By Christina Xu '18
After a year-long siege, the Taliban finally seized the city of Kunduz, Afghanistan in a surprise attack earlier this month. They were, however, forced out by a military counter-offensive three days into their invasion. Kunduz is the capital of the Kunduz province, a center of trade and taxation, and a gateway to northern Afghanistan; its fall marked the most crucial Taliban victory since its 2001 US-led oust. The Taliban gained not only funding and weaponry but also significant publicity: photographs of Taliban fighters and their signature white flags have been posted on social media websites around the world.The implications of the attack are twofold. The weakness of the Afghan government, which had been facing setbacks due to corruption amongst civilian and security officials, was clearly demonstrated by the inability of the security forces to suppress the attack; though there were up to 7,000 Afghan security forces present in the region, they were overcome by a few hundred Taliban fighters. Meanwhile, the attack reflects an increase in the confidence of the Taliban, which was previously unwilling to target major cities due to both their inability to run them and their fear of exposure to targeted attacks.The relatively seamless seizure of Kunduz reflects an alarming increase in the strength of terrorist organizations within Afghanistan, which the US has spent the past 14 years attempting to eradicate. Currently, there are 9,800 troops stationed in Afghanistan. This Thursday, President Obama announced plans to retain 5,500 troops in Afghanistan, stationed in Kabul, Bagram, Jalalabad, and Kandahar past the end of his term into 2017 in order to help counter the increasing threat posed by the Taliban. The decision was made in response to not only the recent Kunduz attacks, but also to a months-long review of US troop presence in the nation. Despite his original plan to withdraw all but 1,000 troops—a small force based at the embassy—from Afghanistan by the end of his presidency, the President insists that keeping US troops in the nation is crucial to American security interests.In early December of 2014, NATO operations were ended in Afghanistan, resulting in the increased presence of the Taliban and the death of many Afghan civilians and poorly trained and equipped troops. While the Kunduz seizure reflects the increased influence of the Taliban within the nation, al-Qaeda, ISIS, and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan all hold influence within Afghanistan. Though he opposes “endless war,” President Obama asserted that he “will not allow Afghanistan to be used as safe haven for terrorists to attack our nation again.”The goal of the extended presence of US troops in Afghanistan is lasting settlement with the Afghan government; Obama plans to achieve this by focusing on “two narrow missions,” counterterrorism and training. The plan, which is supported by NATO, is expected to be welcomed by Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and the rest of the Afghan government. Though the plan is, according to Obama, “the right thing to do” and is expected to cost $14.6 billion each year, many Republicans hoping for a greater troop commitment were not entirely satisfied; as US involvement in America’s longest war will not end with Obama’s term, the future of this complex and expensive foreign policy ultimately lies in the hands of the upcoming election.Sources:http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-34406648http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34536833http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/16/world/asia/obama-troop-withdrawal-afghanistan.html?hpw&rref=world&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=well-region®ion=bottom-well&WT.nav=bottom-well&_r=0http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/09/29/us-afghanistan-attack-idUSKCN0RS0A820150929http://www.thenational.ae/world/central-asia/obama-extends-us-troop-presence-in-afghanistanhttp://www.cnn.com/2015/10/15/politics/afghanistan-troops-obama/index.html