Afghanistan for the Long Haul
To call the war in Afghanistan a new Vietnam is excessive if we stick to the number of victims among Western troops. More than 1,500 have died in the foothills of the Hindu Kush, whereas 58,000 American soldiers perished in Southeast Asia’s rice fields.
One wonders, nonetheless, how Barack Obama and his allies are going to be able to pull out of this conflict, which presents a new batch of alarming news each day. Since 2001, when the offensive began — nine years already! — it’s been repeated over and over that the only solution can be a political one. Of course, but with whom to negotiate? Afghanistan isn’t Iraq; they don’t have the same culture of governance. Some even say that Afghanistan isn’t a country in the typical sense of the word. The distinction between the “good” and the “bad” Taliban is a difficult one to impose when the selection is made by a foreign power that is seen as an unwelcome occupier. To count on the weak and corrupt government of Hamid Karzai is equally impossible.
Seen in this light, the international conference on Afghanistan held on January 28th in London won’t be able to avoid the military solution. Barack Obama, who has announced the deployment of 30,000 more Americans, will ask for reinforcements from other countries in the coalition: approximately 10,000 soldiers, which will bring the number of troops fighting the Taliban from 120,000 to 150,000. The public, particularly in France, is understanding this sacrifice less and less. The “point” of this war — the fight against Islamist terrorism — seems empty, as the attacks, committed or attempted, continue. The perpetrators recruit all over the world. After Afghanistan, should Yemen be next for intervention?
The American president won’t find an honorable exit strategy alone, in a country both the British and the Soviets ended up having to leave, tails between their legs. He needs help, and the Europeans can’t back out, because the balance of international power depends on this. But how? The strategy of land-based counter-insurrection, which has replaced air bombardment and is favored by the White House, will prove its worth again. Nobody dares say it, but it is doubtless that even more troops are needed. All said, the date set by Obama for the beginning of the pullout — 2011 — seems illusory, except as something to give up on.
One wonders, nonetheless, how Barack Obama and his allies are going to be able to pull out of this conflict, which presents a new batch of alarming news each day. Since 2001, when the offensive began — nine years already! — it’s been repeated over and over that the only solution can be a political one. Of course, but with whom to negotiate? Afghanistan isn’t Iraq; they don’t have the same culture of governance. Some even say that Afghanistan isn’t a country in the typical sense of the word. The distinction between the “good” and the “bad” Taliban is a difficult one to impose when the selection is made by a foreign power that is seen as an unwelcome occupier. To count on the weak and corrupt government of Hamid Karzai is equally impossible.
Seen in this light, the international conference on Afghanistan held on January 28th in London won’t be able to avoid the military solution. Barack Obama, who has announced the deployment of 30,000 more Americans, will ask for reinforcements from other countries in the coalition: approximately 10,000 soldiers, which will bring the number of troops fighting the Taliban from 120,000 to 150,000. The public, particularly in France, is understanding this sacrifice less and less. The “point” of this war — the fight against Islamist terrorism — seems empty, as the attacks, committed or attempted, continue. The perpetrators recruit all over the world. After Afghanistan, should Yemen be next for intervention?
The American president won’t find an honorable exit strategy alone, in a country both the British and the Soviets ended up having to leave, tails between their legs. He needs help, and the Europeans can’t back out, because the balance of international power depends on this. But how? The strategy of land-based counter-insurrection, which has replaced air bombardment and is favored by the White House, will prove its worth again. Nobody dares say it, but it is doubtless that even more troops are needed. All said, the date set by Obama for the beginning of the pullout — 2011 — seems illusory, except as something to give up on.