Despite questions over U.S.-Afghan pact, Stanford professor remains optimistic

Erik Jensen argues that staying the course will have positive outcomes for generations of Afghans to come.

President Barack Obama’s trip to Afghanistan this week to sign the Strategic Partnership Agreement reaffirmed America’s commitment to secure and rebuild the country beyond the 2014 troop withdrawal. The stakes are high as the United States embarks on an ambitious and expensive 10-year plan that the American public may be reluctant to support after a decade of war. But Stanford law Professor Erik Jensen argues that staying the course will have positive outcomes for generations of Afghans to come.

Jensen just returned from Afghanistan where, he says, the streets of Kabul are bustling with life, business and a renewed sense of pride. Working on rule-of-law issues in Afghanistan since the fall of the Taliban in the mid-1990s, Jensen sees these small changes as signs of progress in a country that has experienced decades of conflict.

Jensen, an affiliated faculty member at the Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law at Stanford’s Freeman Spogli Institute, has piloted a program to train Afghan lawyers at the American University of Afghanistan. The project has gained the trust of Afghanistan’s political, judicial and law enforcement officials, and is a model for innovation in legal education.

Jensen discusses U.S. relations with Afghanistan and the legal education project that has required an adjustment of his own career.

Why is the Strategic Partnership Agreement important?

It is a framework for President Obama to ensure Afghans that America will not pull out lock, stock and barrel in 2014. Afghans are palpably apprehensive about the pullout in 2014. President Obama’s trip to Afghanistan to sign this strategic partnership in the presence of President Karzai is a very important signal to Afghans that there is a future to the relationship beyond 2014.




What will happen under the agreement?

What is anticipated is a drastic drawdown on troops and security contractors, but not a pullout. The budget is estimated at $4 billion per year, which might sound like a lot. But the budget currently tops $100 billion. Drastic reductions in funding create opportunities for institutional change. There have been comparisons to the American presence on the Korean Peninsula, which is not inexpensive but you can see a security benefit with relatively modest amounts of money.




How is Afghanistan becoming a stronger, more stable country?

Despite negative publicity that Afghanistan has attracted in the international press, I have seen qualified teachers showing up to teach students who are hungry to learn. On my most recent trip, I drove through Massoud Circle in the heart of Kabul and people handed out photos of fallen Afghan soldiers who had stood up and defended their country against a recent insurgent attack. There was a sense of pride among Afghans. Afghan security forces have been in charge of security in Kabul for several years, and I think this is a really modest but positive sign.

There are a number of Afghans who have put their backs into building democratic institutions. It hasn’t all gone that well but they remain committed. The American public owes it to itself and the Afghan people to imagine alternatives and to work hand-in-hand with Afghans to ensure that systems are in place to give Afghans a chance.