[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 16]
[Senate]
[Pages 21732-21734]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                              AFGHANISTAN

  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I appreciate the statement my colleague, 
Senator Brown from Ohio, just made about health care. It is a 
critically important issue we all have been working on. He and I were 
fortunate to serve this summer and throughout the year, but especially 
this summer, working on the bill he spoke of--the Health, Education, 
Labor and Pensions Committee bill.
  I rise tonight to talk about another significant challenge we face as 
Americans; that is, the really grave challenge we face in Afghanistan.
  I had the opportunity this summer toward the end of August to travel 
to both Afghanistan and Pakistan with Senator Brown of Ohio and his 
colleague from Ohio, Zack Space, a Member of the House of 
Representatives. They would agree with me, and I believe most Americans 
would agree, that when we have troops on the ground in harm's way in 
such an important part of the world for our security, we must have a 
very serious debate, a sober deliberation, an objective assessment of 
where we are right now.
  The administration has expressed, and I support, the overall goal in 
Afghanistan to ensure that al-Qaida or any other terrorist group does 
not gain the sanctuary it requires to plot, plan, or train for another 
terrorist attack on American soil or against our allies.
  We have seen the direct impact of an unstable Afghanistan right in my 
home State of Pennsylvania. Last week, I traveled to Shanksville, PA, 
in southwestern Pennsylvania, as the world knows now as the place where 
the plane went down in September of 2001. That was an unspeakable act 
of terrorism. Thank goodness for this Capitol and for our country that 
a group of brave Americans took control as best they could and made 
sure that plane, which was headed for Washington, did not get here. And 
they gave their lives in that effort. The men responsible for those 
attacks conducted their planning from Afghanistan, not from anywhere 
else. It is in our national security interest to make sure that 
Afghanistan today never again becomes a safe haven for the likes of 
Osama bin Laden or any other terrorist who may confront us in the 
future and continues to confront us today.
  As of this week, at least 822 members of the U.S. military have died 
in Afghanistan, including 35 from the State

[[Page 21733]]

