In discussing the planned handover of security responsibilities to the Afghan National Army, Vice President Joe Biden stated:
“Daddy is going to start to take the training wheels off in October — I mean in next July — so you’d better practice riding,” he said of the plan that will be outlined at the NATO summit in Lisbon. Â (ABC News Radio)
The undiluted mix of imperialism and paternalism, while embarrassing from a public relations standpoint, is a good guide to how the US plans to spin the transition.  The US and ISAF will seek to shift responsibility and hence the blame for a precarious and faltering security situation onto the Afghan National Army.  Of course, no amount of paternalism will mask the fact that US and ISAF failed to properly resource and prioritize training a robust ANA and police force until last year.
The current strategy is reliant on a process of accelerated training, in order to swell the ranks.  It is a strategy that clearly emphasizes quantity over quality.  Whether such a strategy will lead to a competent force is highly debatable.  As a CSIS Report on the Afghan National Security Forces recently commented:
“Trying to expand Afghan forces too quickly, creating forces with inadequate force quality, and decoupling Afghan force development from efforts to deal with the broad weakness in Afghan governance and the Afghan justice system will lose the war. America’s politicians, policymakers, and military leaders must accept this reality—and persuade the Afghan government and our allies to act accordingly—or the mission in Afghanistan cannot succeed.”
A rushed transition designed to suit US domestic political priorities and national interests may jeopardize the prospects for a stable Afghanistan.  If the relationship between the US/ISAF and the ANA is that of parent to child as the Vice President asserts, then the parent seems to be guilty of criminal neglect and reckless endangerment.
@Vikash. CSIS, while i respect them, has let me down recently. I dont recognize that quote but i am sure itis Andrew Cordesman-who i quick to criticize ANSF. That's what he does. I have been in ISAF since fall 2009 and i have never seen him here. I am not saying his criticism is wrong, but i am saying he is opinionated and prolific and he has not come talk to us lately.
With respect to Quantity over Quality, you are correct. We deliberately went withthe quantity method.  One of lessons from Iraq (where i have also spent 3 yrs) was the Bremer-dissolution of the Iraqi Sec Forces gave the insurgency a fresh, angry, disenfranchised recruit base. Didnt work out so well. Took 4.5 years to undo.  The quality argument which says “start small, make quality ANSF, grow over time” is, when modeled, the slower way to build the force. First, we allow the INS to foment; second, quality is relative…18 percent of the Afghan pop is literate…and we need some for govt officials, business owners, etc. we are all competing for the same resources. Lastly, as you know war is politics, we would need more patience out of the already impatient capitals. I would love to drink a beer with you and tell you why we went this route.  How would you find quality anyway if not from the ranks? if a guy has leadership, organization, bravery, and is literate…he is going to run his own terror for hire business to whomever is paying best. Just makes sense to ween the top level of the ANSF, groom them and build quality in them, and turn them back to their people to raise the quality. Also, now they ar ein uniform and getting paid and have rsepct, we are developing Quality through partnering and mentoring. Lets face it, it's a fickle macedoine society and they trust their own kind. This again works us out of a job, vice signing up for the whole enchilada.Â
lastly, at Lisbon last weekend, all 48 ISAF nations signed on for “1 in-All in” and “Conditions Based Transition” as well as “NATO has a role post-combat opns” so i fail to see the argument about criinal neglect -using the parental metaphor. (which is not your metaphor to begin with–until you propagate it again, then you own it.) kp     Â