Afghanistan: Barack Obama's War?? Maybe Not Yet

[drbob]

   As President Obama closes down our military commitment in Iraq the focus will turn to the war in Afghanistan.  Afghanistan is the war we really need to win and the only war we should have been fighting all along.  The mountainous area of Afghanistan along its border with Pakistan is the center of international terrorism.  If we are ever going to defeat al Qaeda, that is the place where it will be accomplished.  Osama bin Laden is there along with other top criminal leaders of international terrorism.  So, if we lose the battle to the Taliban it will result in a major shot in the arm for the Pakistani version of the Taliban and international terrorism.  The Pakistani government has been more or less friendly to the United States, but that nuclear armed nation is itself tottering on the brink of tumbling into chaos, as militants and terrorists grow bolder each day.       
   So far what the U.S. has done in Afghanistan is not working.  At present we are just holding our own and, with our best effort, are just able to prop up the Afghan central government which formed after we removed the Taliban.  But according to one-time Secretary of State, now professor Henry Kissinger what we are doing cannot be maintained and will surely fail.  He writes in the Washington Post, "The country is too large, the territory too forbidding, the ethnic composition too varied, the population too heavily armed."  Afghans are fiercely independent and historically have resisted any control from a central government and no foreign power has ever succeeded in holding control over Afghanistan for long.  Ask the Russians, they will tell you how difficult it is.
   What might work, Kissinger writes, is a plan something like what worked in Anbar Province last year.  First, we must make an accommodation with local militia leaders.  Without them on our side, any effort is likely to fail.  Second, our military approach must be agile and flexible enough to stop the development of any Taliban stronghold.  We cannot maintain control over all of Afghanistan, but keeping the terrorists isolated may eventually lead to their defeat.  Finally, Kissinger argues, that we cannot succeed without the cooperation of nations in the area.  We must engage in an all out diplomatic effort to win the support of nations around Afghanistan.  This includes Pakistan, India, China and Russia, all of which have their own problems with international terrorism. 
   Victory in Afghanistan is going to require a long-term commitment on our part and a good deal more troops than the 17,000 reinforcement President Obama has just ordered into Afghanistan.  Without very careful handling Afghanistan is likely to become Barack Obama's war, in the same manner as Iraq became George W. Bush's war.   

[DannyBoy]

Go all in or get all the way out!  Can't have it both ways.....(Iraq).

[drbob]

Hi Danny,

I do agree, but either path is fraught with danger.  All in and you might not succeed.  Afghanistan is a very tough nut to crack.  Again, consider the Russian experience.  Overwhelming force, most modern military technology counted for little.  The Afghans are tough and fiercely independent.  All out and Afghanistan might well be the source of another attack on the U.S.

[Monroe]

Did you write that youself, Bob?  If so, you did a fine job.  I think you are right about Afghanistan and you said it well. 

Technology does make a difference though.  The Afghans were about defeated by the Russians.  The ground to air heat seeking missles made the difference.  The Russians might return the favor.  It can get much uglier in Afghanistan, especially from the point of view of a helicopter pilot.

Obama said during the champain that Bush took his eye off the ball with Iraq; that Afghnaistan was the front againts the terrorists and that he would hunt down Osama B and win in Afghanistan.  It was a champhain ploy by the O but he is stuck with the issue. 

[drbob]

Hello Monroe... Thanks for your comment...

Yes.  I wrote the post myself... As I indicated in the post, I cited some of the ideas Henry Kissinger wrote in his article.  He has a lot better research than I and without doubt knows a great deal more than I do.  So, I used his article to help marshal the facts. 

I agree strongly, President Bush did allow himself to get distracted when he turned from Afghanistan to Iraq.  That was, in my view, a major mistake.  At the time, we had bin Laden cornered and has a good chance of getting him and pretty much smashing al Qaeda.  All that was lost when Bush diverted our emphasis to Iraq. 

Not only did the Iraq war cost us getting al Qaeda, it also caused major diplomatic difficulties in the Middle East.  We lost prestige and the good will with several Middle East nations (including Iran which was then helping us in Afghanistan).  In my view, the invasion of Iraq was one of America's worst foreign policies errors ever. 

[DannyBoy]

So dabble and hope that some military force with diplomatic negotiations will solve everything.  Recipe for 10 years of wasted time, money, and lives.

[drbob]

Hello Danny,  I cannot argue with your point... I'm just hoping that it is not dabbling.  It it is dabbling, then you are correct.  It will be 10 years and the loss of thousands of lives, and billions of dollars... I just do hope that this is not the case. 

[DannyBoy]

me too!

[Exterminator]

It was a champhain ploy by the O but he is stuck with the issue.

That's what happens when you drink too much champagne.