps, numbering over a dozen major sites like Darunta and Khalden, trained 10,000–20,000 recruits yearly in , bomb-making, and urban combat by the late , drawing foreign fighters and enabling al-Qaeda's operational buildup; the Taliban rebuffed U.S. demands post-1998 embassy bombings in and , which killed 224 and were linked to bin Laden, prioritizing ideological solidarity over diplomacy. In July 2000, amid drought and UN pressure, the Taliban banned cultivation, slashing output by 94% the following year, though enforcement relied on rather than eradication of underlying economic dependencies.

U.S. Policy Shifts Pre-9/11

During the Soviet-Afghan War (1979–1989), the provided extensive covert aid to fighters through the CIA's , channeling over $3 billion in weapons and funding via Pakistan's to counter Soviet influence. Following the Soviet withdrawal in 1989, U.S. policy shifted to disengagement, abruptly halting aid to Afghan factions amid concerns over factional infighting and the rise of warlordism, which contributed to a and ensuing civil war. This neglect allowed the , emerging in 1994 from madrassas funded partly by and , to consolidate control by 1996, capturing and imposing strict rule while providing safe haven to . Under President Clinton, U.S. attention turned sporadically to Afghanistan after Al-Qaeda's 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in and on August 7, killing 224 people, which intelligence attributed to Osama bin Laden's network operating from Taliban-protected camps. In response, on August 20, 1998, launched over 70 cruise missiles at Al-Qaeda training sites near , Afghanistan, and a pharmaceutical plant in , aiming to disrupt terrorist infrastructure; however, bin Laden evaded the strikes due to faulty intelligence, and the action drew criticism for limited strategic impact amid Clinton's domestic impeachment proceedings, which some analysts argued constrained bolder measures. These strikes represented a shift toward targeted pressure but failed to alter Taliban-Al-Qaeda ties, as the regime refused U.S. demands to expel bin Laden, citing codes of hospitality. The incoming Bush administration in January 2001 initially deprioritized terrorism, focusing instead on national missile defense systems and threats from state actors like and , as evidenced by Advisor Condoleezza Rice's early emphasis on rogue regimes over non-state networks in public statements. Counterterrorism coordinator Richard Clarke later testified that interagency rivalries between the CIA, FBI, and NSC hampered coordinated action, with warnings about Al-Qaeda's Afghan bases—such as the August 6, 2001, titled "Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US"—downplayed as historical rather than imminent threats. U.S. reluctance to bolster the , a Tajik-Uzbek coalition resisting rule, stemmed from prior aid suspensions in the over human rights abuses and opium ties, leaving anti-Taliban forces under-resourced and territorially confined to about 10% of the country by 2001, which empirically enabled Al-Qaeda's operational expansion. This pattern of episodic strikes amid broader neglect highlighted missed opportunities to pressure the decisively before , as sustained support for proxies might have disrupted safe havens without direct intervention.

September 11 Attacks and Ultimatum to Taliban

On September 11, 2001, nineteen operatives of the Islamist terrorist organization hijacked four commercial airliners departing from U.S. East Coast airports: and struck the North and South Towers of the in , causing both skyscrapers to collapse; impacted in Arlington, Virginia; and crashed into a field near , after passengers and crew attempted to overpower the hijackers. The coordinated suicide attacks killed 2,977 people, excluding the perpetrators, marking the deadliest terrorist incident in history. , which had established multiple training camps and operational bases in under the protection of the ruling regime since the mid-1990s, orchestrated the plot; these sanctuaries enabled recruitment, training, and logistical preparation by operatives including the hijackers, who had received instruction there. , 's founder and leader residing in Taliban-controlled territory, publicly praised the attacks in a videotape recovered in Afghanistan and released by U.S. authorities in December 2001, in which he discussed their planning and execution while expressing satisfaction with the outcomes. The Taliban regime's refusal to sever ties with al-Qaeda, despite prior U.S. extradition requests dating back to 1998 following al-Qaeda's embassy bombings in Africa, directly contributed to the group's ability to launch the assault from Afghan soil. In direct response, President addressed a joint session of on September 20, 2001, delivering an to the : immediately hand over al-Qaeda leaders including bin Laden to U.S. custody, close all terrorist training camps under their control, and surrender all foreign nationals—including non-Afghan combatants—the had been sheltering. emphasized that the bore responsibility for al-Qaeda's actions due to their provision of "great influence" and material support within Afghanistan, framing non-compliance as complicity in global . The Taliban leadership, headed by Mullah Mohammed Omar, rejected the demands outright on September 21, 2001, with their ambassador to , Abdul Salam Zaeef, declaring the U.S. conditions a threat to Muslims worldwide and proposing instead that bin Laden be tried in an Afghan Islamic court or detained pending a UN-led , while insisting on evidence of his guilt that they deemed insufficient. This conditional stance, which avoided unconditional despite mounting linking al-Qaeda's Afghan bases to the attacks, underscored the regime's prioritization of its alliance with bin Laden over international pressure. On , 2001, the UN Security Council adopted 1368 unanimously, condemning the 9/11 attacks in the strongest terms and recognizing the "inherent right of individual or collective self-defence" as enshrined in Article 51 of the UN Charter, thereby affirming the legal basis for defensive measures against those states and non-state actors enabling such terrorism.)

Diplomatic Efforts and Invasion Planning

Following the September 11, 2001, attacks, the United States issued a formal ultimatum to the Taliban regime on September 20, demanding the immediate handover of Osama bin Laden and closure of al-Qaeda training camps, which the Taliban rejected the next day, citing insufficient evidence of bin Laden's guilt and Pashtunwali codes of hospitality. Pakistan, the only other major supporter alongside Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, attempted mediation through high-level envoys, including ISI Director General Mahmood Ahmed, who urged Taliban leader Mullah Omar to comply to avoid military action, but these efforts failed as the Taliban prioritized sheltering bin Laden. Amid mounting isolation, the United Arab Emirates severed diplomatic ties with the Taliban on September 23, 2001, citing the regime's refusal to extradite bin Laden despite repeated appeals, followed by Saudi Arabia on September 25, leaving Pakistan as the sole recognizing state. These diplomatic breakdowns underscored the Taliban's intransigence, rendering peaceful resolution untenable and prompting accelerated U.S. preparations for military intervention. In parallel, U.S. intelligence operatives laid groundwork for operations by deploying CIA paramilitary teams, including the Northern Afghanistan Liaison Team (NALT), which arrived in the Panjshir Valley on September 26, 2001—11 days before the official invasion—to coordinate with anti-Taliban forces led by figures like Ahmed Shah Massoud's successors. These teams, numbering around 10-12 initially, assessed capabilities, provided initial intelligence, and facilitated liaison for impending U.S. air support, building on prior CIA aid to the group since the 1980s Soviet withdrawal. U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), under General , developed Phase I of as a rapid decapitation and overthrow strategy, emphasizing precision airstrikes, special operations forces, and proxy ground advances by Afghan allies to minimize U.S. troop commitments and avoid a protracted ground war reminiscent of the Soviet experience. To mitigate Afghanistan's ongoing —exacerbated by three years of affecting 5-7 million people—and counter propaganda portraying the U.S. as an aggressor indifferent to civilian suffering, the Bush administration announced $320 million in on October 4, 2001, including plans for airdrops of over 1.7 million Humanitarian Daily Rations (HDRs) starting with the , distinct from meals to emphasize intent. These measures, executed by C-17 from , aimed to deliver self-heating meals with rice, beans, and to remote areas, addressing UN warnings of potential mass starvation while demonstrating U.S. commitment to post- stabilization. The 's refusal to allow unimpeded prior to these efforts further highlighted the regime's prioritization of harboring terrorists over Afghan welfare, justifying the shift to coercive measures.

Initial Overthrow of the Taliban Regime

Command and Early Operations

Operation Enduring Freedom was commanded by General Tommy Franks as head of United States Central Command (CENTCOM), which coordinated the initial phase emphasizing air power and small special operations teams rather than large conventional ground forces. This structure integrated U.S. efforts with the Northern Alliance, a coalition of Afghan anti-Taliban factions primarily composed of Tajik, Uzbek, and Hazara groups led by figures such as Abdul Rashid Dostum. U.S. Army Special Forces Operational Detachment Alpha (ODA) 595 from the 5th Special Forces Group was among the first teams inserted into northern Afghanistan on October 19, 2001, linking up with Dostum's Uzbek forces to provide liaison, training, and targeting support. Similarly, ODA 555 supported other Northern Alliance commanders, enabling coordinated ground advances backed by U.S. air assets. The air campaign commenced on October 7, 2001, with strikes targeting air defenses, command-and-control nodes, and facilities using precision-guided munitions such as Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs) to limit in early phases. AC-130 gunships provided close air support, particularly for offensives, delivering accurate fire on positions while teams on the ground designated targets via and GPS systems. By late October, these operations had destroyed numerous command sites and disrupted their military cohesion, with reports indicating 39 command-and-control facilities neutralized alongside 11 training camps. This approach achieved early successes by fracturing Taliban leadership and logistics without committing substantial U.S. ground troops, allowing forces to exploit air-enabled momentum for territorial gains. teams, often numbering fewer than 12 operators per detachment, leveraged local militias numbering in the thousands, demonstrating the efficacy of in rapidly degrading enemy command structures. Initial phases minimized U.S. casualties while inflicting disproportionate losses on Taliban forces, setting conditions for subsequent advances.

Air Campaign and Ground Advances

The air campaign of commenced on October 7, 2001, with U.S. and British forces launching strikes and manned aircraft sorties against command centers, airfields, and military installations across . Coalition aircraft, including U.S. bombers and fighters, conducted thousands of sorties in the initial weeks, focusing on disrupting , armor concentrations, and positions to establish air superiority. This technological edge—leveraging precision-guided munitions and real-time intelligence—neutralized much of the 's limited conventional capabilities, which relied on outdated Soviet-era equipment, without significant opposition from air defenses. U.S. Forces (SOF) teams embedded with ground units facilitated a synergistic air-ground model, where SOF operators served as joint terminal attack controllers (JTACs) to direct strikes on front lines. This integration amplified the impact of aerial bombardment, breaking defenses in key northern sectors and enabling rapid advances; following the fall of on November 10, 2001, anti- forces pushed southward, capturing territory previously held by organized units. The combination eroded cohesion, as sustained airstrikes on supply lines and troop concentrations compelled defections among commanders and mass surrenders, transforming the pre-invasion into fragmented remnants fleeing to rural strongholds. In southern and eastern regions, similar dynamics unfolded with U.S.-backed Pashtun militias exploiting air-induced disarray, though initial uprisings were localized and dependent on SOF coordination for momentum. Overall, the 's emphasis on air dominance and targeted ground enablers achieved the swift collapse of control over major urban centers by mid-November, underscoring the decisive role of joint operations in overcoming numerical disparities without large-scale U.S. troop commitments.

Key Battles and City Falls

The rapid collapse of Taliban control in northern and central Afghanistan was facilitated by coordinated U.S. airstrikes and the ground offensives of the , a coalition of anti-Taliban Afghan militias primarily composed of Tajik, Uzbek, and Hazara fighters, which numbered around 20,000-30,000 personnel against forces estimated at 30,000-40,000 but hampered by low morale and supply disruptions. U.S. teams, often operating in small units of 10-12 Green Berets, embedded with Northern Alliance commanders to direct precision air support, enabling tactical encirclements and breakthroughs that exploited vulnerabilities in command structure and mobility. The fall of on November 13, 2001, marked a pivotal early , as U.S. airstrikes targeted defenses while forces, advancing from the north under commanders like Mohammed Fahim Khan, bypassed fortified positions and entered the capital with minimal resistance after fighters abandoned their posts en masse. This collapse stemmed from the 's inability to sustain defenses without air cover or reinforcements, allowing approximately 5,000-8,000 troops to seize the city intact, though sporadic looting ensued amid the power vacuum. Further north, the siege of from mid-November 2001 culminated in its capture on November 25 by forces led by Rashid Dostum and Atta Muhammad, supported by U.S. air bombardment that destroyed armor and supply lines, resulting in the surrender of around 4,000-5,000 and foreign fighters. Amid the surrender negotiations, Pakistani aircraft conducted an airlift evacuating an estimated 300-2,000 allies, including Pakistani nationals and Arab fighters, from the airfield, a operation later confirmed by U.S. intelligence despite initial denials from , highlighting cross-border support for the regime. In southern Afghanistan, the Battle of Kandahar concluded with the Taliban's flight from the city on December 7, 2001, following weeks of U.S.-backed advances by Pashtun militias under , augmented by Special Forces-directed airstrikes that neutralized key Taliban strongholds and leadership, including Mullah Omar's narrow escape. Local alliances with anti-Taliban proved decisive, as Taliban defections accelerated under pressure from superior firepower, leading to the regime's dissolution in its Pashtun heartland. A stark indicator of foreign fighter commitment occurred during the Qala-i-Jangi prison uprising starting November 25, 2001, near , where hundreds of captured and prisoners, mostly Arabs and Chechens, overran guards and seized weapons, killing CIA officer Johnny "Mike" Spann—the first U.S. combat death in the war—and sparking a six-day battle resolved by U.S. and British airstrikes and assaults that eliminated nearly all 300-400 insurgents hiding in bunkers flooded with water. This engagement underscored the disproportionate resistance from non-Afghan jihadists, contrasting with the broader rout driven by the -U.S. partnership's effective use of to offset any numerical parity.

Tora Bora Campaign and bin Laden's Escape

The Tora Bora Campaign commenced in late November 2001 and intensified from December 6 to December 17, targeting strongholds in the Spin Ghar mountains of eastern near the Pakistani border, where intelligence indicated and senior leaders had retreated after the fall of . U.S. forces, numbering fewer than 100 personnel including CIA teams and operators, directed the effort alongside approximately 2,000 Afghan militia fighters under warlords Haji Hazrat Ali and Haji Zaman Ghamsharik, facing an estimated 500 to 2,000 defenders, with a around 1,000 combatants. Intensive aerial bombardment, involving up to 100 strikes per day and including massive 15,000-pound "Daisy Cutter" and bunker-buster munitions, devastated cave complexes but proved limited against deep tunnel networks and mobile fighters, as al-Qaeda exploited the terrain for evasion rather than fixed defense. Ground assaults by Afghan militias advanced unevenly, hampered by nightly withdrawals during Ramadan, poor coordination, and instances of fighters accepting bribes from al-Qaeda to facilitate escapes or withhold pressure. Estimates suggest 220 to 500 al-Qaeda fighters killed, with the true figure likely higher due to bodies obliterated or buried by ordnance, alongside 52 captured by Afghans and about 100 intercepted crossing into Pakistan. Bin Laden, wounded but mobile, escaped around December 16 via one of 100-150 mountain passes into Pakistan's tribal areas, evading capture despite U.S. intercepts of his communications confirming his presence and intent to flee. CIA station chief urged deployment of 800 U.S. Army Rangers to block routes, but CENTCOM commander General declined, prioritizing the Afghan proxy model to minimize U.S. casualties and citing logistical hurdles in the rugged terrain. The escape stemmed primarily from Afghan militias' unreliability—marked by divided loyalties, incompetence in night operations, and susceptibility to payoffs—and Pakistan's failure to seal the border effectively, despite deploying around 4,000 troops who proved ill-equipped, undercommitted, and influenced by local sympathies toward bin Laden and . Pakistan's (ISI) maintained ties to tribal elements providing sanctuary, enabling 's transit through porous frontiers rather than U.S. hesitation alone determining the outcome, as even additional American troops faced challenges sealing such extensive escape vectors without full Pakistani cooperation. Hundreds of survivors regrouped in , sustaining the network's resilience.

Inter-Afghan Negotiations and Bonn Agreement

Following the rapid overthrow of the Taliban regime in late 2001, the United Nations convened the International Conference on Afghanistan in , , from December 2 to 5, 2001, to establish provisional governance arrangements among Afghan factions. The conference included delegates from the , the Rome Group (loyal to former King Zahir Shah), the Peshawar faction of Pashtun exiles, and the Cyprus Group of former officials, but deliberately excluded the , who were viewed as defeated and unwilling to engage diplomatically after refusing to surrender leaders. On December 5, the participants signed the Agreement on Provisional Arrangements in Afghanistan Pending the Re-Establishment of Permanent Government Institutions, which outlined an interim authority to assume power on December 22, 2001, and a timeline for broader political transition including a constitutional within 18 months. The Bonn Agreement designated , a Pashtun leader from the Rome Group with prior diplomatic experience, as chairman of the five-member Special Commission to oversee the transfer of power and convene the Emergency Loya Jirga. It established an Interim Administration of 29 members drawn from the participating factions, tasked with disbanding militias under central command, upholding commitments from prior Afghan agreements, and preparing for democratic processes, thereby averting an immediate among competing warlords that could have reignited . Power transferred as scheduled on December 22, 2001, with Karzai's administration taking control in amid ongoing U.S.-led military operations. The Emergency Loya Jirga, convened in from June 11 to 19, 2002, with over 1,000 delegates selected through local councils, confirmed Karzai as head of the Afghan Transitional Administration by a vote of approximately 1,295 to 0 after by King Zahir Shah. The assembly also approved Karzai's proposed cabinet on June 19, extending the transitional government's mandate until national elections could be held, thus providing initial political stability despite its hasty assembly under wartime conditions. However, the exclusion of representatives marginalized significant Pashtun elements, contributing to perceptions of ethnic imbalance and fostering long-term discord that undermined reconciliation efforts. This framework enabled early steps toward elections in 2004 but prioritized anti- factions, reflecting the victors' focus on rapid stabilization over inclusive negotiations.

Early Stabilization and Insurgency Onset

Establishment of Interim Government

The Afghan Interim Administration was formally established on December 22, 2001, following the Bonn Agreement's provisions for provisional governance after the Taliban's overthrow, with Hamid Karzai selected as its chairman to lead a multi-ethnic cabinet aimed at fostering national unity amid diverse factional interests. Karzai's leadership emphasized inclusivity by incorporating former mujahideen commanders and regional strongmen into the administration, a pragmatic step to consolidate power without immediate confrontation, though this sowed seeds of decentralized authority by legitimizing armed factions' roles in the nascent state. The interim period lasted six months, transitioning via an Emergency Loya Jirga in June 2002 that affirmed Karzai as head of the subsequent Transitional Administration, extending governance until presidential elections in October 2004. Centralized executive authority was codified in the 2004 Constitution, drafted by a Constitutional from December 2003 to January 2004 and ratified by Karzai on January 24, establishing a presidential where the serves as head of state with broad powers over executive, legislative, and judicial branches, including appointment of ministers and judges subject to parliamentary approval. This framework aimed to override the decentralized warlordism of prior eras by vesting national command in a single elected office, while incorporating Islamic principles and rights protections, such as and freedoms of expression, though implementation hinged on the central government's ability to enforce it. Initial disarmament efforts through the Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration () program, launched in 2003 under the Afghanistan New Beginnings Programme, targeted the Afghanistan Military Forces (AMF), comprising around 100,000 fighters from allied factions, with over 50,000 demobilized by 2005 via cash grants, job training, and disbandment incentives. These programs achieved partial success in reducing factional armies under central control, enhancing the interim government's legitimacy by signaling commitment to monopoly on force, yet warlords like those in the retained private and economic leverage, perpetuating patronage networks that eroded Kabul's and exposed structural vulnerabilities in .

ISAF Deployment and NATO Involvement

The (ISAF) was authorized by 1386 on December 20, 2001, with an initial mandate limited to securing and its surrounding areas to enable the formation of a new Afghan interim authority following the 's overthrow. Initially comprising contributions from about a dozen nations led by the and then , ISAF focused on stabilizing the capital against residual opposition elements, including remnants and factional militias. NATO assumed operational control of ISAF on August 11, 2003, marking the alliance's first mission beyond and , at the request of the UN and Afghan government. This transition centralized command under 's structure, facilitating coordination among multinational contingents while adhering to the UN mandate for security assistance rather than offensive combat operations. ISAF's mandate expanded progressively through subsequent UN resolutions, beginning with nationwide coverage authorized in October 2003, though implementation occurred in phases: northern regions in 2004, followed by western and southern areas by 2005–2006. Over 40 nations eventually contributed, peaking at more than 130,000 troops by 2011, with major providers including the , , , and providing the bulk of forces for stabilization tasks. Operational effectiveness was hampered by national caveats—restrictions imposed by contributing governments on their troops' deployment, such as geographic limits, prohibitions on nighttime operations, or avoidance of high-risk —applied by nearly all non-U.S. contingents and affecting up to half of ISAF forces at times. These caveats, driven by domestic political constraints in troop-contributing nations, constrained unified command responses and delayed full territorial control. In its early phase, ISAF achieved relative security in , reducing factional violence and enabling the interim government's operations, including the convening of the , after years of instability. Urban areas under ISAF purview saw restored basic order, with patrols and checkpoints deterring major disruptions, though rural regions remained outside effective reach until later expansions.

Initial Reconstruction Efforts

The pledged nearly $300 million in 2002 for Afghan relief and , including allocations for rehabilitating key roads such as the Kabul-Kandahar highway and supporting basic infrastructure like . The broader committed $2 billion for activities in 2002 alone, part of a five-year pledge totaling $4.5 billion, with funds directed toward emergency projects including road repairs, winterization efforts, and contributions to the World Bank's Afghan Reconstruction Trust Fund. These inputs aimed to restore essential services disrupted by decades of conflict, though outputs varied due to logistical challenges in a fragmented post-Taliban landscape. Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs), first conceptualized in summer 2002 as an evolution of Coalition Humanitarian Liaison Cells, integrated U.S. with experts from USAID and the to provide for delivery and promote provincial . By late 2002, initial PRTs were operational in northern provinces like and , focusing on quick-impact projects such as , clinic repairs, and local road improvements to build Afghan government legitimacy without expanding large-scale troop deployments. This military-civilian model facilitated over $80 million in early U.S. road reconstruction commitments, prioritizing arteries vital for commerce and distribution. USAID's education initiatives, launched in 2002, emphasized constructing school facilities, printing millions of textbooks, and training teachers to address the near-collapse of the system under Taliban rule, where female education was severely restricted. These efforts contributed to rapid enrollment gains, with primary school attendance rising from under 1 million students in 2001 to approximately 4.5 million by 2003, though many structures remained makeshift tents or damaged buildings rather than permanent facilities. Economic indicators reflected partial efficacy, as Afghanistan's nominal GDP increased from $4.07 billion in 2002 to $6.88 billion in 2005 per World Bank data, driven by returning refugees, agricultural recovery, and initial foreign investment, yet growth was uneven, concentrated in urban areas like Kabul while rural regions lagged. A notable shortfall emerged in rural agriculture, where opium poppy cultivation surged 657 percent in 2002 relative to 2001 levels following the Taliban's prior ban, as post-invasion priorities deferred aggressive eradication to avoid alienating farmers amid food insecurity and weak central control. This rebound, documented in UN surveys, underscored limitations in early reconstruction's ability to supplant illicit economies without sustained enforcement, with cultivation areas expanding to over 30,000 hectares by 2002 despite pledges for alternative crop support. Overall, while aid inputs yielded tangible infrastructure gains and macroeconomic upticks, distributional inefficiencies and policy pauses highlighted causal gaps between funding and sustained provincial outputs.

Taliban Resurgence and Cross-Border Support

Following the 's initial defeat in December 2001, remnants of its leadership and fighters retreated across the border into Pakistan's (FATA), particularly North and South Waziristan, and province, where they established safe havens for regrouping. By 2002–2003, these cross-border sanctuaries enabled Taliban commanders to rebuild networks, recruit Pashtun fighters from Pakistani madrassas, and plan cross-border incursions, with Pakistani military and (ISI) elements providing de facto tolerance despite U.S. diplomatic pressure. This external support stemmed from Pakistan's longstanding "" doctrine, which viewed a pliable Islamist regime in as a buffer against Indian encirclement, prioritizing geopolitical hedging over disrupting Taliban operations. The , a Taliban-aligned syndicate based in FATA and operating under Jalaluddin Haqqani's influence, began launching cross-border attacks into as early as 2003, targeting U.S. supply convoys and outposts in eastern provinces like Paktika and with ambushes and improvised explosive devices. These operations, sustained by funds from Gulf donors and smuggling routes through , exemplified how sanctuary access allowed rapid tactical reconstitution, with the network conducting over a dozen cross-border raids by mid-decade. 's selective enforcement—raiding some militants while shielding Afghan-focused groups—reflected calculations that fostering resilience served long-term interests in more than short-term alliance with the U.S. Taliban adoption of suicide bombings, rare before 2003 and influenced by trainers in Pakistani tribal zones, escalated from zero attacks in 2001–2002 to three confirmed incidents in 2004 and 27 in 2005, many originating from FATA staging areas. This surge in asymmetric tactics, including vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices smuggled across the , directly correlated with the security provided by Pakistani border regions, where insurgents trained in ISI-proximate areas before infiltrating. Ultimately, the resurgence's momentum derived from these uncontested external bases, which outlasted efforts to interdict them, as Pakistan's strategic imperatives consistently trumped commitments to eliminate havens.