of Pennsylvania. Those who gave, in Lincoln's words, ``the last full 
measure of devotion'' to their country, we are thinking of them and 
their families tonight, as we do every day.
  We are also remembering those who have sacrificed time in Afghanistan 
in this effort and some who have been wounded, so many who have been 
wounded--thousands have been wounded in just this conflict itself.
  We turn again to Lincoln when he talked about ``he who has borne the 
battle''--in the modern context of that, him or her, fighting men and 
women on the ground in Afghanistan, in Iraq, and other places around 
the world. We are thinking of them tonight, and we pray for them. But 
we also pray for ourselves that we may be worthy of their valor.
  I know there have been a lot of reports lately and discussions about 
what has been happening in Afghanistan. We have seen recent reports of 
heavy Taliban activity across 80 percent of Afghanistan. That doesn't 
mean they control 80 percent, but there is a lot of activity in 80 
percent. That number is up from 72 percent in November 2008 and way up 
from 54 percent a year before that. That is just their activity. But a 
substantial Taliban presence, one or more attacks per month--that is 
the measurement of this--was seen in another 17 percent of the country.
  It is critical that we have taken measures to recalibrate our efforts 
in Afghanistan. General McChrystal, a great military leader, a great 
mind, with whom we had a chance to spend some time on our trip, was 
confirmed by the Senate in June to take command of NATO and U.S. 
operations in Afghanistan and arrived in Afghanistan a few weeks later. 
General McChrystal recently submitted his strategic review to the White 
House, and we look forward to hearing the results of that review. We 
need to give General McChrystal and his team an opportunity to 
implement his strategy and to put it into action. That has just begun 
over the last couple several months.
  Having spent so much of the last 8 years since September 11, 2001, 
not focused on Afghanistan, we cannot expect results there overnight. 
This is why I stand in support of Chairman Carl Levin, the chairman of 
our Armed Services Committee, of his call for an expansion, a rapid 
expansion of the Afghan national security forces, both the Afghan 
National Army and the Afghan National Police. I traveled with Chairman 
Levin in May of 2008 to both countries, and I learned on that trip and 
many days before and after that trip of his leadership, his experience, 
and his understanding of the issues we confront in both Afghanistan and 
Pakistan and other places around the world. I believe his understanding 
of these issues is unparalleled. There may be some here who know as 
much, but few could make the case they know more. I have confidence in 
Carl Levin's assessment of where we are today and his recommendations 
for where we should go in the future.
  In July, General McChrystal assessed that the Afghan Army could 
expand from 134,000 troops to about 240,000, and the police force could 
go from 92,000 personnel to about 160,000 personnel by 2013. Chairman 
Levin wishes to see those same numbers but on a shorter timeline, to be 
accomplished in 2012. So that is something we should debate here. But I 
think any acceleration, any strategy that gets us to a higher number of 
Afghan Army and Afghan national police at a faster rate is what we have 
to be committed to.
  Because of low levels of literacy and experience, in some cases, it 
will take time to build a competent Afghan officer corps--the highest 
level of training in the Army. This will require that we use every 
possible resource and enhanced U.S. training capacity to get the job 
done. To get to those numbers will not be easy, but I believe we can do 
it, and so do officials in the Afghan Government. While in Afghanistan 
last month, I met with Defense Minister Wardak and the Interior 
Minister, Mr. Atmar, who both feel confident they can adequately 
accelerate training of these security forces.
  There is a growing insistence here in the Congress and across the 
country that the Afghan Government begin to assume more responsibility 
for its own security. In my visit to Afghanistan just after the recent 
Afghan Presidential election, I met with President Karzai and explained 
that the United States does not plan an open-ended commitment to 
Afghanistan. The Afghan Government, whether led by Hamid Karzai or 
anyone else, needs to recognize the critical need to provide security, 
goods, and services to the Afghan people. While we certainly are 
committed to assistance and development, it is ultimately the 
responsibility of the Afghan Government--the government itself--to 
reform and rebuild the country. Good governance and the fight against 
corruption are crucial elements to garnering public support and 
strengthening the effort against the extremist forces in the country. 
An Afghan public that can trust its government not to steal from them 
is more likely to support this hard-fought counterinsurgency effort--
the effort that General McChrystal has talked about and will continue 
to tell us about.
  I have to be very candid, though--and I have said this publicly 
already in different ways--that when I asked President Karzai specific 
questions about what we can tell the American people about his efforts 
going back a number of years, including his efforts at present--on a 
lot of these critical questions, such as, how are you doing on 
delivering services to your people; how are you doing on anticorruption 
efforts; how are you doing on improving your governance--he had, at 
best, inadequate answers to those questions. I was much more impressed, 
candidly, by his ministers--Minister Wardak and Minister Atmar--who are 
charged with the responsibility for the army and the police. That is 
the good news, despite the bad news I just reported about President 
Karzai, in my judgment. It is only my opinion, but I have met with him 
twice and I have read a lot about him.
  Our challenge in Afghanistan comes not only from a resurgent Taliban 
but development needs across the country. Farmers grow poppy because 
they can get a good rate of return and because the Taliban threatens 
them if they do not. Basic development projects are threatened and 
extorted by Taliban forces. U.S. political relationships with local 
officials are often tenuous, as these leaders are often the main 
targets of Taliban attacks--brutal attacks and threats on people's 
lives, on their families, and on their property.
  That is one reason why the courageous work of the Provincial 
Reconstruction Teams--the so-called PRTs--is essential to our success. 
These teams, composed of able and brave personnel from USAID, the 
Department of State, and the Department of Agriculture, supported by 
the U.S. military, are on the front lines of providing security such 
that political and development progress can flourish in these places 
across Afghanistan. These teams are operating in the most difficult 
environments in the country, and I want to thank them for their 
remarkable efforts and their sacrifice in contributing to our mission. 
I know General McChrystal not only respects and appreciates but works 
closely with all of these parts of our government that are doing such a 
great job for us. While the enhanced presence of Afghan forces is our 
ultimate goal, these Provincial Reconstruction Teams are a substantial 
part of how we are going to get there.
  This approach is comprehensive and smart, but it does require time. 
The courageous work performed by the PRTs, combined with an enhanced 
effort by the Afghan national security forces, I believe, can finally 
put us in a position where a stable Afghanistan is achievable.
  The challenge is not limited to Afghanistan and the Obama 
administration has adopted the correct holistic approach to include 
Pakistan, the neighbor to the east of Afghanistan. We have begun to 
rebuild important ties with the Pakistani Government based on trust and 
a common understanding that extremist forces are a serious threat to 
the Pakistani state, and not an asset to be expended on its other 
national security interests. In

