In Afghanistan, America is Faced With a Difficult Choice
Published in The People's Daily
(China) on 12 October 2009
by Wen Xian (link to original)
According to American media reports, the U.S. military’s highest commanding officer stationed in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, recently delivered a request to the White House to deploy at least 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan. The U.S. has been embroiled in this war for eight years, and now the focus is on whether or not they should continue to send more troops. It seems that, despite Obama’s new strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, the war has entered a phase of serious consequences no matter what happens.
On March 27, Obama announced the new strategy, saying, “I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.” This incorporates ideas about how “the future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan,” that “America must no longer deny resources to Afghanistan because of the war in Iraq,” and that “a campaign against extremism will not succeed with bullets and bombs alone.” However, half a year has past and this strategy has not only been unable to produce immediate results, but the situation in Afghanistan is becoming even more dire.
In reality, after eight years of war, America is increasingly recognizing the inherent complexity of the situation in Afghanistan. Not long ago, General McChrystal expressed skepticism about the probability of success with the new strategy. He said that if Afghanistan had ten Taliban fighters and two were killed, it might give rise to twenty because the relatives of the fighters would seek revenge. After recognizing how complex the Afghan problem is, McChrystal said America needs to have a more humble attitude. The change in attitude of high ranking American military officials is thought provoking.
With America still trying to get out of an economic slump, a military offensive in Afghanistan does not seem like a good idea. There will be more injuries and deaths, a loss in military morale and the war will be prolonged even more, with no real prospect of success. In the U.S., anti-war sentiment, media commentary on the potential end of the American Empire and strong Republican criticism of the President are increasing every day. Add the Afghan presidential election fraud to all of this, along with questions about the the Afghan government’s legitimacy and America’s ability to cooperate with this government, and you can see the challenges that lie ahead. McChrystal and others who advocate the troop surge have brought an internal rift between the military and the U.S. government to light. Essentially, this embodies the debate that exists within American society itself about how to move forward in Afghanistan.
The war in Afghanistan has become a huge political test for the new administration. Only one third of the American public supports a troop surge in Afghanistan, but this is exactly what McChrystal and other high ranking military officials are pushing for. Indeed, the U.S. government is now faced with a very difficult choice.
On March 27, Obama announced the new strategy, saying, “I want the American people to understand that we have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.” This incorporates ideas about how “the future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan,” that “America must no longer deny resources to Afghanistan because of the war in Iraq,” and that “a campaign against extremism will not succeed with bullets and bombs alone.” However, half a year has past and this strategy has not only been unable to produce immediate results, but the situation in Afghanistan is becoming even more dire.
In reality, after eight years of war, America is increasingly recognizing the inherent complexity of the situation in Afghanistan. Not long ago, General McChrystal expressed skepticism about the probability of success with the new strategy. He said that if Afghanistan had ten Taliban fighters and two were killed, it might give rise to twenty because the relatives of the fighters would seek revenge. After recognizing how complex the Afghan problem is, McChrystal said America needs to have a more humble attitude. The change in attitude of high ranking American military officials is thought provoking.
With America still trying to get out of an economic slump, a military offensive in Afghanistan does not seem like a good idea. There will be more injuries and deaths, a loss in military morale and the war will be prolonged even more, with no real prospect of success. In the U.S., anti-war sentiment, media commentary on the potential end of the American Empire and strong Republican criticism of the President are increasing every day. Add the Afghan presidential election fraud to all of this, along with questions about the the Afghan government’s legitimacy and America’s ability to cooperate with this government, and you can see the challenges that lie ahead. McChrystal and others who advocate the troop surge have brought an internal rift between the military and the U.S. government to light. Essentially, this embodies the debate that exists within American society itself about how to move forward in Afghanistan.
The war in Afghanistan has become a huge political test for the new administration. Only one third of the American public supports a troop surge in Afghanistan, but this is exactly what McChrystal and other high ranking military officials are pushing for. Indeed, the U.S. government is now faced with a very difficult choice.
Next article![]( "No We Can’t")