Escalation of the Insurgency

IED Campaigns and Taliban Tactics 2003–2006

The Taliban insurgency shifted toward asymmetric warfare after initial setbacks, prioritizing improvised explosive devices (IEDs) to exploit coalition forces' reliance on road travel and patrols while minimizing direct engagements. IED attacks surged in rural roads and choke points in southern and eastern provinces, using pressure-plate, command-detonated, and victim-operated variants often constructed from artillery shells, fertilizer, and commercial explosives sourced locally or via smuggling. These devices inflicted remote, low-risk attrition on U.S. and Afghan National Army convoys, with tactics evolving to include secondary blasts and decoy placements to ambush responders. IEDs accounted for a rising share of U.S. casualties, causing 18 of 82 hostile deaths in 2005 (22 percent) and 27 of 86 in 2006 (31 percent), though percentages fluctuated with operational tempo; overall, blast injuries from IEDs comprised about 4.5 per 1,000 deployed troops in 2005. The U.S. responded by prioritizing counter-IED technologies, including jammers and route clearance, but the threat prompted the 2006 establishment of the Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected () vehicle program to enhance survivability against underbelly blasts, with initial fielding in following Iraq deployments. Insurgent IED employment reflected adaptation to superior coalition firepower, emphasizing attrition over territorial gains. Complementing IEDs, Taliban tactics incorporated targeted assassinations and civilian intimidation to erode government legitimacy, particularly in Pashtun areas. Assassinations targeted district administrators, police chiefs, and tribal elders cooperating with , such as the 2005 killing of several provincial officials via ambushes or bombs, aiming to decapitate local administration and deter collaboration. involved "night letters" threatening death for aiding forces or attending girls' schools, enforced by beheadings or public executions to instill fear and extract compliance. These measures created no-go zones for development workers and isolated Afghan forces. In Helmand, , and eastern provinces, the developed rudimentary shadow governance by 2004–2006, appointing "shadow governors" to collect ushr taxes (one-tenth of harvests), resolve disputes via mobile courts, and conscript fighters, paralleling state structures to portray themselves as viable alternative rulers. This dual authority undermined by diverting resources and loyalty, with courts handling , , and land disputes to legitimize control among sympathetic populations. Attack frequency escalated accordingly, with -claimed operations roughly tripling amid cross-border safe havens, though precise counts varied due to underreporting in remote areas. Such tactics sustained momentum despite lacking conventional capabilities.

Opium Trade and Narco-Insurgency Links

Following the U.S.-led in late 2001, poppy cultivation in surged, with production rising from an estimated 74 metric tons in 2001—suppressed under the 's prior ban—to over 3,400 metric tons by 2002, capturing approximately 76% of global supply that year and exceeding 90% by 2005. The , displaced but reconstituting as insurgents, imposed a ushr of roughly 10% on harvests in areas under their influence, alongside protection fees and transit levies on traffickers, generating an estimated $100 million to $400 million annually for the group by the mid-2000s. This revenue stream, often comprising up to 60% of funding in poppy-dominant southern provinces like Helmand and , directly financed weapons , fighter recruitment, and (IED) networks, intertwining narcotics with the insurgency's operational sustainability. Coalition counternarcotics efforts, including manual and mechanized eradication, destroyed limited acreage—peaking at around 20,000 hectares annually by 2010—but aerial fumigation, modeled on Colombia's glyphosate spraying, was repeatedly deferred due to anticipated tribal and popular backlash, risks to licit crops, and concerns over alienating rural populations pivotal to stability operations. Such measures, when pursued, often provoked farmer resentment without viable substitutes, as insurgents retaliated against eradication teams and provided loans, seeds, and security to poppy cultivators, exploiting economic voids left by under-resourced alternative livelihood programs. U.S. and Afghan government initiatives to promote wheat or saffron as replacements allocated insufficient funding—totaling under $1 billion over a decade for rural development broadly—failing to match opium's profitability, which yielded farmers 10-20 times more per hectare than grains amid chronic drought and poor infrastructure. The narco-insurgency nexus persisted because opium's high returns created rational incentives for farmer allegiance to the , who tolerated cultivation in exchange for tribute rather than enforcing blanket bans as in 2000-2001, when plummeted 95% under . In -controlled districts, households derived up to 40% of income from poppy-related activities, fostering a where ' taxation and anti-eradication stance secured local buy-in, undermining efforts that prioritized suppression without addressing underlying or market dynamics. This dynamic, rather than eradication shortfalls alone, entrenched the drug economy as a pillar of insurgent , with traffickers and commanders integrating narcotics profits into economies that evaded formal .

Pakistani Sanctuary and ISI Role

Following the U.S.-led in October 2001, Pakistan's border regions, particularly in and the (FATA), provided safe havens for leaders and fighters fleeing , enabling the group's reorganization and sustained operations. The Quetta Shura, the 's primary leadership council informally named for its base in , Pakistan, coordinated activities, including attack planning and resource allocation, from these sanctuaries as early as 2002. U.S. assessments identified Quetta as a hub where commanders, such as Mullah Omar's deputies, directed cross-border incursions into southern , contributing to the escalation of ambushes and bombings by 2003. Pakistan's (ISI) agency maintained operational ties with the and affiliated groups like the post-2001, facilitating logistics, training, and funding despite Pakistan's nominal alliance with the U.S.-led coalition. Declassified U.S. documents and intelligence reports from the period reveal ISI officers providing safe houses and communication support to Taliban elements in Pakistan, allowing them to evade capture and regenerate forces. In September 2011, U.S. Chairman of the Mullen testified before that the Haqqani network functioned as a "veritable arm" of the ISI, with agency support enabling attacks such as the June 2011 assault on the U.S. embassy in and a truck bombing of a outpost. Mullen's assertion, based on intercepted communications and informant reporting, highlighted ISI orchestration of specific operations rather than mere tolerance. The U.S. response included targeted strikes in Pakistan's tribal areas starting in June 2004, with the first operation killing commander Nek Muhammad Wazir in South Waziristan, a key figure sheltering Afghan insurgents. Over the subsequent years, these strikes eliminated dozens of and Haqqani leaders operating from Pakistani soil, disrupting but not dismantling the sanctuaries, as influence reportedly shielded high-value targets. Despite receiving approximately $20 billion in U.S. and economic between 2002 and 2011—intended partly to secure cooperation against militants—Pakistan's efforts to dismantle these networks remained limited, with denials contradicted by persistent cross-border attacks traced to Quetta-based planning. This duality persisted, as evidenced by admissions in captured documents and U.S. assessments linking to revenue flows sustaining insurgent operations.

Provincial Reconstruction Teams

Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) were civil-military organizations established in starting in early , initially as Coalition Humanitarian Liaison Cells under U.S. leadership, to integrate security provision with reconstruction efforts in support of objectives. These teams aimed to extend the reach of the Afghan central government into provincial areas by combining military forces for protection with civilian experts focused on development projects, thereby fostering local stability and governance capacity amid ongoing threats. By 2006, more than 20 PRTs operated across , expanding to 25 by 2007 under NATO's (ISAF), with teams typically comprising 50 to 100 military personnel alongside a smaller contingent from agencies like USAID or foreign equivalents. PRTs funded and oversaw quick-impact projects such as road repairs, school construction, and water systems, with U.S.-led teams expecting to complete over 600 such initiatives by the end of 2006. In terms, this model sought to generate local buy-in by linking visible aid to secured environments, enabling Afghan officials to engage populations without immediate insurgent interference. National approaches to PRTs varied significantly, reflecting differing priorities in civil-military balance. U.S. PRTs followed a standardized structure embedding civilian advisors within military command for integrated operations, prioritizing rapid delivery to bolster . British-led PRTs, by contrast, were larger and emphasized sector , mediating local power disputes among to build sustainable provincial . These differences influenced project focus: U.S. teams often executed tactical aid to deny insurgent safe havens, while British models stressed longer-term transitions, though challenges arose from inconsistent civilian across lead nations. Empirically, PRTs achieved localized security gains by hiring laborers for projects and facilitating consultations, which enhanced perceptions of responsiveness in some provinces and reduced immediate insurgent influence through economic incentives. However, evidence of broader impact remains contested, as PRT activities correlated with temporary stability in controlled areas but failed to measurably degrade resilience, per assessments questioning metrics like project completion rates as proxies for enduring loyalty. Critics, including reports from the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), highlighted sustainability deficits, with many PRT-funded facilities—such as clinics and schools—left unstaffed or unmaintained after team rotations, fostering dependency on foreign aid rather than Afghan . The military-aid fusion also reinforced perceptions of occupation, as armed escorts for development work blurred humanitarian neutrality, alienating segments of the population wary of external interference and enabling narratives of coercive . This approach, while yielding short-term compliance, undermined causal pathways to organic governance, as locals anticipated perpetual subsidies without reciprocal capacity-building obligations.

U.S. and Coalition Surge

Obama Administration Strategy Shift

Upon assuming office in January 2009, President inherited a deteriorating security situation in , where forces had regained momentum after U.S. focus shifted to post-2003, necessitating a strategic reassessment. In February 2009, Obama authorized an initial increase of 17,000 U.S. troops to bolster Afghan forces and stabilize key areas, but this proved insufficient amid rising insurgent attacks and failures. General Stanley McChrystal, appointed commander of U.S. and forces in June 2009, conducted a comprehensive assessment released on August 30, 2009, which diagnosed the campaign's shortcomings as stemming from inadequate resources, fragmented unity of effort, and an overemphasis on kinetic operations rather than protecting the Afghan population. McChrystal recommended a pivot to (COIN) doctrine, prioritizing population security, local , and development to isolate insurgents, while requesting up to 40,000 additional troops to implement it. Obama's subsequent 2009 strategy review, involving interagency debates and military input, culminated in a December 1, 2009, address announcing approval for 30,000 additional U.S. troops—about half of McChrystal's ask—deployed on an accelerated timeline with a planned 18-month period before transition to lead. This shift explicitly adopted population-centric principles, drawing from U.S. Army Field Manual 3-24, which emphasized securing civilians over body counts, integrating military operations with and aid to build government credibility and deny insurgents sanctuary. The strategy rejected indefinite escalation, framing as a finite effort to reverse gains, enable (ANSF) buildup, and create conditions for eventual U.S. drawdown, while conditioning aid on anti-corruption reforms. Implementation metrics indicated initial success in shrinking Taliban influence; by mid-2010, coalition assessments reported reduced insurgent-initiated attacks in surge priority areas like Helmand and increased population access to , with Taliban-controlled territory contracting temporarily from pre-surge highs where insurgents operated in over 70% of districts. However, these gains were fragile, dependent on sustained troop presence and Pakistani border sanctuaries, and insurgency violence rebounded post-2011 drawdown as ANSF capabilities lagged. Critics, including some military analysts, argued the timeline constrained COIN's long-term requirements for cultural adaptation and host-nation buy-in, though proponents viewed it as a pragmatic response to fiscal and political constraints rather than an initiation of perpetual conflict.

Troop Surge and Helmand Offensive 2009–2010

In December 2009, President authorized a surge of additional U.S. troops to , building on an earlier increment of 17,000 approved in February 2009, with deployments accelerating into to counter Taliban control in key population centers. U.S. forces in the country expanded from approximately 32,000 at the start of Obama's term to over 100,000 by mid-2010, contributing to a peak exceeding 130,000 personnel under ISAF command, concentrated in southern where intensity reached its highest levels. This influx enabled large-scale clearing operations, prioritizing Helmand's Nad Ali district, a Taliban stronghold reliant on production and cross-border reinforcements, with U.S. and British forces leading efforts to disrupt insurgent command nodes and supply lines. The Helmand offensive culminated in Operation Moshtarak, launched on February 13, 2010, involving roughly 15,000 coalition and Afghan National Army troops targeting Marjah, a 200-square-kilometer Taliban-controlled area housing up to 90,000 civilians and serving as a logistics hub. Ground assaults, supported by air and artillery but constrained by revised rules of engagement emphasizing civilian protection—such as a July 2009 tactical directive limiting airstrikes near populated areas—cleared Taliban fighters from the town center within days, killing or dispersing hundreds of insurgents while minimizing collateral damage compared to prior operations. Initial kinetic engagements resulted in dozens of Taliban deaths per day, with reports of fighters fleeing northward or surrendering, yielding temporary territorial control over Marjah's markets, government buildings, and irrigation canals previously used for IED emplacement and ambushes. Violence metrics reflected the surge's immediate pressure: enemy-initiated attacks in Helmand spiked 60-70% during the first quarter of 2010 due to intensified resistance via IEDs and small-arms fire, but overall insurgent-initiated incidents nationwide declined by 10-15% from peak 2009 levels into 2011 as forces held cleared zones and disrupted momentum. These gains inflicted measurable setbacks on operational capacity, reducing their ability to project power in central Helmand and forcing reallocations from sanctuaries in , though insurgents adapted with to contest vacuums post-clearing.

Night Raids and Special Operations

United States (JSOC) units, including and , conducted targeted night raids throughout the , focusing on high-value and targets to disrupt insurgent networks. These operations leveraged advanced night-vision technology and rapid insertion tactics, often involving helicopter-borne assaults, to capture or kill mid-level commanders and facilitators. By 2010, coalition special operations forces executed raids that resulted in the elimination or detention of an average of six leaders per night, contributing to over 2,000 such operations annually. The raids significantly degraded Taliban leadership cohesion by removing key figures responsible for planning attacks and , forcing the insurgency to rely on less experienced replacements and hindering coordinated operations. U.S. military assessments indicated that these efforts prevented the from regaining momentum in critical areas, with officials like former Helmand deputy governor Abdul Satar Mirzokhel stating that night raids "have broken the back of the ." Data from the period shows thousands of insurgents captured or killed, with JSOC raids alone accounting for a substantial portion of removals, thereby limiting the group's ability to reconstitute command structures. Integration of Afghan partners was a core element, with U.S. A-Teams (Operational Detachment Alphas) training and embedding with Afghan National Army commandos and local militias to conduct joint raids, enhancing operational and cultural awareness. This allowed for more precise targeting based on Afghan-sourced tips, reducing errors and building local capacity, though challenges persisted in vetting partners amid green-on-blue risks. By mid-decade, such collaborations enabled Afghan-led elements in many operations, transitioning from U.S.-dominated strikes to combined efforts that sustained pressure on networks. Overall, night raids and achieved measurable success in preventing Al-Qaeda's reconstitution in by maintaining relentless pressure on remaining cells, denying safe operational spaces, and disrupting alliances with the . Despite criticisms over civilian casualties—estimated in some reports at over 1,500 in late 2010 to early 2011—military analyses credited the tactic with buying time for broader efforts, though long-term insurgent resilience highlighted limitations in solely kinetic approaches.

Kandahar Clearance Operations

In 2010, coalition forces launched major clearance operations in , the Pashtun heartland and 's spiritual birthplace, targeting areas long serving as the insurgents' shadow capital. Operation Dragon Strike, conducted from September 15 to December 31, 2010, involved over 8,000 U.S. and Canadian troops focusing on districts such as Zhari, Panjwai, and Arghandab to disrupt control and secure key routes like Highway 1. The operation resulted in a coalition victory, with forces removing an estimated 195 commanders and achieving significant security improvements along vital supply lines. Complementing conventional efforts, U.S. Forces implemented Village Stability Operations (VSO) in , embedding small teams in remote villages to partner with local leaders willing to resist influence. Initiated broadly in 2010, VSO aimed to foster grassroots security by enabling community self-defense and governance, particularly in districts like Khakrez. These platforms provided enablers for local stability, marking a shift toward bottom-up in strongholds. Despite initial tactical gains, such as expanded access to previously denied areas, operations faced persistent challenges from entrenched within local power structures. Predatory and graft in undermined military progress by alienating populations and fueling insurgent recruitment, as unchecked local officials prioritized personal gain over effective administration. These issues eroded hard-won territorial control, highlighting the limits of kinetic clearances without addressing systemic failures.

Transition and Drawdown

Afghan Security Force Buildup

The and NATO allies invested heavily in expanding the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF), comprising the Afghan National Army (ANA) and (ANP), as part of the transition strategy following the 2009 troop surge. By 2014, the ANSF had reached an authorized strength of approximately 352,000 personnel, with the U.S. having committed nearly $62 billion to recruitment, training, and equipping efforts up to that point. This buildup involved establishing training centers, such as the Kabul Military Training Center, where recruits underwent basic instruction modeled on Western military doctrines, including literacy programs to address foundational skill gaps. Despite these investments, pervasive weaknesses undermined ANSF development from the outset. An estimated 80-90% of ANA recruits were illiterate upon entry, complicating instruction in tactics, , and , as even basic manuals required into oral or pictorial formats. Annual rates, driven largely by desertions, averaged around 30-35% in the early , necessitating constant to maintain numbers, with monthly losses equivalent to thousands of personnel. Corruption further eroded capabilities, with widespread diversion of equipment and funds; U.S. oversight reports documented instances of forces stealing contractor-supplied materials, including batteries and vehicles, while for billions in procured weaponry remained poor due to and falsified inventories. These issues stemmed partly from systemic networks, where promotions favored ethnic or tribal ties over merit, leading to incompetent and low . Cultural mismatches between imposed Western professionalization and Afghan societal realities—such as reliance on loyalties, aversion to centralized , and historical patterns of fragmented —limited the efficacy of programs, as recruits often prioritized local survival over commitments. Efforts to mitigate these through accelerated timelines and over-reliance on advisors failed to foster self-sustaining institutions, as evidenced by persistent dependencies on foreign air support and even at peak strength.

ANSF Performance and Green-on-Blue Incidents

The Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) assumed lead responsibility for security operations nationwide on June 18, 2013, marking the completion of NATO's Inteqal transition process, under which ANSF were to conduct the majority of combat and stability missions with coalition forces in advisory roles. By mid-2014, ANSF led approximately 80-90% of partnered operations, demonstrating initial capacity to hold terrain and respond to insurgent threats, as assessed in contemporaneous U.S. military evaluations. However, operational readiness was undermined by systemic deficiencies, including high attrition rates exceeding 30% annually in the Afghan National Army, widespread in chains, and inadequate for independent sustainment. ANSF performance metrics during the 2013-2014 transition revealed mixed outcomes, with successes in holding key population centers but failures in enabler-dependent tasks. Independent analyses, such as those from for Naval Analyses, concluded that ANSF generally performed adequately in their first full year of lead operations, conducting patrols and clearing actions with reduced coalition casualties. Yet, SIGAR audits highlighted overreliance on U.S. air support, , and intelligence, which ANSF could not replicate; for instance, Afghan forces conducted fewer effective missions without assets, leading to higher casualties in contested areas. This dependency stemmed from rushed force generation to meet end-2014 deadlines, prioritizing quantity over quality in equipment maintenance and command structures, as critiqued in Department of Defense oversight reports. Green-on-blue incidents—attacks by ANSF personnel against partners—escalated sharply from to , eroding trust and operational partnering. These numbered over 100 documented cases during the period, causing at least 140 fatalities and accounting for up to 20% of deaths in peak years like 2012. Primary causes included Taliban infiltration via lax vetting and , with insurgents exploiting cultural frictions and propaganda narratives of foreign ; a Congressional Research Service analysis noted that in the prior 12 months, such attacks killed one in every seven troops. In response, ISAF implemented mitigation measures like "" for , restricted joint patrols, and enhanced screening, which reduced incidents by about 50% by late but at the cost of diminished ANSF- cohesion. SIGAR later attributed persistent vulnerabilities to inadequate within ANSF recruitment, reflecting broader failures in building awareness amid ethnic factionalism and illiteracy rates exceeding 60% in ranks.

Obama-to-Trump Handover and Partial Withdrawals

In July 2016, President Obama revised plans for a further drawdown, opting to maintain approximately 8,400 U.S. troops in through the end of his term in January 2017, rather than reducing to 5,500 as previously announced. This residual force under NATO's emphasized training, advising, and counterterrorism support for Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF), amid persistent offensives that had eroded government control in rural areas. The Trump administration inherited this posture during the January 2017 handover, with troop levels at roughly 8,400 U.S. personnel focused on enabling ANDSF operations rather than direct combat. A subsequent strategic review, completed in mid-2017, prompted to authorize an increase to approximately 14,000 U.S. troops by early , reversing the prior trajectory of partial withdrawals to reinforce advisory roles and intensify pressure on . The August 2017 strategy announcement discarded rigid timelines for conditions-based commitments, delegating more authority to theater commanders for airstrikes and special operations. Despite the augmentation, Taliban forces regained ground during this period, with U.S. assessments indicating they controlled or influenced about 14 districts by late 2017 and expanded to contest over half of Afghanistan's territory by , exploiting ANDSF vulnerabilities in contested provinces like Helmand and . efforts maintained continuity, as U.S. forces conducted thousands of airstrikes annually; in alone, aircraft released a record 7,423 weapons on and affiliated targets, supporting Afghan offensives and disrupting leadership networks. This escalation in air power, averaging over 20 strikes per day by late , underscored a persistent focus on degrading insurgent capabilities amid fluctuating ground force levels.

Trump-Era Peace Talks Initiation

In July 2018, the administration authorized direct diplomatic engagement with the to expedite a conditions-based withdrawal of forces from , marking a departure from prior multilateral approaches that included the Afghan government. , a veteran diplomat and former ambassador to , was appointed as Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation on September 5, 2018, to lead these efforts. Initial talks commenced in , , later that year, focusing primarily on guarantees against terrorist safe havens in exchange for a troop drawdown timeline. The insisted on bilateral negotiations excluding the Afghan government, which they characterized as illegitimate and a regime, prioritizing instead firm commitments on military exit over intra-Afghan political reconciliation. This stance compelled the to conduct talks without Kabul's direct involvement, yielding concessions such as phased base closures and troop reductions to build momentum toward a full withdrawal within 14 months, contingent on compliance with pledges. By early 2020, forces had drawn down from approximately 13,000 to 8,600 personnel, aligning with negotiation benchmarks and contributing to a sharp decline in American combat fatalities, with the last service member occurring on February 8, 2020. These initial negotiations secured no immediate ceasefire, however, allowing the Taliban to intensify attacks on Afghan forces and maintain territorial gains, which critics argued undermined the Afghan government's negotiating position and signaled tacit US acceptance of Taliban battlefield leverage for withdrawal assurances. The framework emphasized empirical progress on force reductions over enforceable halts to violence, reducing US exposure at the cost of prolonged instability for Afghan security partners.

Doha Agreement and Final Withdrawal

U.S.-Taliban Negotiations

The U.S.-Taliban negotiations, conducted primarily in , , from 2018 onward, culminated in the signing of the "Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan" on February 29, 2020. Under the deal, the United States committed to a full troop withdrawal by May 1, 2021, contingent on the 's pledges to prevent terrorist groups such as from recruiting, training, or operating in territories under their control, and to ensure Afghan soil would not be used to threaten U.S. or allied security. The agreement also called for a reduction in violence to enable intra-Afghan talks, though it explicitly excluded direct participation by the government, treating the as a co-equal negotiating partner despite its status as a non-state insurgent group not recognized as Afghanistan's legitimate authority. In exchange for these commitments, the Taliban agreed to enter direct negotiations with Afghan representatives and pursue a comprehensive ceasefire, but enforcement mechanisms were minimal, relying largely on goodwill rather than verifiable benchmarks or penalties for non-compliance. A brief "reduction in violence" period preceded the signing from February 22 to 28, 2020, but Taliban attacks quickly resumed and intensified against Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) checkpoints, convoys, and outposts, sustaining high operational tempos without the promised de-escalation. U.S. military assessments noted no sustained decrease in Taliban-initiated violence post-agreement, with the group exploiting the deal to consolidate territorial gains while continuing offensive actions that undermined conditions for meaningful peace talks. Pakistan played a pivotal mediation role, leveraging its historical influence over Taliban leadership—much of which resided in Pakistani territory—to facilitate the talks and pressure the group toward agreement. officials, including and figures, hosted preliminary meetings and conveyed U.S. demands, crediting their diplomatic efforts for the breakthrough amid longstanding accusations of providing sanctuary to commanders. This involvement aligned with Islamabad's strategic interest in a -favorable outcome to counter Indian influence in and secure its western border, though it drew criticism for enabling the asymmetric leverage without addressing Pakistan's own harboring of militant networks. The negotiations' dynamics reflected a U.S. of domestic political imperatives—particularly then-President Trump's campaign pledge to end the war—over rigorous verification of assurances or inclusion of governmental input, leading to terms that effectively sidelined Kabul's agency and incentivized insurgent intransigence. Analysts have argued the deal's rushed timeline and lack of enforcement eroded institutional confidence, as the interpreted U.S. withdrawal commitments as a signal of reduced resolve, allowing them to intensify pressure tactics without reciprocal concessions. This approach, driven by electoral considerations rather than empirical assessment of compliance capacity, foreshadowed the agreement's failure to deliver verifiable security improvements or a stable transition.

