Obama’s Big Gamble

Published in Sin Chew
(Malaysia ) on 4 December 2009
by Zhang Ling Fang (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Ng Ai Fern . Edited by Alex Brewer.
President Obama finally put to rest speculation by announcing on Tuesday the deployment of 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. His biggest challenge was not to explain the necessity of deploying such a large number of troops into Afghanistan, nor to convince the American public to accept the expenditure of $30 billion more for the war, but how to figure out when the war should end.

When Obama announced the new Afghan strategy, he mentioned an 18-month timeline for U.S. disengagement, frightening Afghanistan and Pakistan. Pakistan has always been worried that the U.S. would retract suddenly and leave it to face the Taliban alone.

The dilemma facing the U.S. and its NATO allies is when, exactly, can the troops leave completely.

However, the U.S.’s allies are skeptical about the plan to reform Afghan military in 18 months. The concerns stem from Hamid Karzai’s government and its reputation for being useless and corrupt. The U.S.’s NATO allies are uncertain of what kind of assistance the Afghan army can provide and how the country will turn out politically once the foreign forces leave.

For a Taliban government whose military power is far behind the U.S., UK and other countries present in Afghanistan, time is their weapon. The Taliban are indeed happy now as they are waiting for the foreign troops to leave Afghanistan.

The U.S.’s war in Afghanistan might be another blunder like the Vietnam War and may end up similar to the USSR’s war in Afghanistan. Then again, Afghanistan could fall into another civil war.

Obama put forth a timeline because he is optimistic and overconfident about his new strategy. He has not considered that this indeed affects the other allies psychologically.

For Obama, winner of a Nobel Peace Prize, this not-so-peaceful strategy will turn out to be his biggest political gamble.


章玲芳‧一場政治豪賭
美國總統奧巴馬在週二終於結束外界的種種揣測,宣佈向阿富汗增兵3萬。他的最嚴峻挑戰,不是解釋向阿增派如此大規模部隊的必要性,亦非說服美國民眾要為此戰“赴湯蹈火”墊交的300億美元開支,而是如何知道這場戰爭可以在何時結束。
奧巴馬在宣佈阿富汗新戰略時,提出在18個月開始撤軍的構想,讓阿富汗和巴基斯坦緊張兮兮。巴基斯坦長久以來憂心忡忡,美國會突然撤離,讓該國獨自面對境內的塔勒班勢力。
美國和北約國際部隊參與國一直被拷問的難題,就是甚麼時候,部隊可以從阿富汗“全身而退”。
但是這次美國的盟友對在這短短18個月,讓阿富汗安全部隊改頭換面,讓阿富汗實現穩定感到懷疑,因為美國合作的哈密卡再政府,是一個在國際和國內信譽盡失、軟弱無能的政府。他們在美國的阿富汗戰略上能提供何種程度的幫助,政權移交後的阿富汗,會是怎樣的一個情景,依然令人疑慮重重。
對軍事實力與美英等國際部隊懸殊的塔勒班武裝部隊而言,時間就是他們的武器,此時的塔勒班好戰份子心裡正在竊喜,他們已經在摩拳擦掌,要讓這些外國兵團落荒逃出阿富汗。
美國在阿富汗的戰爭可能會是另一個越戰的泥淖,亦有像1989年前蘇聯軍因無法征服阿富汗的抵抗勢力,倉惶撤出阿富汗。屆時,阿富汗又會陷入新一輪的內戰。
奧巴馬這次祭出這一個撤軍時間表,是對於他的新戰略過於樂觀和過度具信心,但無疑這極不利盟軍的心理戰。
對頂著諾貝爾和平獎光環的奧巴馬,這場“不和平”的戰略,將是他的一場政治豪賭。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Germany: Trump Wants To Shut Down the Free Press for Good*

Germany: Trump Turns the Tables

Singapore: TikTok Deal Would Be a Major Win for Trump, but Not in the Way You Might Expect

Turkey: Market Access Isn’t Success: Trade Deals Won’t Save US Automakers

Topics

Bangladesh: Donald Trump’s 19th Century Nationalism in a 21st Century World

Sri Lanka: Trump’s Nobel Peace Prize Bid Paved with Gaza Corpses

Turkey: Market Access Isn’t Success: Trade Deals Won’t Save US Automakers

Poland: Charlie Kirk’s Death Is a Warning to America

Germany: Trump Wants To Shut Down the Free Press for Good*

Germany: Trump Turns the Tables

Malaysia: A Major Breakthrough of US and EU on Ukraine or Mere Rant? ASEAN Taking Notes

South Korea: Trump Halts Military Aid to Taiwan, and It Concerns Us, Too

Related Articles

Malaysia: A Fresh Look at the US

Malaysia: Does the Fed’s Interest Rate Cut Mean the US Has Lost and China Has Won?

Malaysia: A New Cold War in a Changing World

Malaysia: More Nations Emulating South Africa

Malaysia: Western Double Standards