Afghanistan appears to be a gluetrap. You can get in, but you can’t get out. I’ll wait to see what the president announces tonight, but, at best, he’s going to remove the 30,000 troops he inserted in Afghanistan in 2009. And, in doing so, he’s going to get a bunch of headlines and headaches about how he’s not listening to the commanders in the field who, naturally, want as many troops as possible for as long as possible.
Everyone knows that the public wants our troops home and to be done with Bush’s wars. But, it seems we’re incapable of taking that risk. I hope to be pleasantly surprised by the president’s decision, and in our screwed-up Washington, he’s actually going to be bold in bucking the consensus for inertia. In the end, though, we’re not getting out of Afghanistan in his first-term, and unless something dramatic happens, in his second-term either.
I go back to the debate about withdrawing from Iraq circa 2006. The people who insisted that we stay until conditions warranted, that withdrawal would create huge security problems, and that we not telegraph our exit ahead of time, were proven spectacularly wrong. What actually happened was that the promise and reality of our withdrawal, drawing down over time on a pre-determined schedule, served to greatly improve the security and political situation. The Sunni nationalist insurgents ceased to have any reason to ally with the foreign jihadists, the Shiite militias changed over into political movements and laid down their arms, and violence and casualties dropped precipitously. The government became more legitimate in the eyes of the public and the factions, and participation in a political process became distinct from collaborations with the occupiers.
The important part is to adopt withdrawal as a policy in a very public manner, and then actually begin the drawdown in a way that Afghans notice.
I don’t agree with the gluetrap characterization. Quite the opposite, getting out, in a strategic, deliberate manner, is the best tool we have to accomplish our goals.
But you miss what the naysayers were really saying. It was that, if we withdraw soon, we risk not being able to get permanent bases in Iraq from which we can forwardly deploy to Iran, if necessary. Saudi Arabia no longer being welcome to a US base.
And in Afghanistan, the dream of a base at Russia’s, China’s, Pakistan’s, and India’s back door is hard to shake off.
The US still is a Western Hemisphere power, and Atlantic power, a Pacific power, and the naval power. What we aren’t is a Central Asian power or a Middle Eastern power.
On gluetraps: Britain didn’t find it hard to eventually leave Afghanistan; Russia didn’t find it hard to leave Afghanistan. Both left is pretty prompt order after they realized they could not gain their objectives. But the “lesson” of Vietnam that the military says they learned is to stay the course until you achieve victory. Bet the brass have hurt pride over Iraq and Afghanistan. The way World War II ended was the exception to the way most wars end (despite the narratives and spin that historians put on it).
There are those naysayers who raised the point I mentioned sincerely, and others who did so merely as a pretext for the concerns you mentioned.
And some who were concerned both about al Qaeda having a safe haven in Iraq (remember that golden oldie? When John Murtha wanted to “cut and run?”) and about regional power projection.
.
Recent developments may bring wisdom to the President and a decision for complete pull-out by the end of 2013. Caspian Sea oil will find its way to the West …
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."The map doesn’t show an envisioned pipeline to the Iranian port of Chabahar to be a port for the filling of LNG transport ships.
Because the US is backing the pipeline that goes through Taliban territory, that one is not likely to be built anytime soon. There are more promising routes.
The possibility of a pipeline through Afghanistan was always something of an opium pipe dream for the oil and natural gas companies. If that really was the motive for Bush’s full invasion of Afghanistan, he and Cheney are much, much more stupid than we ever thought. Of course, Cheney is the type of guy who draws a pipeline route through the Himalayas and tells his underlings to make it happen.
Who is this “we,” Kimosabe?
the whole Establishment, the media, the president, Dems, Republicans, the intelligence agencies.
So, you’re saying the emperor has no clothes, and thus, is showing no leadership? Let’s just be clear. Thanks.
FWIW, I give Obama lots of points for his handling of our wars and our military:
*He said he’d withdraw troops and end “combat operations” in Iraq by summer 2010 and he did, despite Pentagon opposition;
*He said he’d repeal DADT, gave the Pentagon a year to “study” how to do it, protected their back, then enacted their recommendation;
*He said he’d escalate the war in Afghanistan and he did (I wasn’t happy about it, but he did what he said he would);
*When the Pentagon presented him with “options” for a “surge”, followed by war without end in Afghanistan, he successfully pushed them to develop a plan to speed up the surge, and to publicly state they supported an eventual drawdown (which he appears ready to announce tonight, on schedule, despite Pentagon grumbling);
*He said he’d go after bin Laden wherever he was, and he did, successfully.
Not bad for a Kenyan, socialist, lefty, community organizer.
Yep. He’s negotiated with the normally loose cannon military far better than he has negotiated with Congress. I guess that title Commander-in-Chief helps, and cashiering Gen. McChrystal didn’t hurt his credibility.
This is where Obama cashes in every chit he has with the military. It is also when he calls Hamid Karzai’s bluff or strengthens Karzai’s ability to provide security. It is laying the cards on the table. The schedule that the military said they could deliver slipped from 2012 to 2014 already and that after the surge. He had to drag them into providing an actual strategy instead of BS Powerpoints, and now he is saying that their failure cannot continue while they put out rosy stories of what is happening. If the security unwinds from now until 2014, it will be most likely because we did not get out soon enough.
That’s if he’s finally calling the game instead doubling down for another FU.
I’m ok with leaving Afghanistan, but can we please let Obama finish the job Bush failed to complete. Zawahiri and Mullah Omar are still hiding out in Pakistan. That is why we went to Afghanistan 10 years ago…not to nation build…not to win…not to build an Afghan army…
I’d let Omar pass if we could get Zawahiri.
But these guys might already be from a past age. The Middle East has moved on. Islam has moved on. Without the US to bollocks up things, Pakistan can move on.
Sadly, that wasn’t actually the job Bush started all those years ago. It looked like he was there to do the job, but as it turned out, his war in Afghanistan wasn’t about that.
It’s not a question of staying to finish that job. We can do that job – the actual counter-terrorism job – without the counter-insurgency and nation-building. This was the Biden Plan back in 09, when he was overruled.
The bin Laden raid had nothing to do with the Afghan War.