Intra-Afghan Talks Failure

The intra-Afghan negotiations commenced on September 12, 2020, in , , following the completion of a stipulated in the U.S.- agreement, whereby the Afghan government released approximately 5,000 prisoners and the reciprocated with about 1,000 government and allied personnel. These talks aimed to address fundamental issues such as power-sharing, governance structures, and a , but procedural delays persisted even after the launch, with the parties struggling to agree on basic rules and an agenda. The delegation, representing their interpretation of an , consistently rejected power-sharing arrangements that preserved the Afghan republic's framework, instead demanding a model rooted in their strict sharia-based system without dilution through democratic elections or inclusive quotas. This intransigence manifested in their refusal to renounce the nomenclature or accept the existing as a starting point, viewing concessions as incompatible with their ideological goals of restoring pre-2001 rule. Afghan government negotiators, led by President Ashraf Ghani's administration, resisted these demands to avoid capitulation that would dismantle two decades of institution-building, insisting on protections for , electoral processes, and a transitional mechanism only under conditions like verified violence reduction. Ghani's stance emphasized maintaining the republic's , framing proposals as tantamount to rather than . Despite occasional exchanges of draft texts on issues like ceasefires and prisoner releases, the talks yielded no substantive progress by early 2021, as the Taliban prioritized military gains over compromise, conducting high-profile attacks that undermined . Violence levels remained elevated, with Taliban-initiated assaults comprising the majority of incidents, including targeted killings in urban areas, even as delegations met sporadically. This persistence of offensive operations signaled the Taliban's strategy of using talks as a diplomatic facade while exploiting the U.S. withdrawal timeline for leverage, rendering inevitable without their willingness to halt hostilities or moderate core demands. The absence of a reduction in violence, despite repeated international calls, highlighted the causal primacy of Taliban unwillingness to de-escalate, as empirical data from monitoring groups showed no correlated drop in casualties post-launch.

Biden Administration Execution

Upon taking office in January 2021, President Biden reviewed the administration's February 2020 Agreement, which stipulated a U.S. troop withdrawal by May 1, 2021, contingent on commitments including reduced violence and assurances. On April 14, 2021, Biden announced a full withdrawal of remaining U.S. forces by , 2021, extending the timeline but initiating an accelerated drawdown without enforcing conditions such as intra-Afghan negotiations or restraints on . This decision prioritized ending U.S. involvement over maintaining leverage, despite intelligence assessments warning of potential government vulnerabilities. As the situation deteriorated in summer 2021, the administration vacated Bagram Air Base on July 2, 2021, handing it to Afghan forces in a nighttime operation without prior notification to the local commander, which critics argued severed a key logistical hub and complicated later evacuation efforts from . By August, with forces closing in, Biden rejected allied calls to extend the deadline beyond August 31, 2021, insisting on completing the pullout to avoid , even as partners expressed frustration over the unconditional timeline. The evacuation from International Airport in became chaotic, with thousands of s and Americans crowding perimeter gates amid inadequate perimeter security and intelligence gaps on ISIS-K threats. On August 26, 2021, an ISIS-K suicide bomber detonated at Abbey Gate, killing 13 U.S. service members—11 , one Navy corpsman, and one soldier—and wounding dozens more, alongside approximately 170 civilians. While the Doha Agreement was negotiated under , congressional reviews attributed execution shortcomings—including the early exit, insufficient contingency planning, and failure to anticipate rapid collapse—to Biden administration choices, rejecting claims of full inheritance without agency. The final U.S. forces departed on August 30, 2021, marking the end of the 20-year presence.

Collapse of Afghan Government and Taliban Takeover

The Taliban launched a major offensive in May 2021 that accelerated in early August, capturing the provincial capital of on August 6, followed by rapid successive falls of cities including , , and Taluqan by August 8, and and by August 12-13, with minimal organized resistance from (ANSF). By August 15, Taliban forces entered unopposed after the government leadership collapsed, marking the end of the Afghan republic. President fled on August 15 amid the advance, reportedly to avert a potential and taking cash-filled vehicles, initially to and later the , leaving a that facilitated the insurgents' uncontested takeover of the . Key cities like and saw ANSF units disintegrate through desertions, surrenders, or factional infighting rather than sustained combat, with commanders often negotiating local deals or abandoning posts. In response, U.S. and coalition forces conducted a large-scale air evacuation from Kabul's International Airport between August 14 and 31, airlifting over 123,000 individuals, including U.S. citizens, Afghan allies, and others, using military aircraft amid chaotic crowds and security threats. The ANSF's swift disintegration stemmed primarily from systemic corruption that hollowed out institutional capacity and morale over two decades, including inflating payrolls, diversion of U.S.-provided fuel and supplies to elites, and predatory elite pacts that prioritized personal enrichment over operational readiness, ultimately eroding soldiers' willingness to fight without external sustainment like U.S. airstrikes. SIGAR assessments, drawing from declassified and Afghan official accounts, highlight how this graft created a brittle force dependent on foreign , where frontline troops faced shortages while leaders siphoned billions, fostering distrust and collapse when U.S. support waned.

International Coalition and Allies

NATO Contributions and Caveats

NATO allies contributed over 50 nations' forces to the (ISAF) mission in Afghanistan, assuming command from the U.S.-led coalition on August 11, 2003, under UN mandate. Peak troop levels reached approximately 130,000 by 2011, with non-U.S. allies providing around 40,000 personnel focused on combat, training, and stabilization in provinces like Helmand and . Prior to the 2009 U.S. surge, the and bore disproportionate combat burdens, deploying battle groups to Taliban strongholds; UK forces in Helmand faced intense fighting from 2006, suffering over 400 fatalities, while Canadian troops in conducted aggressive operations, logging more than 150 deaths by 2011. National caveats—self-imposed restrictions by contributing nations—significantly constrained operational flexibility and burden-sharing. , for instance, limited its 5,000 troops primarily to northern reconstruction via Provincial Reconstruction Teams, prohibiting combat patrols or night operations outside due to domestic political sensitivities over casualties. Such caveats, numbering over 200 across ISAF contributors, fragmented command unity, forcing U.S. and willing allies like the to compensate in high-risk areas, as restricted units could not reinforce or rotate freely. These disparities stemmed from divergent national interests, with casualty-averse governments prioritizing over mission needs, ultimately prolonging insurgent advantages by hindering rapid response capabilities. Non-U.S. NATO fatalities exceeded 1,100 from 2001 to 2021, reflecting uneven sacrifices; the alone accounted for 457 deaths, 158, and 86, compared to Germany's 59 amid restricted roles. At the 2010 Lisbon Summit, NATO pledged a phased transition of security responsibilities to Afghan forces by 2014, aiming to end combat operations while maintaining training support, though persistent caveats delayed cohesive implementation. Varied commitments underscored alliance tensions, as political constraints in often subordinated collective defense to national electoral concerns, eroding interoperability and strategic coherence.

Key Partner Nations' Roles

The deployed over 9,500 personnel at its peak in 2010, leading combat operations in from 2006 onward, where forces conducted extensive and stabilization efforts amid intense resistance. British contributions included mentoring Afghan National Army units and infrastructure development, sustaining a presence until 2014 with subsequent advisory roles. Canada assumed responsibility for Kandahar Province in 2006, deploying up to 2,500 troops focused on clearing insurgent strongholds and partnering with local forces through operational mentoring and liaison teams, a role that ended in combat capacity by 2011. This commitment involved high-risk patrols and reconstruction projects, reflecting Canada's emphasis on direct engagement in one of Afghanistan's most contested regions. Australia led the Provincial Reconstruction Team in Uruzgan Province from 2006 to 2013, integrating special forces raids, mentoring of Afghan units, and civil development projects to extend government control in a Taliban sanctuary. Over 39,000 Australian personnel rotated through the mission, resulting in 41 fatalities and 263 wounded, primarily from enemy action after 2007. Georgia, as a non-NATO major contributor, surged to 1,700 troops by 2012, embedding units with U.S. and British forces in Helmand Province for combat patrols and logistics, sustaining deployments until the 2021 withdrawal. Georgian forces recorded 31 deaths and over 400 wounded since 2010, yielding the highest per-capita casualties among coalition partners due to frontline exposure without national caveats restricting high-threat missions. Turkey maintained a sustained presence, emphasizing coordination, airfield operations at , and training of Afghan National Army recruits, with troop levels reaching 600 during the Resolute Support phase from 2015 to 2021. Turkish efforts included engineering support and medical evacuations, though a 2012 helicopter crash near claimed 12 soldiers' lives, marking one of the deadliest single incidents for the contingent. These roles collectively broadened the coalition's operational footprint and political legitimacy under UN mandates, enabling distributed burden-sharing across provinces; however, disparities emerged as combat-heavy contributors like the , , and absorbed higher attrition in southern hotspots, while support-oriented nations prioritized rear-area stability and capacity-building with lower direct engagement.

Regional Actors: Pakistan, Iran, and Others

Pakistan's (ISI) agency maintained close ties with the throughout the conflict, providing sanctuary, financial support, training, and logistical aid to despite Pakistan's nominal with the U.S.-led . This "double game" enabled the to regroup in Pakistan's border regions, particularly , from which they launched cross-border attacks into , undermining efforts while Pakistan received over $33 billion in U.S. military and economic assistance between 2002 and 2017. The 2011 U.S. raid killing in , located less than a mile from the , highlighted these inconsistencies; documents recovered from the compound and subsequent investigations suggested Pakistani intelligence either knowingly sheltered leaders or exhibited gross incompetence in monitoring high-value targets on its soil. Pakistan's official described the episode as a "collective failure" of state institutions but avoided admitting complicity, fueling U.S. suspicions corroborated by declassified intelligence indicating protection for figures like . Iran pursued a dual-track policy in Afghanistan, initially cooperating with the U.S. invasion by supporting anti-Taliban forces following the Taliban's 1998 killing of Iranian diplomats, but later shifting to covert actions against coalition troops to counter American influence. provided reconstruction aid and invested in , yet U.S. reports documented Iranian supply of explosively formed penetrators (EFPs) and other weapons to Shia militias and , resulting in American casualties; these efforts aimed to expel U.S. forces while protecting Iran's Shia interests against Sunni extremists like the . Iran's support extended to Hazara Shia communities, bolstering groups like Hezb-e-Wahdat, but remained opportunistic, avoiding full endorsement of the Taliban due to sectarian tensions. Among other regional actors, emerged as a major donor to the Afghan government, committing approximately $3 billion in developmental aid from 2001 to 2021 for projects including the , Parliament building, and road networks, positioning itself against Pakistan's influence. However, diplomatic outposts faced repeated Taliban-linked attacks, such as the July 7, 2008, embassy bombing that killed 58 people including staff, attributed to the with ISI facilitation, and the January 3, 2016, assault on the Mazar-i-Sharif consulate involving gunfire and explosions repelled by Afghan forces. , concerned with Central Asian stability, engaged the Taliban diplomatically in the , hosting talks and allegedly providing non-lethal aid, amid U.S. accusations of offering bounties to insurgents targeting American troops as retaliation for U.S. support to Syrian rebels. maintained a low-profile stance focused on economic stakes, signing mining contracts like the copper deposit in 2007 but refraining from military involvement, prioritizing border security over active intervention during the war.

UN and Diplomatic Frameworks

The United Nations Security Council established the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) via Resolution 1401 on 28 March 2002, assigning it responsibility for coordinating international civilian efforts in humanitarian relief, reconstruction, and development while facilitating political processes under the Bonn Agreement framework. This mandate emphasized promoting national reconciliation, good governance, and the rule of law, with UNAMA serving as the primary multilateral coordinator for donor assistance and transitional administration support.) Annual renewals adapted its scope to include monitoring cease-fires and aiding institutional capacity-building, though its non-enforcement powers confined it to advisory and facilitative roles amid ongoing insecurity. Resolution 1386, adopted unanimously on 20 December 2001, authorized the deployment of the (ISAF) to assist the Afghan Interim Authority in maintaining security in , providing a diplomatic endorsement for multilateral stabilization efforts tied to political transitions.) Subsequent resolutions, such as extensions in 2003 and 2004, broadened ISAF's operational area nationwide and explicitly supported electoral timelines outlined in the Bonn process, including the establishment of an electoral unit within UNAMA to oversee , polling logistics, and result certification for the 2004 presidential and 2005 parliamentary elections. These measures aimed to legitimize emerging Afghan institutions through internationally observed democratic processes, yet implementation depended on ground-level security provided by ISAF contributors. The Security Council upheld a targeted sanctions regime against Taliban and Al-Qaida figures through the 1267/1989 Committee, initiated by Resolution 1267 in October 1999 and maintained via periodic renewals until 2021, imposing asset freezes, travel prohibitions, and arms restrictions to disrupt insurgent operations and financing. Administered by a monitoring team that assessed compliance and delisting requests, the regime listed over 250 -associated individuals and entities by 2020, drawing on intelligence from member states. However, enforcement gaps persisted due to inconsistent implementation across jurisdictions and the regime's reliance on national authorities, rendering it insufficient against state-tolerated cross-border insurgent that sustained resilience despite diplomatic isolation efforts.

Nation-Building and Governance Efforts

Karzai and Ghani Administrations

Hamid Karzai served as head of the Afghan interim administration from December 2001, following the Bonn Agreement, and was elected president in October 2004 with 55.4% of the vote, securing re-election in amid allegations of widespread fraud. His administration centralized executive power under a strong presidency, a structure imposed post-2001 invasion, while relying heavily on networks comprising ethnic Pashtun allies, tribal leaders, and former warlords to maintain fragile coalitions and stability across diverse factions. This approach prioritized short-term political accommodation over institutional reform, fostering dependency on personal loyalties rather than merit-based , which alienated peripheral regions and undermined long-term state cohesion. The 2009 presidential election exemplified governance challenges under Karzai, with evidence of ballot stuffing and pre-marked votes favoring him, leading to an initial count of 54.6% but requiring UN-backed audits that invalidated over a million votes. Despite confirming Karzai's victory without a runoff, the episode eroded public trust and highlighted weak electoral oversight, as international observers documented systematic irregularities in his strongholds. Ashraf Ghani assumed the presidency in September 2014 following a against , resolved through U.S.-mediated power-sharing forming a , with Ghani as president and Abdullah as chief executive. A U.S.-educated anthropologist and former official, Ghani pursued a technocratic agenda, appointing qualified professionals over political loyalists and seeking to modernize bureaucracy and reduce patronage influences. However, his centralizing reforms and insistence on loyalty exacerbated ethnic and factional divisions, polarizing allies and intensifying infighting within the unity government, which contributed to administrative paralysis. Under both administrations, Afghanistan's GDP per capita rose from approximately $139 in to $607 by , driven largely by foreign inflows, though growth stagnated thereafter amid , with urban centers benefiting disproportionately while rural areas lagged. This economic expansion masked structural weaknesses, as aid dependency reinforced centralized patronage without building resilient local institutions, fostering alienation in provinces distant from .

Electoral Processes and Political Instability

The first post-Taliban presidential election on October 9, 2004, saw secure victory with high of approximately 83.7%, reflecting initial enthusiasm for democratic processes amid relative stability. Subsequent elections, however, revealed deepening challenges, including widespread that invalidated significant vote tallies—such as 1.1 million in 2009—and Taliban-orchestrated that suppressed participation. plummeted to 38.8% in 2009 and hovered around 38.9% in 2014, before dropping to about 19% in 2019, driven by insecurity, disillusionment over manipulated results, and insurgent threats that closed thousands of polling stations. The 2009 election, marred by ballot stuffing and fake voter IDs, prompted Abdullah Abdullah's withdrawal from a planned runoff after the Electoral Complaints Commission invalidated over a million suspect votes, allowing Karzai to retain power without a second round. Fraud allegations escalated in 2014, with audits revealing irregularities concentrated in key provinces, fueling a standoff between frontrunners and Abdullah that nearly derailed the process until U.S.-brokered talks yielded a on September 21, 2014, marking Afghanistan's first attempted peaceful transfer of power from Karzai. Ghani assumed the presidency, with Abdullah appointed chief executive, though the arrangement institutionalized ethnic divisions and weakened centralized authority. By , biometric measures curbed some ballot stuffing but failed to restore confidence, as 86,000 duplicate registrations and over 300,000 contested votes highlighted persistent manipulation, alongside attacks that killed dozens and deterred voters. The consistently boycotted elections, issuing calls for abstention and launching disruptions—such as destroying cell towers and targeting polling sites—to delegitimize the process, contributing to the closure of over 3,000 stations in alone. Ghani's narrow win sparked rival inaugurations with Abdullah in March 2020, resolved only by a May power-sharing deal amid threats of aid suspension, underscoring how and eroded electoral legitimacy and fostered governance structures. Despite these failures, elections facilitated rare instances of non-violent power transitions, as in , where international mediation averted civil unrest and enabled governance continuity under the unity framework. Yet, recurrent —often enabled by corrupt officials and —combined with Taliban violence, progressively undermined public trust, as evidenced by turnout declines and post-election disputes that prioritized elite bargaining over voter will. This cycle of instability highlighted the fragility of imposed democratic institutions in a context of ongoing and weak .

Anti-Corruption Measures and Failures

Corruption permeated the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF), exemplified by "" and officials—non-existent personnel listed on payrolls to divert salaries and fuel—costing U.S. taxpayers an estimated $300–400 million annually in the later years of the conflict. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) documented how Afghan officials inflated troop numbers, with audits revealing discrepancies of up to 50% in some units, such as the Afghan National Army reporting 180,000 soldiers while actual strength hovered around 90,000–100,000 by 2015. SIGAR's analysis indicated that systemic graft diverted at least 20–40% of reconstruction funds, including ANSF sustainment, undermining operational readiness as diverted resources left real soldiers unpaid, deserting at rates exceeding 30% annually. The 2010 Kabul Bank scandal highlighted elite-level corruption, where insiders embezzled nearly $1 billion—about 5% of Afghanistan's GDP—through sham loans to politically connected figures, including relatives of President , triggering a and exposing weak oversight by the . U.S. responses included establishing the Major Crimes Task Force in 2009 and embedding financial mentors via programs like the Embedded Training Teams (ETTs) to train Afghan auditors and prosecutors, alongside conditioning some aid on anti-corruption benchmarks under the 2012 Tokyo Mutual Accountability Framework. However, these initiatives faltered due to U.S. reluctance to confront powerful —key allies against the —despite SIGAR warnings that shielding them perpetuated networks. By 2016, fewer than 10% of investigated cases resulted in convictions, as political interference halted prosecutions. Afghan societal structures, rooted in tribal and familial where trumps merit, clashed with imposed mechanisms, rendering reforms superficial as officials prioritized distributing to clients for influence rather than institutional capacity. SIGAR reports emphasized that this cultural disconnect, combined with unchecked cash flows—over $8 billion in unmonitored bulk payments from 2009–2013—fueled a predatory , eroding in the . Consequently, hollowed out ANSF , with diverted funds contributing to 2021's rapid collapse as units proved phantom in combat, while bolstering recruitment by validating their narrative of a venal, foreign-puppet .

Human Rights Advances and Reversals

Under Taliban rule prior to 2001, women and girls faced severe restrictions, including a near-total ban on , with enrollment dropping to virtually zero, and prohibitions on outside the , enforced through floggings, amputations, and executions for violations of codes or unaccompanied movement. The regime conducted executions by or shooting for offenses like , often targeting women disproportionately, while attacks and beatings were documented against girls attempting to attend or against unveiled women. These practices stemmed from the 's strict interpretation of , which prioritized male guardianship and segregated life, resulting in systemic gender apartheid as described by contemporary observers. Following the U.S.-led intervention in 2001, the interim government established the Ministry of Women's Affairs in early 2002 to promote , leading to constitutional protections for in the 2004 charter, including equal access to education and political participation. Girls' enrollment surged from nearly zero in 2001 to 2.5 million by 2018, with overall female enrollment reaching about 40% of 10 million students by 2021, and primary-age girls' attendance exceeding 80%. Women assumed roles in (about 27% quota seats filled), , and , with UN-supported initiatives facilitating entry into these sectors, though implementation varied by region. Secondary and access expanded, enabling thousands of women to enter professions like and , marking measurable progress from the prior era's exclusion. However, these gains encountered persistent cultural and tribal resistance, particularly in rural Pashtun areas, where conservative norms viewed urban women's advancements as Western imports eroding traditional values, limiting enforcement of laws against honor killings, forced marriages, and domestic violence. Under Presidents Karzai and Ghani, legal commitments to women's rights often remained aspirational, undermined by corruption, weak judicial systems, and political concessions to warlords who opposed reforms; for instance, Karzai endorsed a 2012 Ulema code restricting women's public roles and testimony, signaling elite-level backsliding. Such resistance, combined with insurgency violence targeting female educators, prevented deeper societal shifts, rendering many advances fragile and urban-centric rather than nationally transformative. After the Taliban's August 2021 takeover, these advancements reversed rapidly, with edicts banning girls from (affecting 1.1 million students), prohibiting women from most including NGOs and , and abolishing the Ministry of Women's Affairs in favor of a Ministry for the Propagation of Virtue and Prevention of Vice. By 2025, over 2.2 million girls remained excluded from schooling beyond , and female healthcare access deteriorated due to mobility curbs and workforce bans, exacerbating humanitarian crises. The regime resumed public executions and corporal punishments, including floggings for dress code breaches, echoing pre-2001 practices and entrenching gender-based without the prior era's nominal legal safeguards. This backslide underscores how externally imposed reforms, absent sustained local buy-in or coercive enforcement, yielded temporary rather than enduring improvements.

Counterterrorism Achievements

Al-Qaeda Dismantlement

Following the U.S.-led invasion in October 2001, coalition forces rapidly dismantled 's operational infrastructure in Afghanistan, destroying at least 11 terrorist training camps and 39 command-and-control sites within the first 100 days of . This initial phase targeted the network's pre-9/11 safe havens, which had included dozens of facilities used for recruiting, training, and planning attacks; by early 2002, 's ability to maintain large-scale camps inside Afghanistan was effectively eliminated through airstrikes, special operations raids, and ground advances. These efforts displaced core operatives, forcing survivors into Pakistan's border regions, where subsequent captures and drone operations further degraded command structures, though many high-value targets evaded Afghan-based elimination during the war. Sustained counterterrorism operations from 2002 to 2021 prevented from reconstituting significant safe havens within , with intelligence-driven raids and partnerships with forces targeting remnant cells. , such as the Counter Narcotics-Terrorism Intelligence Fusion Center established in , integrated U.S., , and intelligence to disrupt financing, logistics, and plotting, contributing to the capture or killing of mid-level facilitators. Isolated pockets persisted, including a major (AQIS) training facility in destroyed in October 2015 after housing up to 300 fighters, but these were anomalies rather than systemic recovery. The dispersal of 's core led to the emergence of regional affiliates like Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), which operated semi-independently and focused on local insurgencies rather than global from soil. The dismantlement yielded long-term prevention of major external threats originating from , with no successful terrorist plots against Western targets directed from the country after —a fact underscoring the denial of operational space despite 's ideological persistence elsewhere. U.S. assessments noted that while affiliates proliferated globally, central lacked the Afghan base to orchestrate 9/11-scale attacks, attributing this to sustained pressure that fragmented planning and resource flows. This outcome held through 2021, though post-withdrawal tolerance of low-level presence raised concerns about reversal, independent of war-era gains.

Osama bin Laden Raid

The pursuit of Osama bin Laden culminated in intelligence breakthroughs tracing his trusted courier, whose pseudonym "" was identified through U.S. interrogations of detainees, with confirmatory details emerging by 2007 from sources like . Persistent CIA surveillance intensified after al-Kuwaiti's real identity was established in 2010, leading agents to a fortified compound in , —built around 2005 and located less than a mile from the —where analysis indicated a high probability of bin Laden's presence based on the site's unusual security features, lack of internet or phone connections, and resident patterns. On the night of May 1–2, 2011 (local time), U.S. launched Operation Neptune Spear from , , deploying 23 Navy SEALs via two modified Black Hawk stealth , accompanied by a combat dog and minimal support elements. The assault team breached the compound walls, neutralized armed resistance—including al-Kuwaiti, his brother, and bin Laden's son—in engagements lasting under 40 minutes, and killed bin Laden during a confrontation on the third-floor bedroom after he resisted; no U.S. personnel were killed, though one helicopter crashed due to mechanical issues and was destroyed on site. Intelligence materials, including computers and documents, were seized for analysis, confirming bin Laden's role in ongoing operations. The raid proceeded without notifying Pakistani officials, reflecting deep U.S. suspicions of intelligence leaks or complicity within Pakistan's (ISI), given the compound's proximity to military installations and bin Laden's undetected residence there for approximately five years. Post-operation, Pakistan condemned the action as a violation, detaining the crashed helicopter's wreckage briefly before release, while U.S. officials publicly questioned how the leader evaded detection in a garrison town, exacerbating bilateral tensions that included temporary halts in U.S. and NATO supply routes through . This operation achieved the strategic decapitation of by eliminating its founder and symbolic figurehead—responsible for the , 2001, attacks that prompted the Afghanistan intervention—disrupting command structures and yielding actionable intelligence on global terrorist networks, though the group persisted under successors like . The success underscored U.S. persistence a decade into the war, validating unilateral action when alliance reliability faltered.

