Afghanistan: Does the BSA really matter?

CPO Tim Dickey — Sun, 26 Oct 2014 07:36:58 -0400

Now that the Afghan government has signed the bilateral security agreement that had been proposed for nearly a year, does it really matter? For those of us who served one or more deployments, there is a bitter-sweet overtone to this mostly non-event. For the Afghans involved it means a few more years of boot on the ground, for any ISAF force it means a thinner layer of protection for/by our brothers in arms.

Response by 1SG Steven Stankovich made Oct 26 at 2014 7:41 AM

1SG Steven Stankovich — Sun, 26 Oct 2014 07:41:37 -0400

One of the things that the BSA does is it gives the US the "go-ahead" to continue operations on the ground in theater. On a "bigger scale," it also ensures that NATO will also be around for a while there also. What I mean by that is a lot of NATO nations were waiting to commit to future operations until they saw what the US was going to do. Since the BSA is signed and the US is staying for a little while longer, some NATO members who were on the fence to contribute personnel/resources into next calendar year have now done so.

Response by COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM made Oct 26 at 2014 9:59 AM

COL Jason Smallfield, PMP, CFM, CM — Sun, 26 Oct 2014 09:59:01 -0400

I think the question of whether the BSA really matters is of secondary or even tertiary importance. The primary questions are "what is the US strategic interest and what is the US strategic objective in Afghanistan". Once these questions are properly answered then the question of the BSA can be properly framed and answered. If the interest and objective are properly answered and are important then the BSA is extremely important as an implementing means to help achieve them. If they are not then the BSA is not.