The Foreign Service Journal, March 2006

M A R C H 2 0 0 6 / F O R E I G N S E R V I C E J O U R N A L 63 F O C U S O N I R A Q A N D T H E F S PRT S IN A FGHANISTAN : M ODEL OR M UDDLE ? n Oct. 7, 2001, a U.S.- led military coalition launched Operation Enduring Freedom against Afghanistan’s Taliban government, top- pling it after just two months of fighting. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1386 established an International Security Assistance Force on Dec. 20 of that year to help the Afghan Interim Authority maintain security in and around Kabul. In light of the ISAF’s rel- ative success, Afghan President Hamid Karzai, U.N. offi- cials and others soon called for the force to expand its operations into the provinces. U.S. officials were not interested, however, believing that a traditional peace- keeping approach would be ineffective in Afghanistan. And U.S. allies were unwilling to deploy large numbers of troops to patrol Afghanistan’s remote cities and towns. During the summer of 2002, U.S. officials developed the concept of Provincial Reconstruction Teams to spread the “ISAF effect,” without expanding the ISAF itself. First established in early 2003, PRTs consisted of 60 to 100 soldiers plus, eventually, Afghan advisers and representatives from civilian agencies like the State Department, the U.S. Agency for International Development and the Department of Agriculture. PRTs have the potential to become a model for future stabilization and reconstruction operations. Represen- tatives from more than a dozen countries are now partic- ipating in 22 teams to enhance security, reconstruction, and the reach of the Afghan central government. PRTs have achieved great success in building support for the U.S.-led coalition and respect for the Afghan govern- ment. They have played important roles in everything from election support to school-building to disarmament to mediating factional conflicts. Despite their potential and record of success, howev- er, PRTs always have been a bit of a muddle. Inconsis- tent mission statements, unclear roles and responsibili- ties, ad hoc preparation and, most important, limited resources have confused potential partners and prevent- ed PRTs from having a greater effect. PRTs: All Things to All People? From their earliest incarnation, PRTs had a role in sta- bilization and reconstruction — but what kind of role? The PRTs were originally called Joint Regional Teams. It was President Karzai who asked that they be called PRTs. “Warlords rule regions; governors rule provinces,” he said. Moreover, President Karzai wanted to emphasize the importance of reconstruction for these teams. PRTs were born in an environment of change, so it is not surprising that their mission and structure evolved O PRT S ARE BECOMING A MODEL FOR STABILIZATION AND RECONSTRUCTION MISSIONS . H ERE IS A LOOK AT THEIR EVOLUTION IN A FGHANISTAN . B Y M ICHAEL J. M C N ERNEY