Operations Against ISIS-K and Haqqani Network

The in Iraq and the – (ISIS-K) formed in in January 2015, when , a former leader of the Tehrik-i-Taliban , pledged allegiance to the 's central leadership and was appointed its , drawing recruits from disaffected factions, foreign fighters, and local militants primarily in eastern provinces such as Nangarhar and Kunar. By mid-2015, ISIS-K had seized control of districts like Achin in Nangarhar, establishing governance structures, taxing locals, and conducting brutal enforcement to consolidate territorial gains amid the broader . In response, the expanded its mandate in 2016 to directly target ISIS-K, authorizing airstrikes, raids, and support for Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF) in , where the group had peaked in influence. U.S. forces conducted precision strikes, including a April 2017 operation that destroyed an ISIS-K tunnel complex used for command, storage, and fighting positions, killing dozens of militants and disrupting . U.S.- offensives, such as those in 2017–2018 involving and Afghan , eliminated over 170 ISIS-K fighters in multi-month campaigns, reclaiming key areas and forcing the group into a more clandestine posture focused on bombings rather than held territory. These actions stalled ISIS-K's momentum, confining its operational base largely to eastern and preventing significant outward expansion into or at the time. Parallel U.S. efforts targeted the , a Taliban-affiliated group designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the U.S. State Department in 2012 for orchestrating complex attacks, including suicide bombings in such as the 2011 Inter-Continental Hotel assault and multiple assaults on government targets. Operating from sanctuaries in Pakistan's North , the network facilitated cross-border incursions and high-profile strikes, killing hundreds of civilians, security forces, and personnel through tactics like vehicle-borne improvised explosive devices in urban areas. Throughout the , U.S. Central Command conducted drone strikes and raids against Haqqani facilitators and mid-level commanders in eastern , including detentions in that disrupted attack planning cells. By the late , intensified airstrikes under expanded degraded key nodes, though the network's integration with command structures complicated attribution and full dismantlement. Collectively, these operations against ISIS-K and the —emphasizing intelligence-driven strikes and ANDSF partnerships—contained ISIS-K's territorial ambitions to isolated pockets, limiting its recruitment and logistical reach beyond Afghanistan's borders during the period, while inflicting sustained attrition on Haqqani operational capacity despite persistent threats. U.S. assessments noted that such adaptations prevented the groups from achieving synergies that could have amplified regional jihadist threats, though both retained asymmetric attack capabilities.

Drone Strikes and Intelligence Gains

The United States conducted hundreds of drone strikes in Afghanistan between 2004 and 2020, primarily targeting Taliban and Haqqani network militants who comprised the majority of those engaged. These operations utilized two main categories: personality strikes, which focused on specific high-value individuals identified through biometric data, signals intelligence, or human sources; and signature strikes, which targeted groups based on behavioral patterns such as armed assemblies or militant training activities in Taliban strongholds. The strikes were executed by CIA-operated Predators and Reapers, often in coordination with Joint Special Operations Command, drawing on persistent overhead surveillance to confirm targets. Following high-profile civilian incidents in the mid-2000s, the Obama administration in 2009 implemented revised to minimize casualties, mandating elevated evidentiary thresholds for target nomination, multi-source intelligence corroboration, and post-strike assessments to verify outcomes and address any . These measures included "near certainty" standards for avoiding civilians in populated areas, contributing to reported declines in unintended deaths relative to earlier phases, though precise figures remain disputed due to varying methodologies in casualty tracking. Drone strikes yielded significant advantages by enabling engagements with virtually no to U.S. operators or ground forces, allowing sustained disruption of insurgent without the logistical burdens of manned missions. Empirical analyses from 2004–2011 demonstrate that strikes correlated with reductions in the frequency and lethality of attacks, including fewer suicide bombings and deployments, as degraded networks struggled to coordinate complex operations. Intelligence gains stemmed from integrated drone feeds providing high-resolution, video that refined networks, exposed safe houses, and facilitated follow-on raids, thereby compounding disruptions to Haqqani and command chains. Assertions that strikes provoked widespread radicalization and recruitment blowback lack substantiation in declassified al-Qaeda correspondence and statistical models, which instead reveal eroded insurgent morale, restricted mobility, and diminished plotting capacity without corresponding surges in local support for militants. For instance, captured documents indicate leadership shortages hampered external attack planning, while regional data show net declines in violence metrics attributable to strike-induced organizational stress on groups like the . This approach thus advanced causal disruption of threat networks, prioritizing empirical outcomes over narratives of escalation.

Casualties, Atrocities, and Humanitarian Costs

Coalition and Afghan Force Losses

The military recorded 2,456 deaths in from October 2001 to August 2021, including both hostile and non-hostile incidents, with the majority occurring after the expansion of operations. Non-U.S. coalition partners, contributing under the (ISAF) from 2003 to 2014 and subsequent missions, suffered around 1,100 fatalities in total, reflecting varied national commitments to combat and advisory roles. Allied losses highlighted disparities in operational intensity; for instance, British forces, deployed primarily in from 2006 onward, lost 457 personnel, yielding a fatality rate more than double that of U.S. troops relative to peak deployment sizes due to sustained ground engagements against Taliban strongholds. Canadian contributions, peaking with combat tasks in until 2011, resulted in 158 deaths, while special operations and mentoring efforts led to 41 fatalities, mostly from enemy action post-2005.
CountryFatalities (2001–2021)
2,456
457
158
41
Other NATO/Partners~444
(ANSF), encompassing the Afghan National Army and Afghan National Police, sustained over 66,000 deaths from 2001 to 2021, with annual tallies escalating after 2014 amid reduced combat support and internal challenges like and poor . These figures, compiled from U.S. and reporting, underscore the ANSF's frontline burden in holding territory against insurgents, though undercounts are likely given inconsistent Afghan record-keeping and battlefield chaos. trainers noted ANSF units often fought with resolve in dire conditions, absorbing the bulk of casualties as international forces shifted to advisory roles by 2015.

Taliban and Insurgent Casualties

Estimates of Taliban and other insurgent casualties during the War in Afghanistan (2001–2021) vary due to the insurgents' policy of not publicly disclosing losses and the challenges in verifying battlefield deaths, including those from wounds after combat or unreported engagements. The Costs of War project at Brown University, drawing from multiple data sources including military reports and media compilations, places the number of Taliban and opposition fighters killed in direct war violence at 51,191. This figure is considered conservative by some analysts, as it relies primarily on confirmed reports and may exclude insurgents who succumbed to injuries days or weeks after strikes, particularly from airstrikes and drone operations that often left bodies unrecovered in remote areas. U.S. and coalition forces maintained body counts as a of operational effectiveness, particularly during intensified campaigns. In the 2009–2011 troop surge under General Stanley McChrystal and successor , (ISAF) operations in Taliban strongholds like Helmand and provinces resulted in thousands of reported enemy (). For instance, ISAF reported over 5,000 killed in 2010 alone through combined ground and air operations, contributing significantly to cumulative losses amid the strategy's emphasis on clearing insurgent sanctuaries. These counts, tracked via Department of Defense , focused on confirmed engagements but faced criticism for potential over-attribution of civilian deaths to combatants; however, post-battle assessments and often supported the tallies in high-intensity phases. Foreign fighters, including Arabs from the , Chechens, Uzbeks, and Pakistanis aligned with al-Qaeda and Taliban networks, sustained heavy attrition. Thousands joined the over two decades, with U.S. forces engaging Chechen contingents in fierce battles, such as in , where ruthless foreign units bolstered Taliban defenses. Estimates suggest at least 2,000–4,000 foreign were killed, including high-value targets like Arab commanders who facilitated and funding; many perished in early phases post-2001 or during later raids targeting al-Qaeda remnants. The influx of such fighters, drawn by jihadist ideology, amplified insurgent resilience but also exposed them to disproportionate coalition targeting due to their tactical expertise and non-local status. Overall, insurgent losses exceeded 50,000, undermining Taliban command structures repeatedly, though from and ideological appeal sustained their numbers until the 2021 withdrawal.

Civilian Impacts and Refugee Crises

Civilian casualties during the War in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021 totaled an estimated 46,319 deaths, according to the Costs of War Project at , which aggregates data from multiple sources including UN reports and national records. Anti-government elements, primarily the and affiliated groups, bore responsibility for the majority of these, with UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) documentation from 2009 to 2021 attributing approximately 70% of verified incidents to such actors through tactics like improvised explosive devices, ground assaults on populated areas, and targeted killings. and Afghan government forces accounted for the remainder, often via airstrikes and ground operations, though their share declined over time due to emphasizing minimization. The displaced millions, exacerbating Afghanistan's longstanding ; by 2021, over 2.6 million Afghans were registered as refugees primarily in and , with UNHCR facilitating the return of more than 5.3 million since 2002 amid fluctuating security. Cross-border flight intensified during major offensives, such as the 2015 surge in northern provinces, which prompted over ,000 to flee to neighboring countries or internal areas. Economic desperation compounded by violence drove secondary movements, though empirical data links primary causation to direct exposure rather than indirect factors alone. Internally displaced persons (IDPs) numbered in the millions at peaks, with UNHCR estimating 3.2 million IDPs by late 2020, many uprooted by Taliban advances in rural districts. Specific offensives, like the 2018 Taliban push in , displaced over 100,000 in weeks through indiscriminate shelling and reprisals, overwhelming camp capacities and aid distribution. These surges strained urban centers like , where IDP influxes tripled basic needs for shelter and food without proportional infrastructure gains. Coalition precision-guided munitions and intelligence-driven operations empirically lowered civilian-to-combatant casualty ratios compared to insurgent methods; a analysis found insurgents inflicted roughly four times more civilian deaths per attack than coalition forces in , reflecting the latter's use of standoff weapons and post-strike assessments to mitigate . This disparity held despite insurgent embedding in civilian areas, underscoring tactical differences in and targeting discipline.

Documented War Crimes by All Sides

The Taliban and affiliated insurgent groups systematically committed war crimes throughout the 2001–2021 conflict, including summary executions, beheadings of alleged collaborators, and stonings for perceived moral infractions, often enforced through shadow courts to terrorize populations and deter cooperation with coalition forces. U.S. State Department human rights reports documented Taliban courts issuing convictions resulting in executions by stoning or beheading, with such punishments applied to individuals accused of adultery, theft, or aiding Afghan government or international forces. United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) annual protection of civilians reports consistently attributed a significant portion of civilian casualties to Taliban anti-government elements through targeted assassinations, improvised explosive device attacks on civilian gatherings, and public corporal punishments designed to enforce ideological control. These acts violated international humanitarian law by deliberately targeting non-combatants and using prohibited methods of killing, contributing to an estimated thousands of civilian deaths attributed to insurgent forces over the two decades. U.S. and coalition forces faced allegations of war crimes, primarily involving unlawful killings and detainee mistreatment, though internal investigations led to prosecutions in verified cases, distinguishing them from the insurgents' systematic approach. In the most notorious incident, U.S. Army Staff Sergeant carried out the on March 11, 2012, killing 16 civilians, including nine children, in two villages; he was convicted by a U.S. military of premeditated murder and sentenced to without parole. Allegations against U.S. in Wardak province during 2012–2013 involved the disappearance and torture of up to 10 villagers, with bodies recovered bearing evidence of abuse near a ; while U.S. investigations cleared American personnel of direct involvement, attributing primary responsibility to partnered , the case highlighted challenges in oversight of irregular allies. In Nerkh district, Wardak, on November 21, 2012, an Afghan interpreter working with U.S. Green Berets was implicated in dragging and abusing a suspect, part of broader scrutiny of operational misconduct, though no U.S. personnel faced ICC-level charges for combat-related acts. No U.S. service members were convicted in international courts for Afghanistan-specific combat violations, with most accountability occurring through domestic systems. Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF), including CIA-backed strike forces, perpetrated documented abuses such as extrajudicial executions during night raids and arbitrary detentions, often exacerbating local grievances and fueling recruitment. A 2019 Human Rights Watch investigation detailed over a dozen cases from late 2017 to mid-2019 where these units, operating with minimal oversight, summarily executed unarmed detainees—sometimes shooting them at close range after capture—and conducted raids based on faulty intelligence or personal vendettas, resulting in civilian deaths and enforced disappearances. Reports from the same period indicated ANSF elements placing bounties or incentives on suspected insurgents that inadvertently targeted civilians, leading to wrongful killings for financial gain, though systematic documentation of such practices remains limited due to weak internal accountability. These violations, which included and attacks on medical facilities, were compounded by the of former into security roles, perpetuating cycles of in a context of where distinguishing combatants proved challenging for all parties. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has pursued investigations into alleged crimes by all sides since authorizing a probe in March 2020, focusing on and atrocities against civilians from May 2003 onward, including murder, attacks on medical personnel, and persecution, as well as potential U.S. and ANSF violations from 2014 to 2021. In January 2025, ICC Prosecutor Karim A.A. Khan sought arrest warrants for senior figures for war crimes and committed during the , emphasizing deliberate civilian targeting to consolidate control. While the probe initially encompassed U.S. forces' alleged of detainees, no indictments against American personnel have materialized, reflecting jurisdictional limits and U.S. non-ratification of the ; Afghan authorities have similarly failed to prosecute ANSF abuses effectively, underscoring uneven accountability amid the conflict's protracted, irregular nature.

Strategic Analysis and Controversies

Justification and Legal Basis

The United States Congress passed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) on September 14, 2001, as Public Law 107-40, granting the President authority to employ "all necessary and appropriate force" against nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the September 11 attacks, or harbored such actors. This domestic legal foundation directly targeted al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden, and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan that sheltered the group, enabling military operations that commenced on October 7, 2001, with airstrikes and support for Northern Alliance ground forces. President George W. Bush signed the AUMF three days after its near-unanimous approval, emphasizing its alignment with constitutional war powers without necessitating a formal declaration of war, a mechanism unused by the U.S. since 1942. Under , the U.S. invoked Article 51 of the UN Charter, which preserves the inherent right of individual or collective in response to an armed attack until the Security Council acts to restore peace. The 9/11 attacks, killing nearly 3,000 people, constituted such an attack attributable to , whose leadership and training infrastructure operated from Taliban-controlled territory; the Taliban had hosted bin Laden since 1996, providing safe havens for 30-40 training camps used by thousands of militants. UN Security Council 1368, adopted unanimously on September 12, 2001, condemned the attacks and affirmed the victims' right to under Article 51, while Resolution 1373, passed on September 28, obligated states to suppress terrorist financing and safe havens, implicitly endorsing measures against harboring states like Afghanistan's government. The U.S. formally notified the UN of its actions in a letter dated October 7, 2001, after the Taliban rejected ultimatums issued on to extradite bin Laden and close camps, evidencing the regime's complicity through protection and joint operations. Claims that the intervention constituted illegal aggression under UN Charter Article 2(4) fail to account for the proportionate nature of the response to an unprecedented non-state actor attack enabled by state harboring, a scenario where self-defense precedent allows force against the host absent effective UNSC authorization for invasion. Critics asserting post-hoc illegality, often from academic or advocacy perspectives, overlook the Taliban's refusal to disassociate from al-Qaeda despite prior UN demands in Resolutions 1267 (1999) and 1333 (2000) to expel bin Laden, and ignore the broad international coalition support, including from NATO via Article 5 invocation on September 12, 2001. Such critiques, while highlighting the absence of an explicit UN mandate for regime change, conflate the initial self-defense operation—limited to dismantling al-Qaeda infrastructure—with later nation-building, misapplying aggression prohibitions to a causally linked retaliation that garnered endorsements from over 100 countries. The operation's legality rests on empirical ties between the Taliban and al-Qaeda's 9/11 orchestration, including bin Laden's fatwas and camp operations documented in U.S. intelligence and Taliban admissions of alliance.

Mission Creep and Strategic Drift

The initial U.S.-led intervention in Afghanistan following the , 2001, attacks focused narrowly on counterterrorism objectives: dismantling Al-Qaeda's operational base and ousting the regime that harbored it. By December 2001, these aims were largely achieved with the 's collapse and Al-Qaeda's leadership scattered, transitioning to Phase II operations emphasizing stabilization and light-footprint support for a new Afghan government under the 2001 Bonn Agreement. However, strategic priorities gradually expanded beyond counterterrorism to encompass () and extensive , particularly after 2003, as resistance persisted and U.S. policymakers sought to foster a stable, democratic state to prevent future threats. This shift intensified in 2009 with President Obama's troop surge, which deployed an additional 30,000 U.S. forces to implement a population-centric strategy aimed at securing, building, and transitioning control to Afghan institutions, marking a departure from earlier restraint. The expansion incurred substantial costs, with U.S. expenditures on the war totaling approximately $2.313 trillion from 2001 to 2021, encompassing direct military operations, efforts, and care projections. These outlays represented costs, diverting resources from domestic priorities and alternative strategies, while contributing to increased national debt without yielding proportional strategic gains in Afghan self-sufficiency. Analysts have attributed this drift to optimistic assumptions about transplanting models onto Afghanistan's fragmented political landscape, where tribal loyalties, patronage networks, and resistance to centralized authority undermined efforts to build viable institutions. Critics, including military strategists and reconstruction overseers, argue that the overlooked fundamental incompatibilities between imposed democratic reforms and Afghanistan's entrenched social structures, such as Pashtun tribal codes and decentralized power dynamics, leading to causal overreach where successes were eroded by unsustainable ambitions. This expansion alienated local populations through prolonged foreign presence and culturally discordant initiatives, fueling recruitment rather than resolution, as evidenced by persistent gains despite peak troop levels exceeding 140,000 by 2011. Notwithstanding these failures, the extended commitment arguably prevented an immediate Al-Qaeda reconstitution in Afghan territory during the occupation, maintaining pressure that degraded its core capabilities and denied safe havens comparable to pre-2001 levels, thereby averting large-scale attacks orchestrated from the region. Empirical data from intelligence assessments indicate Al-Qaeda's operational relocation to and elsewhere, with no equivalent 9/11-style plotting emerging from until the 2021 withdrawal.

Corruption in Afghan Institutions

Corruption permeated governmental and institutions throughout the 2001–2021 , with systemic graft diverting billions in international and undermining institutional effectiveness. The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) documented widespread , including the fabrication of "ghost soldiers" and police—non-existent personnel whose salaries and logistics were pocketed by commanders and officials. For instance, audits revealed that up to 40% of personnel records in some National Army units were fictitious, leading to overpayments estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually. This practice persisted despite U.S. efforts to implement biometric identification systems, which were evaded through falsified data and weak oversight. Elite capture exacerbated the issue, as political and tribal leaders siphoned funds intended for and into personal networks. SIGAR reports highlighted how , totaling over $145 billion from the U.S. alone, was routinely redirected through kickbacks, bribes, and scams, with corrupt officials prioritizing over merit-based allocation. In the security sector, this manifested as commanders inflating numbers to secure larger budgets, then diverting resources to fuel or personal militias, fostering a cycle where loyalty to powerbrokers trumped national objectives. Such practices were not merely opportunistic but structurally embedded, with international donors' rushed contracting often enabling local elites to exploit weak Afghan laws. Afghan cultural norms rooted in tribal patronage systems clashed with externally imposed transparency mechanisms, complicating anticorruption efforts. In traditional and other ethnic codes, gift-giving, , and were viewed as reciprocal obligations rather than , allowing officials to justify resource diversion as familial or communal duty. UNODC surveys indicated that while Afghans perceived petty as problematic, elite-level graft was often normalized as the cost of accessing power, eroding incentives for reform. Western-style audits and legal frameworks, though necessary for aid , frequently ignored these dynamics, leading to superficial compliance rather than systemic change. This critically impaired operations by delegitimizing the Afghan state in the eyes of the populace and bolstering narratives of governance failure. SIGAR analyses concluded that graft alienated rural communities, who faced from security forces while insurgents offered alternative protection rackets, thereby facilitating territorial gains. Predatory practices, such as checkpoint shakedowns and theft, generated that insurgents exploited for , with Brookings assessments linking unchecked to sustained insurgent momentum despite military surges. Ultimately, the failure to align reforms with local power realities perpetuated a hollow state apparatus, where funds fueled private gain over collective defense.

Withdrawal Debates and Accountability

The U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in August 2021 precipitated chaotic scenes at Kabul's International Airport, where checkpoints restricted access and crowds surged amid fears of reprisals. On August 26, 2021, an ISIS-K suicide bombing at Abbey Gate killed 13 U.S. service members and approximately 170 Afghan civilians, marking the deadliest day for American forces in the conflict since 2011. The attack highlighted vulnerabilities in the evacuation process, as U.S. forces prioritized departing troops and select personnel over a more orderly drawdown of embassy staff and Afghan allies. As the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces disintegrated, U.S. forces abandoned military equipment valued at $7.12 billion, including aircraft, vehicles, and weapons, which fell into hands without destruction or recovery efforts amid the haste. This matériel, originally provided to forces, bolstered the Taliban's arsenal post-withdrawal. The Doha Agreement of February 29, 2020, negotiated under the administration, committed the U.S. to full troop withdrawal by May 1, 2021, in exchange for Taliban pledges against attacks on U.S. forces and initiation of intra- talks, but excluded the Afghan government from direct negotiations. President Biden delayed the deadline to , 2021, yet proceeded with troop reductions before fully securing evacuation routes, contributing to the disorder. Debates over responsibility centered on the Trump-era deal's flaws—such as emboldening the through reduced U.S. airstrikes and prisoner releases—versus the Biden administration's execution, including assessments that underestimated the Afghan government's collapse speed. U.S. had projected Kabul might hold for six to twelve months post-withdrawal, but the capital fell on August 15, 2021, after provincial surrenders accelerated. The Biden administration attributed the rapid advance to the Doha framework's constraints and Afghan forces' unwillingness to fight, while critics argued it ignored warnings of imminent fragility and prioritized political timelines over contingency planning. Accountability efforts focused on congressional probes, with the House Foreign Affairs Committee's Republican-led faulting Biden officials for dereliction in evacuating Afghan partners and for decisions that left thousands of SIV-eligible allies behind, exposing them to Taliban retribution. Right-leaning analyses described the withdrawal as a betrayal of interpreters and contractors who aided U.S. operations, eroding in commitments and empowering jihadist networks by validating Taliban resilience. These critiques emphasized causal links between the disorganized exit—such as closing Air Base prematurely—and heightened risks to personnel, contrasting with administration claims that inherited agreements limited options. No senior U.S. officials faced formal repercussions, though resolutions like H.Res.1469 sought to key figures for the operation's failures.

Legacy and Long-Term Outcomes

Security and Terrorism Prevention

The U.S.-led military intervention in Afghanistan from 2001 to 2021 prevented the country from again functioning as a primary base for al-Qaeda-led attacks on the scale of , 2001, which killed nearly 3,000 people. In the subsequent two decades, no comparable large-scale terrorist operations originating from Afghan territory targeted the U.S. homeland or major Western allies, a direct outcome of dismantling al-Qaeda's training camps and command structure post-invasion. This containment extended to disrupting multiple nascent plots through intelligence gathered during the campaign, including financial networks supporting transnational terrorism. Al-Qaeda's core organization experienced substantial degradation, with its leadership decimated by raids and drone strikes; key figures like (killed May 2, 2011) and (killed July 31, 2022, in ) were eliminated, reducing the group's capacity for centralized external operations. U.S. intelligence assessments post-2001 noted al-Qaeda's shift to decentralized affiliates, but its Afghan-Pakistani core was left unable to orchestrate complex, homeland-focused attacks, with operational tempo declining by over 90% from pre-invasion levels. The emergence of ISIS-Khorasan during the war's later years introduced a rival jihadist threat, culminating in attacks like the August 26, 2021, airport bombing that killed 13 U.S. service members and over 170 Afghans. Post-2021 withdrawal, ISIS-K has expanded recruitment and regional operations, but U.S. over-the-horizon strikes—using drones and partnered —have neutralized key leaders, such as the August 2021 drone strike on an ISIS-K planner and subsequent operations targeting . Taliban suppression of ISIS-K has been inconsistent yet partially effective, limiting the group's sanctuary, though persistent low-level threats remain. Broader counterterrorism gains included enhanced global intelligence from seized al-Qaeda documents, detainee interrogations, and signals intercepts, which mapped affiliate networks and preempted plots worldwide; for instance, data from Afghan operations informed disruptions of European and Asian cells. These yields improved and interagency fusion, contributing to a reported decline in successful transnational jihadist attacks on Western targets from 2001–2021 compared to prior baselines.

