“Obama Makes Afghanistan the Center of His Strategy”
The Democratic candidate maintains the plans to put an end to the deployment in Iraq.
“I firmly support my plan to put an end to the war in Iraq,” said the Democratic candidate for President of the United States, Barack Obama, yesterday, in order to clear up suspicions about a change in his position and in order to defend a new anti-terrorist strategy, part of which is to recognize that this war was a mistake and which concludes with the need to break from current strategy and center all efforts in Afghanistan and the fight against Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
“The primary front of the war against terror is not and never has been Iraq,” said Obama in Washington in his most important speech to date on themes of security and foreign policy. His plan, if he is elected, is to remove the troops from Iraq and reinforce the military presence in Afghanistan - “that is the war that can be won” – and to increase efforts to slow the growth of Al Qaeda in Pakistan – “we cannot permit Pakistan to be a terrorist sanctuary.”
He promised to proceed with the troop withdrawal in a “step-down, responsible” way, and to heed in all moments the recommendations of the military commanders. “We will be as prudent leaving as we were imprudent in entering,” he repeated. But he insists that this objective can be met in 16 months, even though he left open the possibility that this is not a rigid deadline.
Obama established yesterday new priorities and new ideas in the matter of the United States’ international security. He promised, at that time, “to use all the instruments” at his disposal “to guarantee the security of Americans.” But he drew a new plan.
The Democratic candidate recalled that, after 9/11, the United States “could have been able to unite the world against those that perpetrated the attack.” In place of that, it gained universal hatred for starting a war that “distracts us from the real threats, undermines our prestige, our economy, and our Armed Forces.”
“But there is something more to look at there,” he added. “I want to direct a new strategy that is not solely focused on Iraq and that will help this country to be more secure.” That strategy includes, he explained, the acceptance that “Iraq is not going to be a calm place, nor do we have the infinite resources to make it so.”
Obama praised the work of the head military figure in the Arabic country, General David Petraeus, and the soldiers deployed on that front, but he believes that the advances gained in the last months are not necessary leading to a final victory.
“To which success is John McCain and President Bush referring to in Iraq?” asked Obama. “A ceremonial surrender is not going to produce victory in Iraq. Victory is to be able to transfer power to an Iraqi government responsible for its own security. And that is achievable in time to make a progressive withdrawal.”
The Senator from Illinois added that his plan would maintain “a residual force” in Iraq in order to protect American citizens and teach the Iraqi military. He guaranteed that that will not be an excuse to establish permanent bases in Iraq. And he proposed the creation of an international coalition to contribute to rebuilding that country after the war.
Released from the commitment to the people and economy of Iraq, the United States will be in better condition, according to Obama, to use its Armed Forces and the hundreds of millions of dollars currently being spent in Iraq to defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Yesterday McCain criticized this strategy. “What Senator Obama is saying is that we are not able to win in Afghanistan without losing in Iraq. It is exactly the opposite: it is precisely success in Iraq that will show us the way to triumph in Afghanistan.”
Obama’s speech yesterday gave the Democratic candidate the initiative on an issue with which his rival has more experience and more authority. Obama will be immersed in this terrain in the next few days with a visit, the dates of which have not yet been announced, to the Near East and Europe, with possible stops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama intends to strengthen what has until now been seen as the weak point in his candidacy. He defined his idea of security with a wise combination of strength and dialogue. And he mentioned the issues that, together with the retreat from Iraq and the fight against Al Qaeda, will constitute the priorities of the Administration in this matter: nuclear weapons as protection against threats from terrorists or enemy states, the security of the fuel supply, and the construction of new diplomatic alliances.
“I firmly support my plan to put an end to the war in Iraq,” said the Democratic candidate for President of the United States, Barack Obama, yesterday, in order to clear up suspicions about a change in his position and in order to defend a new anti-terrorist strategy, part of which is to recognize that this war was a mistake and which concludes with the need to break from current strategy and center all efforts in Afghanistan and the fight against Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
“The primary front of the war against terror is not and never has been Iraq,” said Obama in Washington in his most important speech to date on themes of security and foreign policy. His plan, if he is elected, is to remove the troops from Iraq and reinforce the military presence in Afghanistan - “that is the war that can be won” – and to increase efforts to slow the growth of Al Qaeda in Pakistan – “we cannot permit Pakistan to be a terrorist sanctuary.”
He promised to proceed with the troop withdrawal in a “step-down, responsible” way, and to heed in all moments the recommendations of the military commanders. “We will be as prudent leaving as we were imprudent in entering,” he repeated. But he insists that this objective can be met in 16 months, even though he left open the possibility that this is not a rigid deadline.
Obama established yesterday new priorities and new ideas in the matter of the United States’ international security. He promised, at that time, “to use all the instruments” at his disposal “to guarantee the security of Americans.” But he drew a new plan.
The Democratic candidate recalled that, after 9/11, the United States “could have been able to unite the world against those that perpetrated the attack.” In place of that, it gained universal hatred for starting a war that “distracts us from the real threats, undermines our prestige, our economy, and our Armed Forces.”
“But there is something more to look at there,” he added. “I want to direct a new strategy that is not solely focused on Iraq and that will help this country to be more secure.” That strategy includes, he explained, the acceptance that “Iraq is not going to be a calm place, nor do we have the infinite resources to make it so.”
Obama praised the work of the head military figure in the Arabic country, General David Petraeus, and the soldiers deployed on that front, but he believes that the advances gained in the last months are not necessary leading to a final victory.
“To which success is John McCain and President Bush referring to in Iraq?” asked Obama. “A ceremonial surrender is not going to produce victory in Iraq. Victory is to be able to transfer power to an Iraqi government responsible for its own security. And that is achievable in time to make a progressive withdrawal.”
The Senator from Illinois added that his plan would maintain “a residual force” in Iraq in order to protect American citizens and teach the Iraqi military. He guaranteed that that will not be an excuse to establish permanent bases in Iraq. And he proposed the creation of an international coalition to contribute to rebuilding that country after the war.
Released from the commitment to the people and economy of Iraq, the United States will be in better condition, according to Obama, to use its Armed Forces and the hundreds of millions of dollars currently being spent in Iraq to defeat Al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Yesterday McCain criticized this strategy. “What Senator Obama is saying is that we are not able to win in Afghanistan without losing in Iraq. It is exactly the opposite: it is precisely success in Iraq that will show us the way to triumph in Afghanistan.”
Obama’s speech yesterday gave the Democratic candidate the initiative on an issue with which his rival has more experience and more authority. Obama will be immersed in this terrain in the next few days with a visit, the dates of which have not yet been announced, to the Near East and Europe, with possible stops in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama intends to strengthen what has until now been seen as the weak point in his candidacy. He defined his idea of security with a wise combination of strength and dialogue. And he mentioned the issues that, together with the retreat from Iraq and the fight against Al Qaeda, will constitute the priorities of the Administration in this matter: nuclear weapons as protection against threats from terrorists or enemy states, the security of the fuel supply, and the construction of new diplomatic alliances.
Previous article![]( "In United States Campaign, the Latino Vote Does Matter")
