Fran O'Sullivan: Time to reframe the Afghan question

John Key has promised to keep troops Afghanistan - for now. Photo / Supplied

John Key struck the right note in saying his Government would keep Kiwi troops in Afghanistan, despite calls to bring them home in the wake of the first death of a New Zealand soldier in the war-ravaged country.

"I think we owe it to the thousands of New Zealanders who've served in Bamiyan in the last seven or eight years to see the job done," said Key just hours after news Lieutenant Tim O'Donnell was killed when an explosive device detonated near his patrol convoy in Bamiyan Province where the Kiwi provincial reconstruction team is stationed.

The soldier's father also wants New Zealand forces to stay in Bamiyan to finish the job.

"It would be a waste of Tim's life if we pulled out now," Mark O'Donnell said. "He went there because he believed in what they were doing and what the New Zealand Army were doing, and what the New Zealand Government wanted them to do over there, and you couldn't just throw the towel in now."

In fact, Labour leader Phil Goff hit the nail on the head when he questioned on Radio NZ last month how much longer New Zealand should remain embroiled in a war which will not be won if the local government stays corrupt and cannot win the hearts and minds of its own people.

"Sacrifice is one thing for Kiwis, we accept that. But we need to know that it's in a worthwhile cause and that there is a chance of success at the end of it ... I don't believe that that is the situation at the present time."

The plain reality is that while no prime minister or president would announce the withdrawal of their troops in such circumstances, all political leaders who have committed forces to Afghanistan will be pondering the vexed issues that Goff has isolated as they consider the right time-frame for their troops to decamp.

The unpalatable truth is that after nine years, Operation Enduring Freedom has not yet succeeded. President Karzai's Government is still seen as corrupt and unstable and the war has become increasingly deadly.

Almost half of the US fatalities have happened since Barack Obama took office in January 2009 with last month the deadliest - 66 US casualties.

The war has also become increasingly costly to maintain, stretching the finances of many Western governments whose exchequers have yet to recover from the global financial crisis, particularly that of the US.

Meanwhile, a resurgent Taleban is funding much of its military operations off the back of the roaring heroin trade.

Government reports suggest that the Helmand province alone produces enough heroin to almost meet global demand and Afghanistan as a whole supplies 92 per cent of the world's opiates with an annual "farmgate value" of about US$1 billion ($1.3 billion).

A successful US withdrawal is also predicated on handing control to the Afghan national security forces.

But it is difficult to see how the US could be confident in handing over the reins when its own Government Accountability Office has highlighted serious shortcomings within the Afghan police in the fight against the illegal narcotics trade.

Even General David Petraeus - who took command of the US-led Nato forces after Stanley McChrystal's demise - believes progress towards Obama's planned July 2011 withdrawal date is mixed.

The "President has to be interested in fiscal considerations, political considerations, diplomatic considerations" when making decisions about withdrawing troops from a war, Petraeus told a US Senate committee.

This is the crux of it: fiscal, political and diplomatic considerations will inevitably drive the New Zealand Government's decisions. Our SAS contingent is expected home by next April.

They are needed here to help ensure New Zealand is secure from terrorist attacks during the Rugby World Cup.

But Key's recent refusal to commit up to 50 more Kiwi troops to take part in a joint Anzac force in Uruzgan province was telling. It was to be the first major initiative of the combined Anzac force that former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd had promoted to Key last year.

After Key's secret mission to Afghanistan in May, he turned the Aussies down, saying he was not prepared to put New Zealand lives at risk in Uruzgan.

The big question is really why and for now much longer the Government will put lives at risk. There is a big gap between the official statements the Government has made to justify New Zealand's continuing presence and the on-the-ground reality.

Lieutenant O'Donnell's death will not have an immediate effect on the Government's ultimate decisions. But it would be helpful for the Government to reframe exactly why New Zealand is there.

Is it really still about curbing the resurgence of al Qaeda? Or trying to make Afghanistan safe from itself?