Economic and Developmental Impacts

The influx of international aid following the 2001 intervention fueled significant economic expansion in , with (GDP) rising from approximately $4 billion in 2002 to around $20 billion by 2020, driven largely by foreign grants that constituted about 40% of GDP and 75% of government expenditures in the later years. This growth supported urban modernization, particularly in , where construction boomed and services expanded, alongside infrastructure projects that constructed over 10,000 miles of roads and increased access from near-zero in rural areas to covering about 30% of the population by 2020, though much relied on imports. However, this progress masked deep structural vulnerabilities, including heavy aid dependency that stifled domestic revenue generation and development, with foreign assistance comprising up to 97% of GDP financing in peak years like 2011. production, which surged 657% in 2002 post-intervention and accounted for 90% of global supply throughout the period, persisted as a parallel economy, undermining licit growth and contributing 9-14% to GDP while evading formal efforts. Rural areas, home to most , saw limited benefits, with poor road conditions and unreliable power hindering agricultural and trade integration, as prioritized and quick-impact projects over sustainable rural . The unsustainability of these gains became evident after the 2021 Taliban takeover, when the abrupt halt in triggered a GDP contraction of 20.7% in 2021 alone, compounding into a 27% overall shrinkage by 2022 and exposing the economy's reliance on external inflows rather than endogenous . Despite short-term expansions in access to basic , the failure to build resilient institutions and diversify beyond aid and illicit crops left long-term developmental impacts fragile, with post-withdrawal stagnation highlighting causal links between dependency and collapse.

Geopolitical Shifts in South Asia

The U.S. military withdrawal from , completed on August 30, 2021, created a strategic vacuum that accelerated shifts favoring and in n power dynamics. The 's rapid consolidation of control enabled Pakistan to leverage its historical ties with the group, enhancing Islamabad's influence over Afghan border regions and cross-border trade routes. capitalized on this by deepening economic ties with the Taliban without formal recognition, primarily to safeguard extensions of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) into , where instability had previously threatened Beijing's investments. In trilateral talks hosted in on August 20, 2025, Chinese officials offered infrastructure funding to the Taliban in exchange for security assurances against militant threats to CPEC projects. This engagement positioned as a pragmatic counterweight to Western absence, fostering dependencies that deter Taliban-hosted attacks on Chinese interests. These developments correspondingly eroded India's geopolitical leverage in Afghanistan and broader South Asia. New Delhi had invested over $3 billion in Afghan development projects under the pre-2021 government, viewing Kabul as a counterbalance to Pakistan's influence and a conduit for Central Asian connectivity. The Taliban's return, aligned with Pakistani strategic depth objectives, curtailed India's access and diplomatic maneuvering, prompting a reevaluation of its "Act East" policy amid heightened Sino-Pakistani axis dominance. Concurrently, Iran and Russia adopted hedging strategies, expanding pragmatic outreach to the Taliban to mitigate spillover risks. Iran formalized de facto ties by transferring control of its Kabul embassy to Taliban representatives on February 26, 2023, prioritizing border security and water rights amid shared Sunni-Shiite tensions. Russia, despite ISIS-K's March 2024 Moscow attack, sustained economic dialogues and arms discussions with the Taliban to stabilize Central Asia, reflecting a post-U.S. pivot toward multipolar engagement. From a realist perspective, the signaled retrenchment, diminishing U.S. deterrence credibility and emboldening adversaries while unsettling allies. Taiwanese policymakers cited the Afghan collapse as a cautionary parallel, questioning Washington's resolve in defending against potential Chinese incursions, given the perceived abandonment of commitments despite two decades of investment. This perception, echoed in analyses, underscored how the hasty exit—marked by the Taliban's , 2021, seizure of —prioritized domestic imperatives over sustained regional projection, allowing revisionist states to recalibrate without countervailing pressure.

Lessons for Future Interventions

The Afghanistan intervention demonstrated that military engagements must prioritize narrowly defined, achievable objectives centered on immediate security threats, such as dismantling terrorist networks, rather than expansive goals of societal or institutional transformation. Efforts to impose centralized governance and Western-style reforms clashed with Afghanistan's entrenched tribal structures and decentralized power dynamics, fostering resistance and inefficiency without building sustainable legitimacy. Analyses indicate that such overambition diluted resources and prolonged exposure to attrition, underscoring the need for interventions to exit once core threats are neutralized, avoiding indefinite commitments that erode public support and strategic focus. Reliance on proxy forces, such as the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces (ANDSF), carries inherent risks when those proxies lack internal cohesion, face systemic , and depend excessively on external logistics and air support. The ANDSF, despite receiving over $88 billion in U.S. training and equipment from 2001 to 2021, collapsed rapidly in August 2021 due to leadership failures, ethnic divisions, low morale, and inability to operate independently after U.S. withdrawal reduced enabling capabilities like . Future operations should integrate proxy development with rigorous for political will and self-sufficiency, recognizing that outsourced roles often amplify vulnerabilities rather than mitigate them. External actors providing sanctuary and logistics to insurgents can decisively undermine interventions, as Pakistan's (ISI) did by sheltering leadership and facilitating cross-border operations throughout the conflict. Despite U.S. pressure, Pakistan's strategic hedging—supporting militants to counter Indian influence—allowed the to regroup in safe havens, prolonging the and negating gains on the ground. Effective strategies must therefore incorporate diplomatic isolation of spoilers and, where feasible, targeted actions against external enablers to prevent asymmetric advantages from sanctuaries. Narrow (CT) missions, exemplified by U.S. that degraded al-Qaeda's core leadership—including the 2011 killing —achieved measurable disruptions of global plots despite the broader campaign's setbacks. These efforts, relying on precision strikes and intelligence rather than occupation, prevented large-scale attacks on U.S. soil and highlight the efficacy of limited, intelligence-driven interventions over holistic . Future policies should favor such focused CT paradigms, scaling back when terrorist sanctuaries are sufficiently contested, to balance costs against enduring threats without entangling in irresolvable internal conflicts.

