Obama, Leave Afghanistan (You Know You Want To)
Published in Al Ahram
(Egypt) on 15 March 2009
by Salwa Habib (link to original)
If president Obama courageously admitted his country’s potential failure in Afghanistan – the country he described as the central threat in his country’s war on terror – why should he then not declare that he would peacefully withdraw his troops and spare his country another mistake?
Indeed, his calling for talks with the moderate Taliban after the example of the Iraqi “awakening militias” is nothing but a desperate bid to save face - and perhaps a definitive confession of defeat, at least as regarded by the wrongheaded Taliban and Afghani opposition.
Actually, for a while, Obama does not need to consider the gains and losses of the war he just inherited; it is no secret that day after day the situation is deteriorating in that arena. The Taliban is becoming more daring, aggressive and dominant. There is no such thing as a “moderate Taliban,” nor will it give the thumbs up to the American schemes of giving up armed activities in return for forgiveness. Besides, Obama thoroughly realizes both his inability to trust the weak Afghani government and the difficulty of launching a war with Pakistan, which is already on the "hot plate". American and NATO troops in Afghanistan have become exhausted, consumed by anger and pressured by a good-for-nothing mission and contradicting goals. Obama knows very well that his country is losing its military superiority through its “nontraditional wars,” and with a collapsing American economy and the suffering of its people, America cannot sustain any more wars. How can America keep squandering billions of dollars in aimless wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq without an obvious strategy for either escalation or for escaping from such a dark ditch.
All this has certainly raised questions about the sending of 17.000 additional troops as a primary - yet unnecessarily costly - step, while tens of thousands of NATO forces have failed during the past eight years to undermine the Taliban or Al Qaeda. Such an action could thrust the U.S. into a deeper economic and human quagmire.
Maybe this is what drove Obama to reconsider his plans in Afghanistan and search for a new attitude with his European allies. Russia and Iran will hold an international conference on Afghanistan later this month. However, the Taliban’s response to his calling for talks indicates that only the withdraw of foreign troops will be acceptable -as if the problem was their presence, rather than the fact that the Taliban's igniting the wick of that war.
So, go on Obama: take that bold decision to staunch the human and financial bleeding, but leave Afghanistan to its people and just try to protect your country inside its borders.
Indeed, his calling for talks with the moderate Taliban after the example of the Iraqi “awakening militias” is nothing but a desperate bid to save face - and perhaps a definitive confession of defeat, at least as regarded by the wrongheaded Taliban and Afghani opposition.
Actually, for a while, Obama does not need to consider the gains and losses of the war he just inherited; it is no secret that day after day the situation is deteriorating in that arena. The Taliban is becoming more daring, aggressive and dominant. There is no such thing as a “moderate Taliban,” nor will it give the thumbs up to the American schemes of giving up armed activities in return for forgiveness. Besides, Obama thoroughly realizes both his inability to trust the weak Afghani government and the difficulty of launching a war with Pakistan, which is already on the "hot plate". American and NATO troops in Afghanistan have become exhausted, consumed by anger and pressured by a good-for-nothing mission and contradicting goals. Obama knows very well that his country is losing its military superiority through its “nontraditional wars,” and with a collapsing American economy and the suffering of its people, America cannot sustain any more wars. How can America keep squandering billions of dollars in aimless wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq without an obvious strategy for either escalation or for escaping from such a dark ditch.
All this has certainly raised questions about the sending of 17.000 additional troops as a primary - yet unnecessarily costly - step, while tens of thousands of NATO forces have failed during the past eight years to undermine the Taliban or Al Qaeda. Such an action could thrust the U.S. into a deeper economic and human quagmire.
Maybe this is what drove Obama to reconsider his plans in Afghanistan and search for a new attitude with his European allies. Russia and Iran will hold an international conference on Afghanistan later this month. However, the Taliban’s response to his calling for talks indicates that only the withdraw of foreign troops will be acceptable -as if the problem was their presence, rather than the fact that the Taliban's igniting the wick of that war.
So, go on Obama: take that bold decision to staunch the human and financial bleeding, but leave Afghanistan to its people and just try to protect your country inside its borders.