[[Page 21734]]

Congress, we have also worked to ensure that our relationship with 
Pakistan is based on mutual trust and a commitment to build links at 
all levels of Pakistani and American society; among governments but 
also with 
nongovernmental organizations--academics, businessmen and 
businesswomen, humanitarian workers, and across the board. We have a 
lot of Pakistani Americans who are helping us do this. While we will 
also maintain our support for Pakistani's military, this new 
multitiered approach will be critical to building the solid foundation 
for a new relationship between our two countries--the United States and 
Pakistan.
  Despite our efforts to deepen our relationship, the news from 
Pakistan in recent days has not been encouraging. We are happy that 
they took the fight into the Swat Valley and had success there. Thank 
goodness they did that. But when I say the recent days, I mean the last 
several days and weeks. Over the weekend, Pakistan's Government 
announced the sacking of more than 700 police working in the Khyber 
tribal region. These police were fired after not showing up for work 
because they were threatened by militant leaders in the region. This is 
not a new trend in Pakistan. Two years ago, hundreds of police resigned 
under threat from local Taliban forces in the Swat Valley. So we have 
to monitor this, as we do developments in Afghanistan. Without the 
basic security provided by the police in these volatile border areas, 
the difficulty of our efforts is compounded. I hope that the Pakistani 
national government can do more to properly train and equip these 
important front-line defenses against extremist elements in Pakistan 
and/or the border region.
  Human rights questions have been raised in recent days in news 
accounts. That is also a concern we have. I had the opportunity, as 
well as Senator Brown and Congressman Space, when we were there, to 
visit a camp where they are taking care of those who were displaced by 
the fighting in the Swat Valley--so-called IDP camps, internally 
displaced person camps. So far, that effort has met with success, and 
thank goodness the Pashtun tradition in Pakistan has meant as many as 
80 percent of the people displaced were taken into homes and the 
government and military didn't have to help them directly, not until 
they had to go back to their homes and their communities.
  We also had a chance to meet with General Kiyani, a very strong and 
capable military leader, who gave us a briefing on the efforts against 
the Pakistani Taliban. I believe our national security--literally the 
safety of our families from another grievous attack here in the United 
States--depends on our success in South Asia. I applaud Chairman Carl 
Levin for his vision and leadership on this important issue at this 
critical time, and I encourage my colleagues to do the same.
  We ought to have a full debate in the Senate, in the House, and 
across America about troop levels. We are not there yet. There has been 
no recommendation made by the administration beyond the 17,000 combat 
troops and the 4,000 trainers, but it is never too early to start an 
important debate about troop levels. We also should debate and continue 
to get more information about evaluating the progress we are making 
there. President Obama and his administration are committed to doing 
that. They have presented to the Congress a series of metrics or 
benchmarks--pick your word--weighing and evaluating how we are doing on 
our progress there. A series of tough questions has to be asked on a 
frequent basis. They have to be answered by the administration if 
Congress is going to be satisfied with our support, both military and 
nonmilitary.
  I believe we can get this right if we debate it, if we ask tough 
questions and demand answers to those tough questions of the 
administration, of the military, and any other question that Congress 
and the American people want to have asked and answered.
  Finally, I mentioned the great work General McChrystal and our 
fighting men and women are doing every day of the week across the world 
in places such as Afghanistan and Iraq, but let me also highlight, 
before I conclude, three people on the ground there who are leading our 
efforts on the nonmilitary side representing our State Department: 
General Eikenberry, a great military leader who is serving as our 
Ambassador to Afghanistan and who is doing great work there; Ambassador 
Paterson in Pakistan, who has served now in that capacity under two 
administrations working very hard in a difficult situation in Pakistan; 
and finally, Ambassador Holbrooke, who has served this country in a 
number of capacities, now put in charge of monitoring the work and 
being a constructive force in both countries--both Afghanistan and 
Pakistan. We are grateful for their public service, their commitment to 
our security, the commitment to our troops they have made, and the 
commitment to getting this right so the American people can have 
confidence in this policy going forward.
  We are not there yet. We are just beginning a full debate. But I 
would urge our colleagues here to pay close attention and to continue 
to ask these questions so we can make sure that Afghanistan is stable--
as we hope for Pakistan as well--so we can protect our people from 
another terrorist attack or the threat of that kind of an attack.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.

                          ____________________