References

  1. [1]
    Message to the Force - One Year Since the Conclusion of ... - War.gov
    Aug 30, 2022 · The United States went to Afghanistan in 2001 to wage a necessary war of self-defense. On September 11, 2001, al-Qaeda terrorists attacked our ...
  2. [2]
    Operation Enduring Freedom - Naval History and Heritage Command
    Apr 22, 2024 · The United States Armed Forces completed its withdrawal from Afghanistan on 30 August 2021, marking the end of the 2001-2021 war. The U.S. Navy ...
  3. [3]
    NATO and Afghanistan
    Aug 31, 2022 · For nearly 20 years, NATO Allies and partner countries had military forces deployed to Afghanistan under a United Nations (UN) Security Council mandate.Pashto · Dari · Ukrainian · Russian
  4. [4]
    Operation Enduring Freedom One Year of Accomplishments
    October 7 marks the one-year anniversary of the beginning of combat operations in Afghanistan. Many of the coalition's objectives in Afghanistan have been ...<|separator|>
  5. [5]
    Osama bin Laden - FBI
    Osama bin Laden was a violent terrorist and founder of al Qaeda who killed thousands of innocent men, women, and children before his death in 2011.Bin Laden Killed · Bin Laden Deceased Poster · 456. Usama Bin Laden
  6. [6]
    [PDF] The trillion dollar war : the US effort to rebuild Afghanistan, 1999–2021
    It is written for Afghans, Afghan policymakers, and those in the West and broader international community who truly wish to see Afghanistan progress after more ...<|separator|>
  7. [7]
    [PDF] THE FACTORS LEADING TO THE COLLAPSE OF THE AFGHAN ...
    Mar 2, 2023 · The collapse of the Afghan government and its security forces raises several questions: How did billions of dollars in funding and such a large ...
  8. [8]
    1996 Human Rights Report: Afghanistan - State Department
    There was no central government. At year's end, the Pashtun-dominated ultra-conservative Islamic movement known as the Taliban had captured the capital of Kabul ...
  9. [9]
    The Significance of Taliban Shari`a Courts in Afghanistan
    The establishment of an Islamic state based on Shari`a law in Afghanistan has been the cornerstone of Taliban political goals since the movement began in the ...
  10. [10]
    The Destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas - 911 Memorial
    Mar 2, 2001 · Beginning on March 2 and continuing for weeks, Taliban troops launched an all-out assault on the Buddhas, firing at them with guns, tank shells, ...
  11. [11]
    Pipe dreams: The Taliban and drugs from the 1990s into its new ...
    Sep 15, 2021 · Yet in late 1999, the Taliban did issue a ban on poppy cultivation that resulted in the largest reduction of opium poppy cultivation in a ...
  12. [12]
    [PDF] How Opium Profits the Taliban - United States Institute of Peace
    In Afghanistan's poppy-rich south and southwest, a raging insurgency intersects a thriving opium trade. This study examines how the Taliban profit from ...
  13. [13]
    https://govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-911REPORT/pdf/GPO-911REPORT.pdf
  14. [14]
    [PDF] 1996 Osama bin Laden's 1996 Fatwa against United ... - 911 Memorial
    Expel the Polytheists from the Arabian peninsula. A Letter from Sheikh Osama bin Muhammad bin. Laden to his Muslim Brothers across the world, and.
  15. [15]
    Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders
    The following statement from Usama bin Laden and his associates purports to be a religious ruling (fatwa) requiring the killing of Americans, both civilian and ...
  16. [16]
    Mullah Omar Called Washington in 1998, New Documents Show
    Sep 11, 2004 · ... before 9/11. All diplomatic attempts to get the Taliban to extradite Osama bin Laden ultimately failed. In a January 2004 interview with ...Missing: refusal pre-
  17. [17]
    1998 Missile Strikes on Bin Laden May Have Backfired
    Aug 20, 2008 · ... On the tenth anniversary of U.S. cruise missile strikes against al-Qaeda in response to deadly terrorist attacks on U.S. embassies in ...
  18. [18]
    Cruise Missile Strikes in Afghanistan and Sudan | ASIL
    On August 20, American cruise missiles struck targets in Afghanistan and Sudan. The target in Afghanistan was identified as an extensive terrorism training ...Missing: administration | Show results with:administration
  19. [19]
    [PDF] THE AMERICAN RESPONSE TO THE EMBASSY ATTACKS
    at the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, paralyzing those two countries and frightening the rest of the Western world.2 Fundamentalist.
  20. [20]
    Top focus before 9/11 wasn't terrorism - NBC News
    Mar 31, 2004 · ... focus was largely on missile defense, not terrorism from Islamic radicals. The speech provides telling insight into the administration's ...Missing: pre- | Show results with:pre-
  21. [21]
    September 11 and American Foreign Policy - Brookings Institution
    ... terrorism has become the defining issue for the Bush presidency. The ... The terrorist attacks will have a particular impact on the debate over missile defense.
  22. [22]
    [PDF] The Afghan Model More Than 10 Years Later - Air University
    The second, suggested by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), proposed bringing down the regime through a combination of US airpower, special forces, and ...Missing: aid pre-
  23. [23]
    September 11 attacks | History, Summary, Location ... - Britannica
    Some 2,750 people were killed in New York, 184 at the Pentagon, and 40 in Pennsylvania (where one of the hijacked planes crashed into the ground after the ...
  24. [24]
    [PDF] THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT - GovInfo
    ... al Qaeda (1988–1992) 55. 2.4 Building an Organization, Declaring. War on the United States (1992–1996) 59. 2.5 Al Qaeda's Renewal in Afghanistan (1996–1998) 63.
  25. [25]
    U.S. Releases Videotape of Osama bin Laden - state.gov
    The US government released today a copy of a videotape of Osama bin Laden obtained by US forces in Jalalabad, Afghanistan in late November.
  26. [26]
    President Declares "Freedom at War with Fear"
    The leadership of al Qaeda has great influence in Afghanistan and supports the Taliban regime in controlling most of that country. In Afghanistan, we see al ...
  27. [27]
    Taliban Rejects President Bush's Demands | PBS News
    Sep 21, 2001 · Taliban ambassador to Pakistan Abdul Salam Zaeef announced the Taliban's refusal and said the president's demand poses great danger for Muslims worldwide.
  28. [28]
    Afghanistan: Taliban Refuses To Hand Over Bin Laden - RFE/RL
    Sep 21, 2001 · Afghanistan's ruling Taliban has rejected a call from US President George W. Bush to hand over Osama bin Laden, the chief suspect in last week's terror attacks.<|separator|>
  29. [29]
    Pakistan, Taliban and the Afghan Quagmire - Brookings Institution
    Analyze Pakistan's influence over the Taliban and its impact on the Afghan conflict.Missing: pre- | Show results with:pre-
  30. [30]
    A NATION CHALLENGED: ALLIANCES; United Arab Emirates ...
    Sep 23, 2001 · United Arab Emirates, one of only three countries to recognize Taliban, breaks off relations with Afghanistan because of its refusal to hand ...
  31. [31]
    Saudis break diplomatic ties with Taliban - September 25, 2001 - CNN
    Sep 25, 2001 · Saudi Arabia has broken diplomatic relations with Afghanistan's Taliban government, leaving Pakistan as the only country to recognize the ...
  32. [32]
    On the Front Lines: CIA in Afghanistan
    ... Afghan Northern Alliance for several years prior to 9/11. Because of this ... These changes–developed in part from the war in Afghanistan and the war ...Missing: pre- | Show results with:pre-
  33. [33]
    [PDF] Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, May 2005-January 2009
    Afghanistan, a known training ground and safe haven for the terrorist group led by Osama bin Laden, became the initial focus of military efforts to strike back.
  34. [34]
    America sees food drops as key to being hailed as saviour, not invader
    Oct 5, 2001 · The food drop is part of $320m (£217m) in humanitarian aid announced by President George Bush, for the "poor souls" of Afghanistan and the ...Missing: airdrops | Show results with:airdrops
  35. [35]
    Why U.S. Is Dropping Food In Afghanistan - ABC News
    Oct 7, 2001 · Oct. 8 -- The U.S. and British military strikes Sunday in Afghanistan were accompanied by airdrops of food and other humanitarian supplies, ...
  36. [36]
    The Hunger Factor - Brookings Institution
    The Bush administration needs a better plan for averting large-scale famine and starvation in Aghanistan—quickly. The United States has been air-dropping an ...
  37. [37]
    Tommy Franks > U.S. Central Command > Bio Article View - centcom
    Gen. Tommy Franks was born in Wynnewood, Oklahoma, and grew up in Midland, Texas, where he graduated from Robert E. Lee High School one year ahead of First ...
  38. [38]
    Operation Enduring Freedom - Afghanistan - GlobalSecurity.org
    For Central Command (CENTCOM), that directive guided the preparation of the plan that unfolded in Afghanistan. The concept, which Franks briefed to the ...
  39. [39]
    Interviews - U.s. Special Forces Oda 595 | Campaign Against Terror
    Operational Detatchment Alpha (ODA) 595 from the U.S. Army's 5th Special Forces Group partnered with warlord Abdul Rashid Dostum in northern Afghanistan.
  40. [40]
    First to go: Green Berets remember earliest mission in Afghanistan
    Feb 8, 2017 · Gamble served on one of the first Special Forces teams to go into Afghanistan after 9-11. The mission was to destroy the Taliban r
  41. [41]
    Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force-Afghanistan ...
    Special Forces (SF) Operational Detachment - Alpha (ODA) 555 and ODA 595 infiltrate into Northern Afghanistan and establish contact with Northern Alliance ...
  42. [42]
    2001 - Operation Enduring Freedom > Air Force Historical Support ...
    After the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001, the United States government determined to respond with force against those ...
  43. [43]
    The Global War on Terrorism: The First 100 Days - state.gov
    Homeland Security. President Bush has taken steps to help protect America against further terrorist attacks, providing $20 billion for homeland security; ...
  44. [44]
    How the 'Horse Soldiers' helped liberate Afghanistan ... - Military Times
    Oct 18, 2019 · ODA 595 was one of several Special Forces teams sent into Afghanistan to topple the Taliban weeks after the 9/11 attacks as part of an ...
  45. [45]
    U.S.-led attack on Afghanistan begins | October 7, 2001 - History.com
    On October 7, 2001, a US-led coalition begins attacks on Taliban-controlled Afghanistan with an intense bombing campaign by American and British forces.<|separator|>
  46. [46]
    - OPERATION ENDURING FREEDOM - GovInfo
    Senator Warner and I traveled to the Afghan theater over Thanksgiving to visit our forces and to discuss the campaign with General Franks and his subordinate ...
  47. [47]
    [PDF] The Employment of Air Power Afghanistan and Beyond The ...
    Between the 10th of October and the 31st of December a total of 21,000 sorties were flown on Operation. ENDURING FREEDOM, 12,500 of which entered Afghan ...
  48. [48]
    Konduz surrounded; Taliban urged to defect - November 18, 2001
    19 nov 2001 · Northern Alliance forces have surrounded Konduz and are urging Taliban soldiers to surrender, offering them safe passage from the Afghan ...
  49. [49]
    Taliban Command 'Fractured,' DoD Continues Strikes - DVIDS
    7 mar 2025 · Defense officials describe the Taliban's control of its troops as "fractured," as coalition efforts in Afghanistan continue.<|separator|>
  50. [50]
    On The Ground - The Fall Of Kandahar | Campaign Against Terror
    The fall of Kandahar signaled the collapse of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. Many key Taliban leaders escaped, however, during negotiations for the ...Missing: advances | Show results with:advances
  51. [51]
    US War in Afghanistan Fast Facts | CNN
    November 13, 2001 - US airstrikes and ground attacks by the anti-Taliban Afghan Northern Alliance lead to the fall of Kabul. November 16, 2001 - French troops ...Missing: reliable | Show results with:reliable
  52. [52]
    Timeline: The U.S. War in Afghanistan - Council on Foreign Relations
    A notorious Taliban military commander, Mullah Dadullah, is killed in a joint operation by Afghan, U.S., and NATO forces in the south of Afghanistan. Dadullah ...
  53. [53]
    The Getaway | The New Yorker
    Jan 21, 2002 · On November 25th, the Northern Alliance took Kunduz, capturing some four thousand of the Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters. The next day, President ...
  54. [54]
    The 'airlift of evil' - NBC News
    Dec 10, 2003 · The Pakistani air force has evacuated hundreds of non-Afghan volunteers who fought alongside the Taliban against the United States. What's wrong with this ...
  55. [55]
    The End of the Taliban Reign of Terror in Afghanistan - USInfo.org
    ... Taliban stood for. Afghans are retaking control of their lives. After the Taliban fled Kandahar on December 7, witnesses reported that joyous residents ...
  56. [56]
    Reporter's notebook: A scene of human carnage and rubble - CNN
    Rome Bureau Chief Alessio Vinci covered the November 2001 prison uprising at Qala-i-Jangi for CNN. Vinci and TIME reporter Alex Perry were among the first ...
  57. [57]
    The Road to Qala-i-Jangi: Circling back to America's first casualty in ...
    Apr 21, 2015 · Mike Spann, a former Marine turned CIA agent, was killed while interrogating foreign Taliban fighters who staged an uprising inside the fortress ...
  58. [58]
    Al Qaeda prisoners at the Qala-i-Jangi fortress in Afghanistan ...
    Nov 25, 2017 · Al Qaeda prisoners at the Qala-i-Jangi fortress in Afghanistan rebelled Nov. 25-29, 2001 leading to a bloody battle in the earliest days of ...
  59. [59]
    None
    Summary of each segment:
  60. [60]
    [PDF] Tora Bora Reconsidered - NDU Press
    Pakistan, in May 2011, the seminal event in the 13-year hunt for Osama bin Laden was the operation to capture or kill the. Saudi terrorist at Tora Bora in ...
  61. [61]
    Missteps and Missed Opportunities for Peace in Afghanistan
    Oct 27, 2022 · First, he said, the exclusion of the Taliban from the Bonn Conference in 2001 that produced an agreement on a post-Taliban government was a ...
  62. [62]
    signed yesterday in bonn, unanimously adopting resolution 1383 ...
    Dec 6, 2001 · The Security Council this afternoon endorsed the Agreement on provisional arrangements in Afghanistan pending the re-establishment of permanent government ...Missing: Inter- | Show results with:Inter-
  63. [63]
    At Afghanistan's Loya Jirga, former King nominates Hamid Karzai to ...
    Jun 11, 2002 · At Afghanistan's Loya Jirga, former King nominates Hamid Karzai to lead nation. 11 June 2002. As Afghanistan today opened its Loya Jirga - a ...
  64. [64]
    Afghanistan: Loya Jirga Approves Karzai's Ministers - RFE/RL
    Jun 19, 2002 · Kabul, 19 June 2002 (RFE/RL) -- Afghanistan's Loya Jirga has accepted the transitional government's cabinet ministers proposed by ...
  65. [65]
    Eighth anniversary today of 2001 Afghan Interim Authority | UNAMA
    Dec 22, 2009 · To adopt a new Constitution for Afghanistan, the Bonn Agreement had also mandated the AIA to convene a Constitutional Loya Jirga within eighteen ...
  66. [66]
    [PDF] Afghanistan's Bonn Agreement One Year Later A Catalog of Missed ...
    The United. States blocked proposals by Afghan leaders, including President Hamid Karzai, and the United. Nations, for an expanded ISAF to patrol the ...
  67. [67]
    AFGHANISTAN: Karzai vs. the Warlords
    In July, Karzai dropped a powerful warlord who also serves as first vice president and defense minister, Mohammed Qasim Fahim, from his presidential ticket.
  68. [68]
    [PDF] Bonn-agreement.pdf - Afghanistan Analysts Network
    1) An Interim Authority shall be established upon the official transfer of power on 22. December 2001. 2) The Interim Authority shall consist of an Interim ...
  69. [69]
    Afghanistan 2004 - Constitute Project
    The President shall be the head of state of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, executing his authorities in the executive, legislative and judiciary fields ...
  70. [70]
    AFGHANISTAN: The New Constitution | Council on Foreign Relations
    It establishes a presidential system that roughly follows the U.S. model, dividing government power among executive, legislative, and judicial branches. While ...
  71. [71]
    [PDF] DDR in Afghanistan - RAND
    Disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) are likely to result from rather than lead in the process, because disarmament in the presence of an armed.
  72. [72]
    A look back at efforts to disarm, demobilise, reconcile and reintegrate
    Jul 12, 2018 · The DDR programme, launched in 2003, dealt with the armed men of what were called the Afghanistan Military Forces, or AMF. This term was given ...
  73. [73]
    [PDF] SIGAR 19-58-LL Reintegration of Ex-Combatants
    Chapter 2 examines in detail the five main reintegration efforts undertaken since 2001: the Disarmament, Demobilization, and Reintegration program (DDR, 2003– ...
  74. [74]
    International Security Assistance Force (ISAF)
    Apr 15, 2009 · On December 20, 2001, the United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1386 authorized the establishment of an International Security ...
  75. [75]
    ISAF's mission in Afghanistan (2001-2014) - NATO
    May 30, 2022 · NATO took the lead of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan on 11 August 2003. Mandated by the United Nations, ...
  76. [76]
    NATO Press Release (2003)091 - 8 Aug. 2003
    Aug 8, 2003 · NATO will assume strategic command, control and coordination of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), currently under leadership of Germany and ...
  77. [77]
    Speech by the Deputy Secretary General at the ISAF ... - NATO
    Aug 11, 2003 · As of today, NATO will assume the strategic command, control and coordination of ISAF. The Alliance is taking on this mission for one simple reason.
  78. [78]
    Multilateral peace operations in Afghanistan between 2001 and 2021
    Sep 16, 2021 · ISAF troop numbers continued to grow during 2010, peaking at more than 130 000. From 2012, NATO started the transition of security ...Missing: peak | Show results with:peak
  79. [79]
    NATO's Lessons from Afghanistan - Belfer Center
    Many of these restrictions stemmed from the lack of consensus on strategy, especially during the first years of NATO involvement. National caveats ...
  80. [80]
    The road to Kabul - NATO Review
    Jun 1, 2003 · Because of ISAF's dual success in bringing a sense of security to a city that had experienced almost none for decades and in restoring essential ...
  81. [81]
    Text: Afghanistan Reconstruction Progressing, USAID Natsios Says
    ... aid, receiving $174 million before September 11. The U.S. has pledged nearly $300 million in fiscal year 2002 for Afghan relief and reconstruction. (end ...
  82. [82]
    Rebuilding Afghanistan - state.gov
    Jan 9, 2003 · In 2002, American soldiers helped train 1,600 Afghan soldiers. The U.S. has committed $80 million to reconstruction of the main commercial road ...
  83. [83]
    Operation Enduring Freedom One Year of Accomplishments (Text ...
    The international community has pledged $4.5 billion over five years to reconstruct Afghanistan; $2 billion was committed for use in 2002. Of that $2 ...
  84. [84]
    [PDF] Stabilization and Reconstruction in Afghanistan: Are PRTs a Model ...
    Nov 1, 2005 · During the summer of 2002, US officials developed the concept of Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) to spread the “ISAF effect,” without ...<|separator|>
  85. [85]
    The U.S. Experience with Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Iraq ...
    The first PRTs were established by the U.S. in Afghanistan in 2002. The purpose was to combine military leadership with representatives of civilian ...
  86. [86]
    Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) | Institute for the Study of War
    Apr 15, 2009 · Provincial Reconstruction Teams originated in Afghanistan in early 2002, with a program called Coalition Humanitarian Liaison Cells.1 These ...Missing: date | Show results with:date
  87. [87]
    Afghanistan: Enhancing Education - state.gov
    Jan 27, 2006 · USAID's education program was designed in 2002 to meet the urgent need for school building, textbook printing, teacher training, and accelerated learning.
  88. [88]
    Afghanistan Girls' Schools: Achieving Results in a Difficult ...
    Feb 25, 2010 · Since 2001, enrollment in grades 1-12 increased from 3.9 million in 2004 to 6.2 million in 2008. Girls' enrollment skyrocketed from 839000 ...Missing: built aid
  89. [89]
    GDP (current US$) - Afghanistan - World Bank Open Data
    GDP (current US$) - Afghanistan. Country official statistics, National Statistical Organizations and/or Central Banks; National Accounts data files.
  90. [90]
    With the opium production in Afghanistan shrinking dramatically ...
    Nov 19, 2023 · “According to the United Nations Drug Control Program (UNDCP), opium cultivation increased by 657 per cent in 2002 in relation to its 2001 level ...
  91. [91]
    [PDF] Afghanistan - Annual Opium Poppy Survey 2001 - unodc
    In July 2000 the Taleban authorities banned the cultivation of opium poppy throughout all areas under their control. In November/December 2000, reports from ...Missing: policy | Show results with:policy
  92. [92]
    Afghanistan Reconstruction: Despite Some Progress, Deteriorating ...
    Afghanistan Reconstruction: Despite Some Progress, Deteriorating Security and Other Obstacles Continue to Threaten Achievement of U.S. Goals (28-JUL-05, ...
  93. [93]
    Crisis of Impunity - Pakistan's Support Of The Taliban
    The Pakistan government has repeatedly denied that it provides any military support to the Taliban in its diplomacy regarding its extensive operations in ...
  94. [94]
    Haqqani Network - National Counterterrorism Center | Groups
    The Haqqani Network is a Sunni Islamist militant organization founded by Jalaluddin Haqqani, who emerged as a top Afghan warlord and insurgent commander during ...
  95. [95]
    HAQQANI NETWORK | Security Council - the United Nations
    004 on the Al-Qaida Sanctions List), Usama bin Laden (deceased). Jalaluddin joined the Taliban movement in 1995, but maintained his own power base along the ...
  96. [96]
    Pakistan and the Taliban: A Strategic Asset Turned Strategic ...
    Jul 30, 2024 · As part of its policy of creating “strategic depth” in Afghanistan, Pakistan spent decades nurturing the Afghan Taliban as a strategic asset—one ...
  97. [97]
    How to Curb Rising Suicide Terrorism in Afghanistan - RAND
    Jul 18, 2006 · KABUL, AFGHANISTAN; AND WASHINGTON – Suicide attacks have become a major factor in the current resurgence of violence in Afghanistan, ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  98. [98]
    [PDF] Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs) in Iraq and Afghanistan - DTIC
    Nov 21, 2007 · 1 Vehicle-borne IEDs and car bombs are now used to strike police stations, markets, and mosques, killing local citizens as well as U.S. troops.
  99. [99]
    Bob Casey says non-IED deaths in Afghanistan are "very, very rare"
    Aug 30, 2011 · 2004: 12 IED deaths, 29 total hostile deaths, 41 percent 2005: 18 IED deaths, 82 total hostile deaths, 22 percent 2006: 27 IED deaths, 86 ...
  100. [100]
    [PDF] Prevalence and Epidemiology of Combat Blast Injuries from the ...
    The incidence was 4.5 blast injuries per 1,000 deployed in 2005, 3.5 per 1,000 in 2006, 4.0 per 1,000 in 2007, 1.7 per 1,000 in 2008, and 1.7 per 1,000 in 2009 ...
  101. [101]
    MRAP program celebrates 10 years of protecting those who protect us
    Sep 1, 2016 · In response, Marine Corps Systems Command established the MRAP Joint Program Office in 2006, to combine the efforts of Marine Corps, Army, Navy ...
  102. [102]
    World Report 2006: Afghanistan | Human Rights Watch
    ... killing several Afghan civilians and a Burmese engineer working for the United Nations. ... Another alarming development was the Taliban's assassination of ...
  103. [103]
    [PDF] The Politics of the Taliban's Shadow Judiciary, 2003–2013
    1 Complaints about corruption in the Taliban courts started circulating in 2000–2001 and were heard by un officials (according to Thomas Ruttig, Afghanistan ...
  104. [104]
    [PDF] Hearts, Minds, and the Barrel of a Gun: The Taliban's Shadow ...
    wreaking havoc on the Afghan state and whoever sides with it. However, for all their repu- tation of “warrior mullahs,” the Taliban have not altogether ...Missing: tactics | Show results with:tactics
  105. [105]
    [PDF] AFGHANISTAN - United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
    During the 1990's Afghanistan became the world's largest producer of illicit opium. In 1999, it pro- duced 79% of global illicit opium.
  106. [106]
    [PDF] opium cultivation in afghanistan | unodc
    The Taliban de facto authorities announced a ban on opium poppy cultivation in April 2022, just as the opium harvest was about to begin. However, a grace period ...
  107. [107]
    Afghanistan: How do the Taliban make money? - BBC
    Aug 27, 2021 · Estimates of the Taliban's annual earnings from the illicit drug economy range from $100m-$400m. The drug trade accounts for up to 60% of the ...
  108. [108]
    Afghanistan's Opium Economy: Incentives, Insurgency, and ...
    Dec 5, 2012 · The financial benefits to anyone along the supply chain have proven irresistible for many, from individual workers and farmers who produce the ...
  109. [109]
    [PDF] Counternarcotics: Lessons from the U.S. Experience in Afghanistan
    Jun 19, 2018 · 2017 failed to curb the Afghan drug trade, the exponential rise in opium ... In light of the U.S. rejection and the failed compensated eradication ...
  110. [110]
    GAO-07-78, Afghanistan Drug Control: Despite Improved Efforts ...
    Afghan farmers do not have access to credit for planting licit crops, although drug traffickers provide credit to farmers for planting opium poppies.
  111. [111]
    Trying to Be All Things to All People: Alternative Development in A...
    Sep 3, 2020 · Alternative development has had little success in Afghanistan. Understood and implemented as geographically bounded interventions designed to reduce drug crop ...Missing: underfunded | Show results with:underfunded<|separator|>
  112. [112]
    [PDF] Afghanistan opium survey 2023 - UNODC
    The DfA's Decree, however, may have sent a strong signal to farmers and producers, as did the previous Taliban ban on opium poppy in 2000 and 2001, which was ...
  113. [113]
    Full article: The Taliban's Drug Trade Revenue and Taxation System
    In sum, while opium money has undoubtedly been a significant funding source for the Taliban since the group emerged, estimates of the group's income from the ...
  114. [114]
    [PDF] the World Bank
    Farm-gate prices of opium were relatively low in the 1990s, but a nearly 10-fold rise occurred when the. Taliban banned opium production in 2000 (Figure 2).
  115. [115]
    The Quetta Shura: Understanding the Afghan Taliban's Leadership
    Feb 21, 2014 · The Afghan Taliban, formally called the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, has proved to be resilient in its commitment to imposing its own version ...
  116. [116]
    Mullen: Pakistan's Spy Agency Supported U.S. Embassy Attack
    Sep 22, 2011 · “With ISI support, Haqqani operatives planned and conducted that truck bomb attack, as well as the assault on our embassy,” Admiral Mullen said ...
  117. [117]
    Pakistan supports Haqqani network, Adm. Mullen tells Congress
    Sep 23, 2011 · In Pakistan, a spokesman for the Foreign Ministry denied that ISI supports the Haqqani ... 2011. Currently, all U.S. troops will be ...
  118. [118]
    America's Counterterrorism Wars: The Drone War in Pakistan
    Since that first strike, which killed prominent Taliban leader Nek Muhammad in South Waziristan, the use of drones in Pakistan has remained shrouded in mystery ...
  119. [119]
    [PDF] The relationship between Pakistan's ISI and Afghan insurgents - LSE
    It subsequently played a pivotal role in the emergence of the Taliban (Coll 2005:292) and Pakistan provided significant political, financial, military and ...Missing: declassified | Show results with:declassified<|separator|>
  120. [120]
    [PDF] The Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan: Role Model for ...
    Their objective is to extend the authority of the Afghan central government, enhance security in the provinces, and facilitate humanitarian aid and ...
  121. [121]
    Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan - how they ... - NATO
    Jul 1, 2007 · 'Provincial Reconstruction Teams' are small teams of military and civilian personnel working in Afghanistan's provinces to provide security for aid works.Missing: date | Show results with:date
  122. [122]
    Afghanistan: Provincial Reconstruction Teams - state.gov
    Jan 27, 2006 · An interim mechanism, their goal is to strengthen the reach and enhance the legitimacy of the central government in outlying regions through ...Missing: date | Show results with:date
  123. [123]
    [PDF] PRT Models in Afghanistan - CMC Finland
    The American PRTs have a standardized structure – even though they cover such different provinces as Parwan north of Kabul and Ghazni in the southeast of ...
  124. [124]
    [PDF] the U.S. experience with Provincial Reconstruction teams in ...
    The British PRT was somewhat larger, emphasized Afghan security sector reform, and helped defuse confrontations between rival warlords.
  125. [125]
    [PDF] Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan: - Public Intelligence
    The current mission of the PRTs is to enable the legitimacy of the Government of Afghanistan by facilitating provincial security, reconstruction and ...
  126. [126]
    [PDF] Provincial Reconstruction Teams: How Do We Know They Work?
    Instead, the PRTs have become America's primary tool for using large-scale reconstruction to improve security in Afghanistan; the executors of the softer side.Missing: cons empirical
  127. [127]
    [PDF] Sustainability of U.S. Government Projects in Afghanistan - DTIC
    Experience with Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan: Lessons Identified, a United States Institute of Peace Special Report (Washington, DC, 2005).
  128. [128]
    Provincial Reconstruction Teams in Afghanistan: Securitizing Aid ...
    Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) became to the development-security nexus what light bulbs were to electricity. Before Edison's invention, many people ...
  129. [129]
    [PDF] A MEANS TO WHAT END? WHY PRTS ARE PERIPHERAL TO THE ...
    The PRTs, which merged security and development, were intended to provide temporary support to the Afghan authorities – to buy time in which government capacity ...Missing: occupation | Show results with:occupation
  130. [130]
    Remarks by the President in Address to the Nation on the Way ...
    And as Commander-in-Chief, I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan.
  131. [131]
    “Commander's Initial Assessment,” August 30, 2009, Confidential ...
    Aug 19, 2021 · This is the key document behind the Obama “surge” in Afghanistan that produced the highest U.S. troop levels in the whole 20-year war.Missing: achievements securing
  132. [132]
    [PDF] General McChrystal's strategic Assessment - Air University
    General McChrystal was immediately tasked to conduct a 60-day initial assessment of the situation in Afghanistan and to recommend a new strategy that would stop ...
  133. [133]
    President calls for 30000 more U.S. troops in Afghanistan - Centcom
    Dec 2, 2009 · 1, 2009) – It is in America's vital national interests to send another 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan, President Barack Obama said Tuesday ...
  134. [134]
    Was Obama's 2009 Afghanistan Surge Based on Sound Strategy?
    In surging 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan, President Obama wagered that a better-resourced population-centric counterinsurgency strategy was likely to ...
  135. [135]
    Afghan Metrics - CSIS
    Jan 12, 2010 · It failed to provide the military and aid resources necessary to take the initiative, ceding the initiative to the Taliban and insurgency in ...
  136. [136]
    Policy Memorandum: Obama's 2009 COIN Surge in Afghanistan
    Jan 30, 2024 · 64). Although COIN claimed to be a population-centered strategy, ISAF and American troops monumentally failed at understanding Afghan culture ...
