NY Times Letter, 12/1/2009: A Pathetic Afghan Strategy
Pres. Obama's war speech highlighted two truisms.
First, while it is unwise to fight a war from a political posture, America always does. The world, friends and foes alike, know that we plan our wars around the election cycle. Of course, we will begin a surge just prior to the mid-term election cycle to avoid appearing weak. Of course, we will promise to draw down in 2011 just before we get to the presidential elections. The Taliban have us pegged. All they will have to do is wait - they're not going anywhere - it's where they live.
Second, we always refight the last war. It took us a while to figure out how to win in Iraq, so our military thinks that the same thing will work here. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The Iraqis consisted of three jealous groups, Sunni, Shia, and Kurds - each well defined, each anxious to keep the power they got when Saddam fell (Shia, Kurds) or to keep from being disenfranchised (Sunni). Once we figured that situation out, it was possible to leverage the group-interest.
Afghanistan is so different. They have towns with tribal leaders, war lords running a collection of towns, drug lords providing commerce with the outside world, the Taliban, al Qaida, and a weak central government. And with America running a war on an election cycle, there is no way that we will have the staying power to really find the solution. Once we leave, a vacuum will appear waiting for the next strongman (group, whatever) to fill it.
It would be easy to call the President stupid, but he is merely a creature of our political process. He seems intelligent, but peel away the façade and he is simply the face of a political party. Unfortunately, the rest of us aren't much smarter if we think that this plan is worth much.
First, while it is unwise to fight a war from a political posture, America always does. The world, friends and foes alike, know that we plan our wars around the election cycle. Of course, we will begin a surge just prior to the mid-term election cycle to avoid appearing weak. Of course, we will promise to draw down in 2011 just before we get to the presidential elections. The Taliban have us pegged. All they will have to do is wait - they're not going anywhere - it's where they live.
Second, we always refight the last war. It took us a while to figure out how to win in Iraq, so our military thinks that the same thing will work here. Wrong, wrong, wrong. The Iraqis consisted of three jealous groups, Sunni, Shia, and Kurds - each well defined, each anxious to keep the power they got when Saddam fell (Shia, Kurds) or to keep from being disenfranchised (Sunni). Once we figured that situation out, it was possible to leverage the group-interest.
Afghanistan is so different. They have towns with tribal leaders, war lords running a collection of towns, drug lords providing commerce with the outside world, the Taliban, al Qaida, and a weak central government. And with America running a war on an election cycle, there is no way that we will have the staying power to really find the solution. Once we leave, a vacuum will appear waiting for the next strongman (group, whatever) to fill it.
It would be easy to call the President stupid, but he is merely a creature of our political process. He seems intelligent, but peel away the façade and he is simply the face of a political party. Unfortunately, the rest of us aren't much smarter if we think that this plan is worth much.
posted by Stephen at 3:28 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home