|
Sunday, November 08, 2009
Obama’s Afghanistan Deliberation: By Lang Sias
|
http://blog.bobbeauprez.com/2009/11/08/obama%E2%80%99s-afghanistan-deliberation-prudence-or-procrastination-by-lang-sias/
By Lang Sias
President Obama has consistently labeled Afghanistan the war
America cannot afford to lose. Last March, he announced a
"stronger, smarter and comprehensive strategy," undertaken after "a
careful policy review," and subsequently hand-picked one of
America's most respected military officers, General Stanley
McChrystal, to lead the effort.
Yet with General McChrystal's report in and the bill for Obama's
"war of necessity" coming due, bold rhetoric is giving way to
equivocation. Increasingly, the President appears to be saving
political capital for domestic priorities at the expense of
national security, and our troops.
The President was clearly entitled to time for careful
deliberation before deploying additional resources. But the glacial
pace of those deliberations, especially for an administration
committed to "the fierce urgency of now" in its domestic agenda,
suggests that prudence is becoming a smokescreen for
procrastination.
We are told that the administration is conducting a
comprehensive review of Afghan strategy. Fine. But this prompts the
question of what sort of analysis was undertaken before the
President's March announcement. Little that has transpired in the
last several months, including the need for additional troops or a
deeply flawed election, can have come as a shock to an
administration that had recently conducted a thorough strategic
review and maintained awareness of the situation on the ground.
We've also heard the suggestion that the small number of al
Qaeda fighters currently in Afghanistan render that theatre less of
a priority. That's difficult to reconcile with the President's
assertion scarcely two months ago that "those who attacked America
on 9/11 are plotting to do so again. If left unchecked, the Taliban
insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda
would plot to kill more Americans."
Most recently, we've been told that the administration wants to
assure that we have a responsible partner in the Afghan government.
Again, a legitimate wish. But no reasonable person expects the
Founding Brothers to appear in Kabul any time soon. And the enemy,
who has a vote, will not provide the luxury of unlimited time.
Ultimately, the President will have to decide whether to provide
enhanced security to a struggling Afghan society with a highly
imperfect government, or bet that a minimal U.S. counter-terrorism
presence will prevent Afghanistan from degenerating back into
chaos.
The President may choose the latter option, but he must explain
how it differs from the Rumsfeld strategy he has criticized, and
why he is rejecting the recommendation of the most experienced
counter-terrorism officer in the United States military.
In any case, a decision must come soon, first, because the
status quo will weaken America. Current troop levels are inadequate
to stop the insurgents, and we know from experience that Taliban
control will render Afghanistan an incubator for anti-American
terror. A vulnerable Afghanistan will also undermine Pakistan's
long overdue offensive in Waziristan, by providing sanctuary to
fleeing insurgents. Finally, an American defeat will embolden our
enemies, improve terrorist recruiting and undermine the confidence
of allies and potential allies.
But perhaps even more important, the status quo is morally
reprehensible. If the President elects to leave our service people
in harm's way without adequate resources, many of them will die or
be wounded without ever having had any possibility of success. Done
knowingly and as a domestic political calculation, this would be
the most cynical abuse imaginable of our brave warriors and their
families.
Mr. President, you know the right way forward. You and other
democrats campaigned on it when it was politically advantageous,
and barely two months ago, you reiterated that "…there will be more
difficult days ahead. The insurgency in Afghanistan didn't just
happen overnight. And we won't defeat it overnight. This will not
be quick. This will not be easy. But we must never forget. This is
not a war of choice. This is a war of necessity…This is fundamental
to the defense of our people."
In the two months since you uttered those words, very little has
changed except for the increasing domestic political cost of
carrying them out. Every day overseas, young sergeants and
lieutenants risk everything making decisions that place America's
interests above their own. Hopefully, your administration will
emulate these selfless Americans when considering next steps in
Afghanistan.
"Lang Sias is a veteran of the First and Second Gulf Wars,
and was an instructor at the Navy Fighter Weapons School (Topgun).
He is currently serving as a Lt. Col. In the Air National Guard. He
was the National Veterans Director for John McCain's 2008
Presidential campaign. He lives in Arvada, Colorado."
|