  137. [137]
    [PDF] The Afghan surge : January 2009-August 2011
    Coalition forces did not solely contend with the Taliban. The Pakistani-based Haqqani Network sometimes operated in conjunction with the insurgent group.
  138. [138]
    Afghanistan War - US Troop Surge, End of Combat Mission
    On February 17, 2009, he approved sending an additional 17,000 U.S. troops, on top of the 36,000 U.S. troops and 32,000 NATO service members already there.
  139. [139]
    CHART: How The U.S. Troop Levels In Afghanistan Have Changed ...
    Jul 6, 2016 · In his first few years in office, Obama dramatically ramped up the U.S. presence in Afghanistan, from a little over 30,000 to more than 100,000 ...
  140. [140]
    Operation Moshtarak in Marjah, Afghanistan - The Guardian
    Feb 15, 2010 · A combined force of 15000 soldiers, including 4400 Afghans, is taking part in a major assault on the Taliban in the Helmand river valley.
  141. [141]
    Directive re-emphasizes protecting Afghan civilians - AF.mil
    Jul 6, 2009 · A new tactical directive for coalition forces serving in Afghanistan re-emphasizes the importance of preventing civilian casualties.<|control11|><|separator|>
  142. [142]
    Assault on Taliban stronghold of Marja begins - Long War Journal
    Feb 13, 2010 · In the initial attack, five Taliban fighters were killed . One British soldier was killed while on patrol during the offensive, the British ...Missing: results | Show results with:results
  143. [143]
    Taliban Fighters, Civilians Killed In Helmand Offensive - RFE/RL
    Feb 15, 2010 · Twelve Taliban fighters were killed overnight in a NATO offensive against the group's last stronghold in Afghanistan's most violent province ...<|separator|>
  144. [144]
    [PDF] Operation Moshtarak - Institute for the Study of War
    Troops Moving In Marjah,” Associated Press, February 15, 2010. 36 dexter Filkins, “Half of Afghan town's Taliban flee or are killed, allies say,”The New York ...
  145. [145]
    International Special Operations Forces 2010 Year in Review
    Jun 15, 2011 · Despite the heavy casualties, Gen. David Petraeus stated in September 2010 that overall, allied SOF was taking out an average of six Taliban ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  146. [146]
    Deadly night raids hurt Taliban, but anger Afghans - NBC News
    Jul 9, 2011 · “Those night raids have broken the back of the Taliban,” said Abdul Satar Mirzokhel, deputy governor of Helmand Province for three years until ...
  147. [147]
    Special operations forces deal blows to Taliban ranks
    Dec 9, 2010 · December 9, 2010 at 1:28 pm. By this accounting there are close to 40 Special Operations targeted raids a day . . . not including normal Special ...
  148. [148]
    Combined Joint Special Operations Task Force-Afghanistan A Short ...
    The combined joint special operations command was a central player in the fight for Afghanistan for twelve critical years.
  149. [149]
    Afghanistan Raids by U.S. Commandos Almost Triple Since 2009 ...
    Aug 13, 2011 · The US military in Afghanistan has nearly tripled since 2009 the frequency of commando raids launched against Taliban or insurgent groups, according to NATO ...
  150. [150]
    International Security Assistance Force Data Shows Night Raids ...
    Nov 3, 2011 · Washington – U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOF) killed well over 1,500 civilians in night raids in less than 10 months in 2010 and early 2011 ...Missing: per | Show results with:per
  151. [151]
    Operation Dragon Strike | Military Wiki | Fandom
    Operation Dragon Strike ; Date, September 15, 2010 - December 31, 2010. Location, Kandahar province, Afghanistan. Result, Coalition Victory · United States Canada
  152. [152]
    The Surge Moves Into High Gear in Kandahar - ABC News
    Coalition forces launch three attacks along the Arghendab River ... Operation Dragon Strike is concentrated on the Zhari District of Kandahar Province just west of Kandahar City.
  153. [153]
    31 DEC 2010 Operation Dragon Strike was a NATO counter ...
    Apr 12, 2018 · The Combined Task Force Strike (CTFS), with assistance from US Special Forces, had successfully removed an estimated 195 Taliban Commanders, as ...Missing: results | Show results with:results<|separator|>
  154. [154]
    [PDF] Operation Dragon STRIKE!
    STRIKE Soldiers and Leaders, We are winning. Operation DRAGON STRIKE has resulted in a significant increase of security along Highway 1. We continue to improve ...Missing: 2010 | Show results with:2010
  155. [155]
    [PDF] The Fight for the Village: Southern Afghanistan, 2010
    May 26, 2011 · The essence of village stability operations is supporting village leaders and village inhabit- ants who have the will to resist Taliban hegemony ...
  156. [156]
    [PDF] Village Stability Operations and the Afghan Local Police - NET
    Oct 7, 2014 · Afghan Local Police (ALP) and Afghan National Army (ANA) to discuss village stability in the Khakrez district, Kandahar province, Afghanistan.
  157. [157]
    [PDF] VSO/ALP: Comparing Past and Current Challenges to Afghan Local ...
    The team engages with the surrounding community and relies on Village Stability. Platforms (VSPs) that provide a range of enablers for additional support. That ...<|separator|>
  158. [158]
    Kandahar Corruption Poses Challenge For U.S. - NPR
    May 20, 2010 · Kandahar Corruption Poses Challenge For U.S. Military In Southern Afghan ... mission will be how to tackle Kandahar's corrupt power structure.Missing: surge | Show results with:surge
  159. [159]
    [PDF] SIGAR 16-58-LL Corruption in Conflict: Lessons from the U.S. ...
    Corruption in Conflict: Lessons from the U.S. Experience in Afghanistan is the first in a series of lessons learned reports planned to be issued by the ...
  160. [160]
    Dealing with Corruption: Hard Lessons Learned in Afghanistan
    Sep 30, 2014 · It is reasonable to expect that in future military engagements, we will continue to face the problem of corruption. Corrupt governments are ...
  161. [161]
    [PDF] 2014 High-Risk List
    The United States has committed the bulk of its reconstruction funds, nearly $62 billion as of September 30, 2014, to build up the Afghan Na- tional Security ...
  162. [162]
    Government auditor challenges White House account of Afghanistan ...
    May 3, 2013 · Speaks said recruitment targets were lowered last year to slow growth as Afghan forces approached “its force structure ceiling of 352,000. . . .
  163. [163]
    [PDF] Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF): Training and Development
    May 16, 2012 · Back in 2009, 86% of all new ANA recruits were illiterate and there was no mandatory literacy training.Missing: rate | Show results with:rate
  164. [164]
    Afghan Army's 90% Illiteracy Rate Big Training Obstacle - NPR
    Sep 16, 2009 · So there's perhaps a 90 percent illiteracy rate. Which means that training the Afghan army won't be as easy as translating the U.S.'s English- ...
  165. [165]
    NATO Trainers Increase Literacy in Afghan Forces - DVIDS
    Mar 7, 2025 · Though the illiteracy rate among officers is only about seven percent, among enlisted soldiers the rate is upwards of 89 percent.
  166. [166]
    [PDF] Afghanistan National Defense and Security Forces
    The dominance of local loyalty and links with corrupt networks, along with poor training and low pay, contributed to endemic corruption in the police force. To ...
  167. [167]
    Desertions deplete Afghan forces, adding to security worries | Reuters
    Jan 18, 2016 · In 2015, the Afghan army had to replace about a third of its roughly 170,000 soldiers because of desertions, casualties and low re-enlistment ...
  168. [168]
    Afghan troops beat up contractors, stole equipment: report
    Mar 20, 2019 · As of January, Afghan forces had stolen contractor equipment from 17 sites across the country, materials that include batteries, exhaust fans, ...
  169. [169]
    How Long Can the Afghan Security Forces Last on Their Own?
    May 9, 2021 · Afghan units are rife with corruption, have lost track of the weapons once showered on them by the Pentagon, and in many areas are under ...
  170. [170]
    [PDF] The Afghan National Army: Has Capacity Building Become Culture ...
    He recently completed a tour as a combat advisor to the Afghan National. Army in Paktika Province, Afghanistan, and has served as a scout platoon sergeant and ...
  171. [171]
    [PDF] Raising and Mentoring Security Forces in Afghanistan and Iraq
    This chapter deals in turn with Afghan National Security. Forces (ANSF)—the army, national police, and village police program—and then the Iraqi army and ...Missing: peak | Show results with:peak
  172. [172]
    Why the Afghan and Iraqi Armies Collapsed: An Allied Perspective
    Aug 29, 2024 · Rather than military factors, American and Western liberal ideas (ideological views) and politics explain many of the obstacles faced in ...
  173. [173]
    Afghan Desertions in the U.S.: Assessing the Desertion and "Ghost ...
    Oct 30, 2017 · The Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) were supposed to have a total authorized uniformed strength of some 350,000 personnel according ...
  174. [174]
    Afghans Find Their Way - Center for American Progress
    Mar 10, 2014 · On June 18, 2013, the ANSF officially assumed security lead over the entire country. Afghan forces now lead the vast majority of all ...Missing: behind | Show results with:behind
  175. [175]
    Were the Afghan National Security Forces Successful in 2013? | CNA
    Jan 27, 2014 · These empirical, independent observations, when taken together, show that the ANSF were generally successful in 2013 and performed better than most people ...
  176. [176]
    [PDF] Reconstructing the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces
    Sep 23, 2017 · SIGAR began its lessons learned program in late 2014 at the urging of. General John Allen, Ambassador Ryan Crocker, and others who had served in.
  177. [177]
    [PDF] Were the Afghan National Security Forces Successful in 2013?
    The Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) just finished their first year of being fully in the lead for providing security in Af- ghanistan, with the ...
  178. [178]
    [PDF] Lessons From U.S. Security Sector Assistance Efforts In Afghanistan
    Because SIGAR has the authority to look across the entire reconstruction effort, it is uniquely positioned to identify and address whole-of-government lessons.
  179. [179]
    [PDF] United States Department of Defense - DoD
    Sep 28, 2012 · The Department of Defense Inspector General is an independent, objective agency within the U.S. Department of Defense that was created by ...
  180. [180]
    Green-on-blue attacks in Afghanistan: the data - Long War Journal
    the so-called green-on-blue attacks — have emerged as a major threat in the 16-year-old war in ...
  181. [181]
    [PDF] Afghanistan: Green-on-Blue Attacks - DTIC
    Feb 5, 2013 · In the last 12 months, Afghan forces killed one in every seven North Atlantic Treaty. Organization (NATO) soldiers serving in Afghanistan. 1.Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  182. [182]
    Afghanistan: Green on Blue Attacks Are Only a Small Part of the ...
    Sep 4, 2012 · During the last few weeks, coverage of the Afghan War has focused on 'green on blue attacks' - the killings of U.S. and other International ...Missing: 2011-2014 | Show results with:2011-2014
  183. [183]
    Obama to Leave 8,400 U.S. Troops in Afghanistan Through 2017
    Jul 6, 2016 · The announcement marks a shift from his previous plan of reducing that number to 5,500 by the end of this year, and breaks his 2008 campaign ...Missing: exact | Show results with:exact
  184. [184]
    Obama, in shift, to keep 8,400 U.S. troops in Afghanistan until 2017
    Jul 6, 2016 · President Barack Obama on Wednesday shelved plans to cut the U.S. force in Afghanistan nearly in half by year's end, opting to keep 8400 ...Missing: exact | Show results with:exact
  185. [185]
    8400 U.S. troops to remain in Afghanistan through January - Centcom
    The situation in Afghanistan remains “precarious,” President Barack Obama said here today, and that is why he will keep 8400 U.S. service members in country ...Missing: 2017 handover
  186. [186]
    Trump announces new strategy for Afghanistan that calls for a troop ...
    Aug 21, 2017 · His decision to endorse a Pentagon plan to boost troop levels reflects mounting concern among military leaders that battlefield setbacks for ...
  187. [187]
    Trump declares US will 'win' in Afghanistan, but gives few details
    Aug 22, 2017 · Senior administration officials said the President had agreed to increase troop levels, but noted that Trump delegated the authority to manage ...
  188. [188]
    Trump Settles on Afghan Strategy Expected to Raise Troop Levels
    Aug 20, 2017 · President Trump, who has been accused by lawmakers of dragging his feet on Afghanistan, has settled on a new strategy to carry on the nearly 16-year-old ...
  189. [189]
    Afghan Government Control Over Country Falters, U.S. Report Says
    Jan 31, 2019 · Roggio said, using the acronym for the American military in Afghanistan. “The Taliban use areas under its influence to raise taxes, produce ...
  190. [190]
    SIGAR report: Taliban gained territory in Afghanistan - Al Jazeera
    Jul 29, 2016 · The Afghan government has lost control of nearly 5 percent of its territory to the Taliban since the beginning of this year, according to a ...Missing: 2015-2019 | Show results with:2015-2019
  191. [191]
    Record 7,423 US bombs dropped in Afghanistan in 2019: Report
    Jan 29, 2020 · The US has ramped up air bombings since Donald Trump was elected president in 2016.
  192. [192]
    Almost 40 strikes every day in Afghanistan last month | TBIJ
    Oct 29, 2019 · The air war in Afghanistan is intensifying following the failure of the US-Taliban peace negotiations.Missing: sorties | Show results with:sorties<|separator|>
  193. [193]
    White House Orders Direct Taliban Talks to Jump-Start Afghan ...
    Jul 15, 2018 · The Trump administration has told its top diplomats to seek direct talks with the Taliban, a significant shift in American policy in Afghanistan.
  194. [194]
    Zalmay Khalilzad Appointed As U.S. Special Adviser To Afghanistan
    Sep 5, 2018 · Zalmay Khalilzad, who served as US ambassador to Afghanistan and Iraq and as UN ambassador during the administration of President George W. Bush, has been ...
  195. [195]
    Afghan Taliban officials: 'US agrees to discuss troops pullout'
    Oct 13, 2018 · In July, the US announced it was ready for direct talks with the Taliban to seek negotiations and to “discuss the role of international forces”.
  196. [196]
    Trump's Deal To End War In Afghanistan Leaves Biden With ... - NPR
    Mar 4, 2021 · New Yorker writer Dexter Filkins says Biden must now decide whether to honor a deal that included the Taliban but not the Afghan government.<|control11|><|separator|>
  197. [197]
    [PDF] Agreement for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan
    1) They will reduce the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan to eight thousand six hundred. (8,600) and proportionally bring reduction in the ...
  198. [198]
    U.S. Troops in Afghanistan Reduced to 8600, General Says
    Jun 20, 2020 · U.S. Troops in Afghanistan Reduced to 8,600, General Says. The phased troop withdrawal has continued on schedule, even as other parts of a peace ...
  199. [199]
    Trump claimed no U.S. troops died in Afghanistan for 18 months ...
    Sep 9, 2024 · Government data shows while there was an 18-month period with no U.S. troop deaths in Afghanistan, Trump was not in office for all of this ...
  200. [200]
    Afghan conflict: US and Taliban sign deal to end 18-year war - BBC
    Feb 29, 2020 · The United States and the Taliban mark the signing of their agreement in Doha. The US invaded Afghanistan weeks after the September 2001 attacks ...<|separator|>
  201. [201]
    Timeline of U.S. Withdrawal from Afghanistan - FactCheck.org
    Aug 17, 2021 · The Trump administration in February 2020 negotiated a withdrawal ... reduce its forces in Afghanistan from roughly 13,000 to 8,600.” Aug ...
  202. [202]
    The U.S.-Taliban Agreement and the Afghan Peace Process
    Dec 7, 2020 · In accordance with the agreement, the U.S. initially reduced its military presence from 12,000 to about 8,600 troops, and closed several bases, ...
  203. [203]
    A Failed Afghan Peace Deal | Council on Foreign Relations
    Introduction On February 29, 2020, the United States and the Taliban signed an agreement intended to be a first step toward an intra-Afghan peace deal.Missing: key | Show results with:key
  204. [204]
    [PDF] Enhancing Security and Stability in Afghanistan - DoD
    Jul 1, 2020 · During this reporting period, terrorist and insurgent groups continued to present a formidable challenge to Afghan, U.S., and coalition forces.
  205. [205]
    The US-Taliban Peace Deal: 10 Weeks On - ACLED
    May 22, 2020 · An analysis of the US-Taliban peace deal focusing on troop withdrawal, prisoner swaps, and violence reduction.
  206. [206]
    US Hails Pakistan's Role in Advancing Afghan Peace Process - VOA
    Sep 14, 2020 · Pakistani leaders take credit for persuading the Taliban to negotiate and sign a landmark agreement with the U.S. in February 2020 that led to ...
  207. [207]
    How Pakistan's 'Taliban support' finally paid off – DW – 03/04/2020
    Mar 4, 2020 · Following the US-Taliban deal, Pakistan has re-emerged as a key player in the Afghan peace process. Experts said that Islamabad's alleged ...
  208. [208]
    How The Doha Agreement Guaranteed US Failure In Afghanistan
    Nov 3, 2021 · This essay examines how the poorly negotiated US-Taliban agreement undermined the Afghan government and institutions and facilitated the Taliban's rise to ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  209. [209]
    Talks between Afghan government and Taliban open in Qatar
    Sep 12, 2020 · The intra-Afghan talks were set to take place in March but have repeatedly been delayed over a prisoner exchange agreement made as part of the ...
  210. [210]
    Intra-Afghan Negotiations Set to Begin | International Crisis Group
    Sep 11, 2020 · After months of delay, these intra-Afghan talks are finally set to commence, also in Doha, on 12 September.
  211. [211]
    [PDF] View PDF - European Union Agency for Asylum
    During the intra-Afghan talks, the Taliban demanded the establishment of a ... of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan (IEA), which was previously in power in.
  212. [212]
    [PDF] An independent assessment of the Afghanistan peace process
    Alongside the US and Afghan. Government, the Taliban and their advisers must also take some responsibility for the failure of the peace initiative. They ...Missing: intransigence | Show results with:intransigence
  213. [213]
    Knowledge, power and the failure of US peacemaking in ...
    May 2, 2023 · The US approach to inducing intra-Afghan talks required significant coercion. It framed Afghanistan's President Ghani as the spoiler if he ...
  214. [214]
    Conditions-based Interim Government: President Ghani presents a ...
    Apr 1, 2021 · President Ashraf Ghani has raised the curtain on his peace plan and agreed to the formation of an interim government in Afghanistan.
  215. [215]
    Amid Promising Developments in Afghan Peace Talk, Relentless ...
    Dec 17, 2020 · ... violence continue in Afghanistan, with the Taliban responsible for most of it. “The Taliban claims to want a part in Afghanistan's future ...
  216. [216]
    Afghanistan: The Peace Negotiations Have Become an Extension of ...
    Oct 28, 2020 · ... Taliban's effort to exploit the negotiations and its continued use of violence. There are few indications that the Afghan central government ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
  217. [217]
    [PDF] Why Was a Negotiated Peace Always Out of Reach in Afghanistan?
    Aug 10, 2022 · this report examines why negotiations involving the united states, the government of the. Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, and the taliban ...
  218. [218]
    [PDF] After Action Review on Afghanistan - U.S. Department of State
    The decisions of both President Trump and President Biden to withdraw U.S. military forces from Afghanistan during this period provide the overall context for ...Missing: flaws | Show results with:flaws
  219. [219]
    Remarks by President Biden on the Way Forward in Afghanistan
    Apr 14, 2021 · Treaty Room 2:29 P.M. EDTTHE PRESIDENT: Good afternoon. I'm speaking to you today from the Roosevelt -- the Treaty Room in the White.Missing: per pre-
  220. [220]
    US forces leave Afghanistan's Bagram airbase after 20 years
    Jul 2, 2021 · US forces leave Afghanistan's Bagram airbase after 20 years. Withdrawal a clear indication that the last of 2,500-3,500 US troops have left ...
  221. [221]
    Biden heads to NATO amid friction over Afghanistan withdrawal
    Jun 16, 2021 · NATO allies have made no secret of their frustration with President Joe Biden's decision to withdraw forces from Afghanistan unconditionally by Sept. 11.
  222. [222]
    Defiant Biden rejects criticism of Afghan exit, points to ... - Reuters
    Aug 31, 2021 · President Joe Biden on Tuesday defiantly rejected criticism of his decision to stick to a deadline to pull out of Afghanistan this week, ...Missing: denies | Show results with:denies
  223. [223]
    Abbey Gate Supplemental Review Findings - Centcom
    Apr 15, 2024 · ... Aug. 26, 2021, terrorist attack at Abbey Gate outside Hamid Karzai International Airport (HKIA) in Kabul, Afghanistan. This supplemental ...
  224. [224]
    https://foreignaffairs.house.gov/getting-answers-on-afghanistan-withdrawal
  225. [225]
    Timeline: Afghanistan provincial capitals captured by Taliban
    Aug 11, 2021 · The provincial capitals that have fallen to or are being attacked by the armed group as it advances across the nation. Taliban fighters ...
  226. [226]
    The shocking speed of the Taliban's advance: A visual timeline
    Aug 16, 2021 · Just four months after President Biden announced he would withdraw the United States from Afghanistan, the Taliban has taken control of Kabul, ...<|separator|>
  227. [227]
    Timeline: Taliban's rapid advance across Afghanistan - Al Jazeera
    Aug 12, 2021 · The Taliban has taken control of Qalat, Terenkot, Pul-e Alam, Feruz Koh, Qala-e Naw and Lashkar Gah, raising the number of captured Afghan provincial capitals ...
  228. [228]
    [PDF] SIGAR 23-05-IP Why the Afghan Government Collapsed
    Nov 1, 2022 · WHAT SIGAR REVIEWED. As of June 30, 2021, the United States had appropriated $145.0 billion for the reconstruction of Afghanistan. Of that.Missing: buildup | Show results with:buildup
  229. [229]
    Afghan President Ghani flees country as Taliban enters Kabul
    Aug 15, 2021 · President Ashraf Ghani fled the country as the Taliban entered Kabul after capturing major cities within a week. Published On 15 Aug 202115 Aug ...
  230. [230]
    Ashraf Ghani says he fled Afghanistan to avoid being lynched.
    Aug 18, 2021 · Aug. 18, 2021. In his first video address since he fled Afghanistan, President Ashraf Ghani said he had left the country to avoid a lynching ...
  231. [231]
    Lessons from the Collapse of Afghanistan's Security Forces
    In the immediate wake of the signing of the U.S.-Taliban Agreement in February 2020, the ANDSF entered into an “active defense posture,” which limited their ...
  232. [232]
    The Reasons for the Collapse of Afghan Forces - CSIS
    Aug 17, 2021 · The sudden catalytic collapse of the Afghan government and military forces can be attributed to Afghan and U.S. mistakes made long before ...
  233. [233]
    U.S. says 2,500 Americans evacuated from Kabul in past week
    Aug 21, 2021 · Briefing reporters at the Pentagon, Major General William Taylor said 17,000 people have so far been evacuated including the 2,500 Americans.
  234. [234]
    [PDF] Testimony of John F. Sopko Special Inspector General for ...
    Apr 19, 2023 · In the final 18 months before the government's collapse, corruption robbed ANDSF personnel of critical supplies on the frontlines, eroded.
  235. [235]
    Afghanistan War: How Did 9/11 Lead To A 20-Year War? | IWM
    In 2001 an international coalition led by the USA invaded Afghanistan to destroy terrorist organisation Al-Qaeda when the Taliban refused to hand over Osama ...
  236. [236]
    The Canadian Armed Forces Legacy in Afghanistan - Canada.ca
    Dec 13, 2018 · The Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) conducted operations in Afghanistan for more than 12 years in a number of different roles involving air, land and sea assets.
  237. [237]
    [PDF] Germany's Involvement in Afghanistan
    Given the limitations placed by. Germany on its troops (caveats), the participation of German soldiers in combat operations is subject to many restrictions ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  238. [238]
    #38 ISAF National Caveats in Afghanistan: Summary of Research ...
    ISAF caveats have: (1) prevented the timely attainment of mission objectives (chiefly through the loss of at least two-and-a-half years of progress between 2007 ...Summary Of Research Findings... · Isaf Caveats: Summary Of... · Nato's Uncertain Future
  239. [239]
    Afghanistan war coalition losses by nation - areppim
    NATO/ISAF losses amounted to 3,485 deaths since the beginning of the war on 7 October 2001 through 2014. The number of US personnel killed reaches 68% of the ...
  240. [240]
    Declaration by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation ... - NATO
    Nov 20, 2010 · NATO re-affirms its long-term commitment to a sovereign, independent, democratic, secure and stable Afghanistan that will never again be a safe ...Missing: pledge | Show results with:pledge
  241. [241]
    Fact Sheet: Bringing the U.S. War in Afghanistan to a Responsible End
    May 27, 2014 · The troop surge that the President announced at West Point in December 2009 set the conditions that allowed us to push back the Taliban and ...Missing: numbers | Show results with:numbers
  242. [242]
    Afghanistan statistics: UK deaths, casualties, mission costs and ...
    Dec 9, 2024 · Statistics on the UK's involvement in Afghanistan since 2001, including fatalities and casualties, the cost of operations, and Afghan refugees to the UK.
  243. [243]
    Australians in the War in Afghanistan 2001 to 2021 - Anzac Portal
    Oct 2, 2025 · More than 40 Australians lost their lives and 263 were wounded as a result of their service in the war in Afghanistan.
  244. [244]
    Georgia's contribution to the International Security Assistance Force ...
    Since 2010, 31 Georgian servicemen have died, all in the Helmand campaign, and over 400 wounded, including 35 amputees. Many of the amputees received medical ...
  245. [245]
    Turkey's long involvement in NATO mission in Afghanistan
    Jun 19, 2021 · With 600 soldiers, Turkey ranks seventh among countries in NATO-led Resolute Support Mission - Anadolu Ajansı.
  246. [246]
    Turkish troops killed in Afghan crash | Humanitarian Crises News
    Mar 16, 2012 · At least 12 soldiers and four civilians killed on outskirts of Kabul in Turkey's worst loss of life in the 10-year war.Missing: ISAF logistics hubs
  247. [247]
    Pakistan's problematic victory in Afghanistan - Brookings Institution
    Aug 24, 2021 · This post was originally published on Lawfare. The Afghan Taliban and their Pakistani army patrons are back in Kabul before the 20th anniversary ...
  248. [248]
    Unpacking the Abbotabad Commission Report
    Jul 16, 2013 · Pakistan's internal audit of Osama bin Laden's death isn't perfect, but it's refreshingly honest and self-critical.
  249. [249]
    Pakistan's Osama bin Laden Report - Brookings Institution
    Jul 12, 2013 · On a clear night in early May 2011, U.S. Navy SEALs found and killed Osama bin Laden in his hideout in the Pakistani city of Abbottabad.Missing: causal factors
  250. [250]
    Pakistan: 'Collective Failure' Allowed Bin Laden To Hide - NPR
    Jul 8, 2013 · But the Pakistani government report also criticized the country's military and spy authorities for not being able to prevent the U.S. raid ...
  251. [251]
    Iran's Ambiguous Role in Afghanistan - Combating Terrorism Center
    Iran is playing a pivotal role in Afghanistan's post-Taliban development. It is a large source of foreign direct investment, and provides assistance in ...Missing: 2001-2021 | Show results with:2001-2021
  252. [252]
    India's Afghanistan policy: a quest for strategic space post the US ...
    Dec 22, 2022 · What Pakistan wanted from the Taliban was to put to an end the years-long conflict between various Mujahideen factions so that an orderly ...
  253. [253]
    Afghan attack targets Indian mission - BBC News
    Aug 3, 2013 · Suicide bombers target the Indian consulate in the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad, killing at least nine civilians, police say.
  254. [254]
    Indian consulate in Afghanistan attacked | News - Al Jazeera
    Jan 3, 2016 · Explosions and shots heard as local official says gunmen try to enter consulate in city of Mazar-i-Sharif.
  255. [255]
    [PDF] Afghanistan: the view from Russia
    After the fall of the Taliban regime,. Russia tried to establish good working relations with the Karzai administration as well as knit Afghanistan into various ...
  256. [256]
    The Pragmatic Neighbour: China's Afghanistan Policy 2001–2021
    China has remained detached from the events in Afghanistan, generally playing a passive role during the US-led war in its neighbour and refusing to actively ...
  257. [257]
    About | UNAMA - United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan
    UNAMA was established on 28 March 2002 by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1401. Reviewed annually, this mandate has been altered over time to reflect ...
  258. [258]
    Security Council Committee pursuant to resolutions 1267 (1999 ...
    Sanctions measures. Measure, Description, Exemptions to the measure. Assets Freeze. All states are required to freeze without delay the funds and ...Sanctions List Materials · Resolutions · Reports · Press Releases
  259. [259]
    Reports | Security Council - UN.org.
    ... report. S/2019/570, 15 July 2019, Monitoring Team's Twenty-fourth report. S/2019 ... Taliban and associated individuals and entities, submitted pursuant to ...Missing: Quetta Shura
  260. [260]
    The Collapse of Afghanistan | Journal of Democracy
    ... Taliban could reemerge as a political and military force. After the Taliban government collapsed in 2001 in the wake of the U.S. invasion, its leaders fled ...
  261. [261]
    [PDF] Comprehending the Challenges in the U.S. Nation-building Efforts ...
    U.S. reliance on corrupt Afghan elites to maintain stability—such as President Hamid Karzai's patronage networks and. “ghost soldiers” in the army—eroded ...<|separator|>
  262. [262]
    New evidence of widespread fraud in Afghanistan election uncovered
    Sep 18, 2009 · Exclusive footage obtained by the Guardian of ballot papers pre-marked for Hamid Karzai that were seized by monitors.
  263. [263]
    Afghan Elections: Where it Went Wrong and What to Do
    Afghanistan's fraudulent presidential election in October throws the legitimacy of the Karzai regime into serious question. In testimony before the House ...
  264. [264]
    2014 Afghan presidential election - Wikipedia
    Preliminary results were expected on 2 July and the final result on 22 July. However, widespread accusations of fraud delayed these results. As a result, John ...Candidates · Campaign · Opinion polls · Conduct
  265. [265]
    Afghan president Ashraf Ghani sought reforms, ousted by Taliban
    to transform Afghanistan from a tribal, patronage-based society to a modern technocratic state — initially ...
  266. [266]
    Ashraf Ghani: The Deeply Polarizing President Who Oversaw The ...
    Aug 16, 2021 · Ghani refused to stick to the terms of a power-sharing agreement ... Once intra-Afghan peace talks began in September 2020, Ghani was ...
  267. [267]
    GDP per capita (current US$) - Afghanistan - World Bank Open Data
    GDP per capita (current US$) - Afghanistan. Country official statistics, National Statistical Organizations and/or Central Banks; National Accounts data files.
  268. [268]
    [PDF] SIGAR 21-16-LL Elections
    Feb 19, 2021 · ... Taliban Afghan elections in 2004 and 2005, the United Nations played a lead role in helping the nascent Afghan government manage its elections.
  269. [269]
    Afghanistan election: turnout may have been as low as 20% amid ...
    Sep 29, 2019 · Voter turnout in the first round of Afghanistan's presidential election ... Nonetheless, the election was marred was by accusations of fraud and ...
  270. [270]
    Statement by the Press Secretary on Signing of a Political ...
    Sep 21, 2014 · The United States applauds presidential candidates Dr. Abdullah Abdullah and Dr. Ashraf Ghani for signing an agreement on the formation of a ...
  271. [271]
    Taliban vow to disrupt Afghanistan election - Reuters
    Jul 30, 2009 · The Taliban in Afghanistan warned on Thursday it would attempt to derail next month's presidential election, calling on Afghans to boycott ...
  272. [272]
    [PDF] 2017 High-Risk List
    Jan 11, 2017 · The U.S. government was slow to recognize the magnitude of the problem, the role of corrupt patronage networks, the ways in which corruption ...
  273. [273]
    [PDF] SIGAR 21-47-AR Afghanistan's Anti-Corruption Efforts
    Aug 31, 2021 · Separately, a lack of resources, a lack of capacity, leadership turnover, and even corruption within the anti-corruption institutions themselves ...Missing: ANSF | Show results with:ANSF
  274. [274]
    Corruption's Destabilizing Effects in Afghanistan - Wilson Center
    May 11, 2016 · They see the Taliban, warts and all, as a less-corrupt alternative to the state. In effect, corruption helps strengthen one of the Taliban's ...
  275. [275]
    I. The Taliban's War Against Women - state.gov
    Afghan women had been active in humanitarian relief organizations until the Taliban imposed severe restrictions on their ability to work. These professional ...
  276. [276]
    [PDF] CORPORAL PUNISHMENT AND THE DEATH PENALTY IN ...
    At the time, concerns were raised about the serious violations of human rights inherent in public executions and corporal punishment,3 with Taliban officials ...Missing: acid | Show results with:acid
  277. [277]
    [PDF] Women's rights in Afghanistan: An ongoing battle
    Apr 7, 2023 · Legal developments. In early 2001, a Ministry of Women's Affairswas created as 'the lead agency for promoting women's rights and advancement ...<|separator|>
  278. [278]
    Afghanistan: Four years on, 2.2 million girls still banned from school
    Aug 13, 2025 · While there were virtually no girls in school in 2001, within two decades, the enrollment rate for girls of primary school age rose to over 80%.Missing: 2020 | Show results with:2020
  279. [279]
    Afghanistan's women are still fighting: Inside the fight for rights under ...
    Jun 27, 2025 · UN Women supported a flourishing women's ministry and an influx of new women into civil service positions, parliament and the judiciary.
  280. [280]
    Progressive Achievements of Afghan Women and its Catastrophic ...
    Afghan women and girls made substantial progress toward equality after the Taliban's fall from power in 2001. During the 20 year period under the republic, ...
  281. [281]
    The Rise and Fall of Women Rights in Afghanistan
    May 2, 2022 · In this essay I will discuss the rise and fall of women's rights in Afghanistan before and after 9/11, highlighting the social reforms, their positive and ...Abstract · Introduction · Before 9/11 · Post 9/11
  282. [282]
    [PDF] Human rights in Afghanistan under the Karzai administration
    Many of Afghanistan's commitments on improving women's rights exist on paper only in areas such as in legal protection, human rights, leadership and political.
  283. [283]
    Hamid Karzai backs restrictive code for women - The Guardian
    Mar 6, 2012 · Afghanistan's president endorses 'code of conduct' which activists say is a giant step backward for women's rights.
  284. [284]
    Rollback of Women's Rights: Not Just in Afghanistan
    Feb 20, 2014 · Polygamy, stoning of adulterers, virginity testing, and laws that protect batterers are on the rise in increasingly conservative nations.
  285. [285]
    From Taliban to Taliban: Cycle of Hope, Despair on Women's Rights
    Nov 1, 2021 · They abolished the Ministry of Women's Affairs, and handed over the women's ministry building to the reinstated Ministry of Vice and Virtue ...
  286. [286]
    Four years on, here's what total exclusion of women in Afghanistan ...
    Aug 11, 2025 · A Taliban edict prevents women and girls from attending secondary school or pursuing higher education. © UNICEF/Amin Meerzad. A Taliban edict ...
  287. [287]
    Afghanistan must immediately stop public executions and corporal ...
    Apr 17, 2025 · ... human rights abuses under the Taliban, including the institutionalised oppression of women and girls. “Capital and corporal punishment are ...
  288. [288]
    Taking a Terrible Toll: The Taliban's Education Ban
    Apr 13, 2023 · From 2002 to 2021, 3,816,793 girls enrolled in first through 12th grades. According to the Afghan Ministry of Education's 2020-2021 annual ...<|separator|>
  289. [289]
    Electronic Systems Center's fusion system aids war on drugs in ...
    Apr 17, 2007 · Steven Webb, 350th Electronic Systems Group commander. The Counter Narcotics-Terrorism Intelligence Fusion Center is a commercial-off-the-shelf- ...Missing: Al- Qaeda
  290. [290]
    'Probably the largest' al-Qaeda training camp ever destroyed in ...
    Oct 30, 2015 · Army Gen. John F. Campbell said the camp was used by AQIS, short for al-Qaeda in the Indian Subcontinent.
  291. [291]
    Two Years Under the Taliban: Is Afghanistan a Terrorist Safe Haven ...
    Aug 15, 2023 · Two years into Taliban rule, the question of whether Afghanistan would once again become a safe haven for international terrorism remains alive.
  292. [292]
    Why was key source on bin Laden's courier freed? - Long War Journal
    May 14, 2011 · The Pakistanis freed Hassan Ghul, a top al Qaeda operative who gave up vital intelligence on Osama bin Laden while in US custody.
  293. [293]
    Timeline: The intelligence hunt leading to Bin Laden - BBC News
    May 6, 2011 · The moment that led to Osama Bin Laden's death in a raid by US Navy Seals was a culmination of years of intelligence gathering.Missing: 2007 | Show results with:2007
  294. [294]
    Minutes and Years: The Bin Ladin Operation - CIA
    A US military raid on an al-Qa`ida compound killed Usama Bin Ladin, America's most wanted terrorist.Missing: details | Show results with:details
  295. [295]
    The Operation That Took Out Osama Bin Laden - Military.com
    On May 2, 2011, SEAL Team Six descended upon a compound in Pakistan, blew down doors and engaged enemy combatants. The goal: kill or capture Osama bin ...<|separator|>
  296. [296]
    Operation Neptune Spear | National September 11 Memorial ...
    Two helicopters piloted by US Army aviators transported 23 SEALs, an interpreter, and a combat dog to carry out the raid in Abbottabad, Pakistan.
  297. [297]
    How SEAL Team Six Took Out Osama bin Laden - History.com
    May 24, 2018 · On May 2, 2011, US Special Forces raided an al-Qaeda compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan, and killed the world's most wanted terrorist: Osama bin Laden.
  298. [298]
    Resetting the U.S.-Pakistan Relationship - Brookings Institution
    ... raid on Abbottabad in early May that killed Osama bin Laden, and culminating in the NATO forces lethal attack on a Pakistani border post in November 2011, a ...
  299. [299]
    https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2011/06/21/u-s-image-in-pakistan-falls-no-further-following-bin-laden-killing/
  300. [300]
    U.S. Image in Pakistan Falls No Further Following bin Laden Killing
    Jun 21, 2011 · Most Pakistanis disapprove of the US military operation that killed Osama bin Laden, and although the al Qaeda leader has not been well-liked in recent years.Disapproval of U.S. Foreign... · Grim Ratings for National...
  301. [301]
    Osama Bin Laden Dead | whitehouse.gov - Obama White House
    May 2, 2011 · President Obama addresses the Nation to announce that the United States has killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda.
  302. [302]
    Islamic State Khorasan (IS-K) | Terrorism Backgrounders - CSIS
    Formation and Relationship with ISIS Core. In 2014, Pakistani national Hafiz Saeed Khan was chosen to spearhead IS-K province as its first emir.[3] Khan, a ...
  303. [303]
    The Rise and Stall of the Islamic State in Afghanistan
    This report details the structure, composition, and growth of the Islamic State's so-called Khorasan province, particularly in the eastern Afghan province ...
  304. [304]
    Special Forces Soldiers help Afghan forces defeat ISIS in eastern ...
    Aug 10, 2018 · Upon receipt of U.S. presidential authority to target Islamic State affiliate militias in January 2016 ... against ISIS-K. The Nangarhar operation ...
  305. [305]
    U.S. Forces targets, destroys ISIS-K stronghold - Centcom
    Apr 13, 2017 · KABUL, Afghanistan (Apr. 13, 2017) - At 7:32 pm local time today, U.S. Forces - Afghanistan conducted a strike on an ISIS-K tunnel complex ...
  306. [306]
    ISIS-Khorasan - Terrorist Groups - DNI.gov
    ISIS-Khorasan (ISIS-K) has killed or injured hundreds of people in mass-casualty attacks in Afghanistan, Iran, Pakistan, and Russia.
  307. [307]
    Foreign Terrorist Organizations - United States Department of State
    FTO designations play a critical role in our fight against terrorism and are an effective means of curtailing support for terrorist activities and pressuring ...Bureau of Counterterrorism · Terrorist Designations · Immigration and Nationality...<|separator|>
  308. [308]
    Afghan, coalition forces detain Haqqani network leader in Khost
    Dec 28, 2010 · Afghan and coalition forces captured a Haqqani Network leader who conducts attacks against Afghan National Security Forces and coalition ...
  309. [309]
    Country Reports on Terrorism 2019: Afghanistan - State Department
    In 2019, the Taliban and the affiliated HQN increased terrorist attacks targeting Afghan civilians, government officials, and members of the international ...
  310. [310]
    The Impact of US Drone Strikes on Terrorism in Pakistan and ...
    ... US drone strikes on terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Some theories ... strikes disrupt and degrade terrorist organizations, reducing their ability to ...
  311. [311]
    Full article: Signature Strikes and the Ethics of Targeted Killing
    Sep 4, 2024 · Since the first lethal drone strike was conducted by the United States in Yemen in 2002,1 the ethics and legality of targeted killings has ...
  312. [312]
    Obama's Final Drone Strike Data | Council on Foreign Relations
    Jan 20, 2017 · The 542 drone strikes that Obama authorized killed an estimated 3,797 people, including 324 civilians. As he reportedly told senior aides in ...
  313. [313]
    Executive Order on the US Policy on Pre & Post-Strike Measures to ...
    Jul 1, 2016 · FACT SHEET: Executive Order on the US Policy on Pre & Post-Strike Measures to Address Civilian Casualties in the US Operations Involving the Use ...
  314. [314]
    How to Avoid Civilian Casualties During Drone Strikes—at No Cost ...
    Feb 10, 2022 · ... Obama implemented a policy to minimize civilian casualties following US strikes in undeclared theaters of operations, especially Pakistan.
  315. [315]
    Beneath the Crosshairs: Remotely Piloted Airstrikes as a Foreign ...
    Feb 16, 2021 · Without a clearly identified endstate and coordinated whole-of-government strategy, remotely piloted aircraft (RPA) strikes alone increase ...Missing: personality | Show results with:personality
  316. [316]
    [PDF] Drone Warfare as a Military Instrument of Counterterrorism Strategy
    While the drone is effective, a nation should consider other complementary nonmilitary approaches to combating terrorism. “To be effective, counterterrorism ...Missing: efficacy | Show results with:efficacy
  317. [317]
    Were Drone Strikes Effective? Evaluating the Drone Campaign in ...
    Jan 11, 2022 · At a time when the United States seems likely to rely heavily on targeted killing as an instrument of counter-terrorism, scholars, ...
  318. [318]
    Afghanistan War: U.S. Deaths and Costs - A-Mark Foundation
    Nov 21, 2021 · 2,456 U.S. military deaths occurred during the Afghanistan War, which ran October 7, 2001 to August 30, 2021. 3,923 Department of Defense (DOD) ...
  319. [319]
    War in Afghanistan | National Army Museum
    Britain's latest war in Afghanistan began in the wake of '9/11' - the terrorist attacks on the United States that took place on 11 September 2001.<|separator|>
  320. [320]
    British troops were twice as likely to be killed in Afghanistan as US ...
    May 12, 2021 · The UK lost 455 lives, which was 4.7% of its peak deployment level, while the 158 Canadians killed represented 5.4% of their total. The study ...
  321. [321]
    National Monument to Canada's Mission in Afghanistan
    May 30, 2025 · While in Afghanistan, 158 Canadian Armed Forces members, a diplomat, four aid workers, a government contractor and a journalist lost their lives ...
  322. [322]
    [PDF] Human and Budgetary Costs to Date of the U.S. War in Afghanistan
    Aug 25, 2021 · This $2.313 trillion total for Afghanistan is a portion of the total estimated cost of the post-9/11 wars. Page 2. ESTIMATED DIRECT WAR DEATHS ...<|separator|>
  323. [323]
    Human | Costs of War | Brown University
    An estimated over 940,000 people were killed by direct post-9/11 war violence in Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Yemen, and Pakistan between 2001-2023.Civilians Killed & Displaced · U.S. Military, Veterans... · EconomicMissing: K Haqqani<|separator|>
  324. [324]
    Costs of the Afghanistan war, in lives and dollars | AP News
    Aug 16, 2021 · ... Taliban capture of their country that they held onto the American military jet as it took off and plunged to death. (AP Photo). Read More.
  325. [325]
    The Secret Battles Between US Forces and Chechen Terrorists
    Feb 19, 2014 · For the last 12 years, U.S. Special Operations forces have repeatedly engaged in fierce combat in Afghanistan against ruthless Taliban ...Missing: 2001-2021 | Show results with:2001-2021
  326. [326]
    The 'Afghan Arabs' Phenomena During Afghan Conflict (1978–2021)
    Oct 20, 2022 · Afghan Arabs played an essential role in the Afghan conflict, from raising funds to providing volunteer fighters and coverage of 'jihad' through their media ...
  327. [327]
    [PDF] The Effect of Civilian Casualties in Afghanistan and Iraq
    Coalition forces killed roughly the same number of civilians per attack in Afghanistan, about one in every 40 attacks. However, insurgents kill roughly four.
  328. [328]
    Situation Afghanistan situation - Operational Data Portal - UNHCR
    This page provides updates on UNHCR's work in support of Afghan IDPs, refugees, and returnees. Links are also provided below for individual UNHCR country ...Missing: 2001-2021 | Show results with:2001-2021
  329. [329]
    Afghanistan | UNHCR
    Learn about UNHCR's work in Afghanistan, including refugee and displacement data, programme plans, funding needs and contact details for our local office.
  330. [330]
    Human Rights Reports: Custom Report Excerpts - state.gov
    ... Afghanistan and kidnapped by the Taliban in 2016 in ... reported summary convictions by Taliban courts that resulted in executions by stoning or beheading.
  331. [331]
    REPORTS ON THE PROTECTION OF CIVILIANS IN ARMED ...
    UNAMA's findings are shared with the parties to help them better understand the impact of their operations on the civilian population so that they may address ...Missing: total | Show results with:total
  332. [332]
    World Report 2021: Afghanistan | Human Rights Watch
    However, fighting between Afghan government forces, the Taliban, and other armed groups continued, causing almost 6,000 civilian casualties in the first nine ...Missing: DoD | Show results with:DoD<|separator|>
  333. [333]
    Soldiers charged in Afghan killings | Article | The United States Army
    Charges were preferred Tuesday evening against three additional Soldiers who are accused in the deaths of three Afghan civilians between January and May 2010.Missing: Uruzgan documented
  334. [334]
    Afghanistan: U.S. Special Forces Guilty of War Crimes? | Rolling Stone
    Nov 6, 2013 · The remains of 10 missing Afghan villagers were dug up outside a US Special Forces base – was it a war crime or just another episode in a very dirty war?
  335. [335]
    Did a Green Beret Unit Commit One of the Worst U.S. War Crimes in ...
    Oct 8, 2025 · On Nov. 21, 2012, Zikria, an Afghan working for U.S. Special Forces in Nerkh, dragged a suspect out of the office of the local intelligence ...
  336. [336]
    “They've Shot Many Like This”: Abusive Night Raids by CIA-Backed ...
    Oct 31, 2019 · Afghan strike forces who have been responsible for extrajudicial executions and enforced disappearances, indiscriminate airstrikes, attacks on medical ...
  337. [337]
    CIA-backed Afghan troops 'committed war crimes': report - BBC
    Oct 31, 2019 · Human Rights Watch reports that Afghan forces committed "extrajudicial killings" and other abuses.
  338. [338]
    How US-Funded Abuses Led to Failure in Afghanistan
    Jul 6, 2021 · As U.S. forces continue their withdrawal from Afghanistan, postmortems on the 20-year U.S.-led military intervention are underway.
  339. [339]
    Afghanistan - | International Criminal Court
    On 31 October 2022, Pre-Trial Chamber II of the International Criminal Court (ICC) authorised the Prosecution to resume investigation into the Afghanistan ...ICC judges authorise... · Statement of ICC Prosecutor... · Information for VictimsMissing: ANSF | Show results with:ANSF
  340. [340]
    Applications for arrest warrants in the situation in Afghanistan
    Jan 23, 2025 · ICC ... We pursue our investigation into alleged crimes by individual members of the Taliban and the Islamic State – Khorasan Province.Missing: ANSF | Show results with:ANSF
  341. [341]
    ICC: Afghanistan Inquiry Can Resume - Human Rights Watch
    Oct 31, 2022 · The International Criminal Court (ICC) should address grave international crimes committed by all sides when it continues its investigation ...
  342. [342]
    [PDF] Public Law 107–40 107th Congress Joint Resolution
    To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States. Whereas, on September 11 ...
  343. [343]
    President Signs Authorization for Use of Military Force bill
    Sep 18, 2001 · In signing this resolution, I maintain the longstanding position of the executive branch regarding the President's constitutional authority ...
  344. [344]
    Authorization for Use of Military Force 107th Congress (2001-2002)
    Authorizes the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, ...
  345. [345]
    [PDF] The legal basis for the invasion of Afghanistan - UK Parliament
    Feb 26, 2010 · Although the initial invasion of Afghanistan was not mandated by a specific UN Security. Council Resolution, relying on the justification of ...
  346. [346]
    [PDF] Terrorism, the Use of Force and International Law After 11 September
    On 12 September 2001, in Resolution 1368, the UN Security Council strongly condemned the terrorist attacks against the US but stopped short of authorising ...
  347. [347]
    Resolution 1368 (2001) / - United Nations Digital Library
    Security Council resolution 1368 (2001) [condemning the terrorist acts of 11 September 2001 in New York, Washington, D.C. and Pennsylvania, United States]العربية · Français · 中文(简)
  348. [348]
    SECURITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTS WIDE-RANGING ...
    The Security Council this evening unanimously adopted a wide-ranging, comprehensive resolution with steps and strategies to combat international terrorism.Missing: defense | Show results with:defense
  349. [349]
    [PDF] Lawful Self-Defense to Terrorism - NDLScholarship
    Enduring Freedom was a massive aerial and land operation on the territory of Afghanistan in response to the September 11 terror attacks on the United States.' ...<|separator|>
  350. [350]
    Explaining Mission Creep in Afghanistan - War on the Rocks
    Aug 8, 2019 · Explaining Mission Creep in Afghanistan. Rick Berger, Bryan ... The post-9/11 mission expanded from counterterrorism to nation-building ...
  351. [351]
    Afghanistan 2001-2021: U.S. Policy Lessons Learned
    Nov 17, 2021 · In a 17 November 2021 hearing before the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Crisis Group's Asia Program Director Laurel Miller ...Missing: militias | Show results with:militias<|separator|>
  352. [352]
    How Not to Build a State - Modern War Institute
    Oct 5, 2021 · To describe the turn from counterterrorism to state building and democratization as an egregious example of mission creep is to downplay the ...
  353. [353]
    Costs of the 20-year war on terror: $8 trillion and ... - Brown University
    Sep 1, 2021 · A report from the Costs of War project at Brown University revealed that 20 years of post-9/11 wars have cost the U.S. an estimated $8 ...
  354. [354]
    The Causes and the Consequences of Strategic Failure in ...
    In a strategic shock, the Taliban in Afghanistan entered Kabul on August 15, following a cascading crisis triggered by Western military withdrawal, ...
  355. [355]
    [PDF] From Uncertainty to Strategic Failure: U.S. Military Interventions and ...
    The forces were able to achieve some of their counterterrorism objectives, but this came at the expense of state-building and nation-building in. Afghanistan.
  356. [356]
    DOD Efforts to Eliminate Ghost Personnel from ANDSF Systems
    Article Display Report | Aug. 5, 2016 Inquiry Letter: DOD Efforts to Eliminate Ghost Personnel from ANDSF Systems SIGAR 16-50-SPMissing: soldiers | Show results with:soldiers
  357. [357]
    Afghanistan's ghost soldiers undermined fight against Taliban - BBC
    Nov 10, 2021 · He said he did not think former President Ashraf Ghani was "financially corrupt". Responding to accusations of corruption within the finance ...Missing: cost | Show results with:cost
  358. [358]
    [PDF] Elite Capture and Corruption of Security Sectors
    Feb 17, 2023 · to corrupt and dysfunctional Afghan institutions risked ensnaring these new community-based forces in patterns of powerbroker domination and ...
  359. [359]
    [PDF] SYSTEMS OF PATRONAGE
    WHAT IS CORRUPTION? The problem is that while a Western audience is quick to condemn cronyism and nepotism as corrupt practices, Afghans do not necessarily feel ...
  360. [360]
    [PDF] CORRUPTION IN AFGHANISTAN:
    While corruption is seen by Afghans as one of the most urgent challenges facing their country, it seems to be increasingly embedded in social practices, with ...Missing: cultural | Show results with:cultural
  361. [361]
    Corruption in Conflict: Lessons from the US Experience in Afghanistan
    SIGAR takes seriously the lessons that anticorruption strategy and planning must be an original component of contingency operations and reconstruction programs ...
  362. [362]
    How predatory crime and corruption in Afghanistan underpin the ...
    Apr 18, 2017 · Extensive predatory criminality, corruption, and power abuse—not effectively countered by the Afghan government—have facilitated the Taliban's ...Missing: norms | Show results with:norms
  363. [363]
    The United States' Response to Corruption in Afghanistan
    May 1, 2018 · The corruption and self-serving acts of the U.S.-backed government in Afghanistan were helping the Taliban recruit fighters and exercise control ...Missing: narrative | Show results with:narrative
  364. [364]
    'We Will Not Forgive,' Biden Says, Vowing Retaliation for Kabul Attack
    May 13, 2025 · President Biden on Thursday denounced a terrorist attack at the Kabul airport that killed at least 13 American service members and injured 18 ...
  365. [365]
    Kabul's collapse followed string of intel failures, defense officials say
    Aug 16, 2021 · In the end, intelligence assessments from earlier this year estimating that the Afghan government could hold out for six to 18 months after ...
  366. [366]
    [PDF] SIGAR 23-04 Evaluation Report
    Nov 9, 2022 · Although DOD reported that it left at least $7.1 billion in U.S.-funded defense articles and equipment in Afghanistan when the U.S. departed, ...
  367. [367]
    Intelligence Warned of Afghan Military Collapse, Despite Biden's ...
    Jun 23, 2023 · Even as the president was telling the public that Kabul was unlikely to fall, intelligence assessments painted a grimmer picture.
  368. [368]
    Getting Answers on the Afghanistan Withdrawal
    The Biden-Harris administration was determined to withdraw from Afghanistan, with or without the Doha Agreement and no matter the cost. · The Biden-Harris ...
  369. [369]
    Biden's Afghan Retreat Has Done Irreparable Damage to Our ...
    Biden not only betrayed our citizens and Afghan allies but also forced NATO allies to betray theirs as well. ... withdrawal reaches Europe's shores, our allies ...
  370. [370]
    H.Res.1469 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): Ensuring accountability ...
    Summary of H.Res.1469 - 118th Congress (2023-2024): Ensuring accountability for key officials in the Biden-Harris administration responsible for ...
  371. [371]
    THE BUSH RECORD - FACT SHEET: The Seventh Anniversary of 9 ...
    ... disrupted key terrorist plots around the world. The President has built a 90-nation coalition to fight terrorism. The United States has partnered with ...
  372. [372]
    Remarks by President Biden on Afghanistan | The White House
    Aug 16, 2021 · ... Qaeda could not use Afghanistan as a base from which to attack us again. We did that. We severely degraded al Qaeda in Afghanistan. ... war after ...Missing: invasion | Show results with:invasion
  373. [373]
    How Strong Is al-Qaeda? A Debate - War on the Rocks
    May 20, 2022 · The United States went to war in Afghanistan to ... United States” while also noting that its external attack capabilities are “degraded.
  374. [374]
    Afghanistan after the drawdown - Brookings Institution
    Jul 6, 2015 · Second, with “core al Qaeda” in Afghanistan and Pakistan heavily degraded ... after the initial U.S. invasion, when the Karzai ...
  375. [375]
    The Threat of Terrorism In Afghanistan Post 2021 | Wilson Center
    Sep 14, 2023 · ISIS-Khorasan has increased attacks in the region and ….is building a capability in Afghanistan…with the ultimate goal of a strike on the ...
  376. [376]
    “Over-the-Horizon Operations" in Afghanistan - Lieber Institute
    Sep 8, 2021 · The concept is that the United States will monitor terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS-K without boots on the ground; develop actionable targets.Missing: rise post-
  377. [377]
    [PDF] operation enduring sentinel - USAID OIG's
    The Taliban's counterterrorism efforts have been somewhat successful against ISIS-. Khorasan (ISIS-K), but the group remains a persistent terrorist threat in ...Missing: strikes | Show results with:strikes
  378. [378]
    Big Data at War: Special Operations Forces, Project Maven, and ...
    Aug 25, 2020 · During the Iraq war America's special operations forces (SOF) demonstrated a remarkable capacity to innovate to accomplish a mission for ...Missing: global enhancements
  379. [379]
    Progress Report on the Global War on Terrorism
    In Portland, seven individuals were charged with engaging in a conspiracy to join al- Qaida and Taliban forces fighting against the coalition in Afghanistan.
  380. [380]
    The 9/11 Terrorist Attacks - Naval History and Heritage Command
    Sep 7, 2023 · On the morning of 11 September 2001, 19 terrorists from the Islamist extreme group al Qaeda hijacked four commercial aircraft and crashed two of them into the ...
  381. [381]
    Funding Tables
    U.S. appropriations for Afghanistan reconstruction prior to withdrawal spanned the FY 2002 to FY 2021 period and amounted to nearly $144.75 billion. U.S. ...Missing: 2001-2021 | Show results with:2001-2021
  382. [382]
    Reshaping U.S. Aid to Afghanistan: The Challenge of Lasting Progress
    Feb 23, 2022 · In November 2020, Afghanistan secured $12 billion in additional international aid for 2021-2025, much of which is conditional upon Taliban peace ...
  383. [383]
    https://harici.com.tr/en/afghanistan-infrastructure-and-agriculture/
  384. [384]
    Afghanistan infrastructure and agriculture - Harici
    Sep 14, 2022 · And in regards to energy, Afghanistan is still facing a huge difficulty in terms of electricity. Afghanistan imports 78% of its electricity from ...<|separator|>
  385. [385]
    (PDF) Review of Afghanistan's Economic Development Status ...
    Mar 19, 2023 · Review of Afghanistan's Economic Development Status during Republic Government (from 2001-2021) ... Road Initiative to Sustain Development ...
  386. [386]
    [PDF] UN Shipments Stabilized the Afghan Economy but Benefit the Taliban
    Jul 24, 2024 · 57 Following the Taliban's takeover, Afghanistan's gross domestic product contracted by 20.7 percent in 2021 and 3.6 percent in 2022. UNDP ...<|separator|>
  387. [387]
    Afghanistan's economy has 'basically collapsed': UNDP - UN News
    Mar 7, 2024 · Since the takeover by the Taliban in 2021, the Afghan economy has contracted by 27 per cent, leading to economic stagnation, according to UNDP.Missing: percentage | Show results with:percentage
  388. [388]
    [PDF] The Problems with Aid Dependency and the Need for a Plan B
    Sep 20, 2021 · Three types of foreign assistance are provided to Afghanistan: humanitarian, development and military. Humanitarian assistance is immediate ...
  389. [389]
    China Dangles Belt And Road Investment To Mend Taliban ...
    Aug 20, 2025 · Taliban Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi welcomes Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to Kabul ahead of an August 20 trilateral meeting with ...
  390. [390]
    China's Economic Engagement as Strategic Deterrence in Afghanistan
    Oct 10, 2025 · By engaging economically with the Taliban without granting formal recognition, the PRC has fostered economic dependencies that function as part ...
  391. [391]
    [PDF] U.S. Withdrawal from Afghanistan and Realignment of Eurasian ...
    Jun 6, 2025 · The speed of their advancement, aided by the collapse of the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces, underscored the fragility of the state ...
  392. [392]
    Iran Formalizes Ties with the Taliban | The Washington Institute
    Mar 3, 2023 · On February 26, Iran officially handed over the Afghan embassy in Tehran to diplomats from the Taliban—a big step in formalizing and deepening ...
  393. [393]
    Russia-Afghanistan relations in the aftermath of the Moscow attack
    Mar 28, 2024 · Although the Moscow attack may complicate Russia's relations with the Taliban, it is unlikely to alter them fundamentally.
  394. [394]
    Afghanistan withdrawal has Taiwan pondering its alliance with the US
    Sep 8, 2021 · The chaotic withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan has sparked concerns among its allies about the credibility of commitments to its strategic allies.
  395. [395]
    What the U.S. Withdrawal From Afghanistan Means for Taiwan | FSI
    Sep 13, 2021 · Some have argued that America's withdrawal from Afghanistan undermines efforts to signal U.S. support for Taiwan.
  396. [396]
    Why Nation-Building Failed in Afghanistan by Daron Acemoglu
    Aug 20, 2021 · Daron Acemoglu explains why the West's top-down approach to establishing state institutions was bound to end in tears.
  397. [397]
    [PDF] Learning from Afghanistan: The Futility of Occupation in Nation
    Legitimacy under occupation is frequently contested, as imposed governance structures may lack acceptance from the local populace, reflecting the perceived ...
  398. [398]
    Why Afghan nation-building was always destined to fail
    Sep 10, 2021 · With two such major neighbours intent on undermining nation-building, an uphill struggle was inevitable. Economics is another major factor ...
  399. [399]
    Who Is to Blame for the Collapse of Afghanistan's Security Forces?
    May 24, 2022 · The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction placed primary blame for that collapse on the shoulders of the United States.
  400. [400]
    Unraveling Deception: Pakistan's Dilemma After Decades of ...
    Sep 26, 2023 · The skills, devices, and materials the ISI imparted to the Afghan Taliban—and the broader partnership between Pakistan and the Afghan ...Missing: declassified documents
  401. [401]
    Do not take the war on terror's big success for granted | Brookings
    Aug 27, 2021 · ... Afghan fighters watch several explosions from U.S. bombings in the. Terrorism & Extremism America failed its way to counterterrorism success.
  402. [402]
    Easier to Get into War Than to Get Out: The Case of Afghanistan
    A member of the Afghan security forces walks in the sprawling Bagram air base after the American military departed, in Parwan province north of Kabul, ...Missing: neglect | Show results with:neglect<|control11|><|separator|>