From Afghanistan, Bad News for Obama

Without doubt, Barack Obama is greatly worried as he looks through reports from Afghanistan, which reveal a significant increase in human and material losses. Recent days have witnessed the downing of four NATO planes and the admission by military leaders in Afghanistan of the killing of 50 soldiers in the month of June, most of them American and British. This is the highest number of losses since the beginning of the war, approximately eight years ago.

As for the current month of July, the number of dead American soldiers alone is 30.

U.S. officials try to minimize the importance of these figures. At one moment they claim that the planes are downed by technical faults, disemphasizing the possibility of any involvement on the part of Taliban resistance. At another, they speak of large victories through sweeping offensives waged by NATO to put an end to the Taliban in Helmand province, the Taliban’s primary land base.

Specialists in Western governments excel in mimicking such deliberately deceptive tactics, which manifest themselves most clearly as these governments strangle the truth and obfuscate bad news emerging from the region. This tactic was not successful in Iraq and is not expected to succeed in Afghanistan. In Britain, which has thus far lost 184 soldiers in bloody confrontations with the Taliban, the press has begun to scathingly criticize Gordon Brown’s Labor government, demanding that British troops withdraw to stem the bloodletting, because this war cannot be won.

Perhaps the biggest blow to Obama is the change in American public opinion toward the war in Afghanistan, since he had bet on victory there by placing it at the top of his leadership priorities. It appears that this bet is in fact closer to being lost than being won.

The number of NATO alliance troops on the Afghan ground does not exceed 70,000, and half of them are American. Leaders of the various American and British units on the ground complain of a lack of equipment supplies. But the issue is not about the number of troops or their readiness, but of the viciousness of their foe, the ruggedness of the terrain and the absence of a desire among NATO soldiers to fight to the death, as is the case among Taliban fighters.

The former Soviet Union sent 115,000 soldiers to Afghanistan to support the communist Kabul regime and fight the jihadist rebellion in order to maintain power. But this huge number failed to accomplish the mission, forcing the Soviet political leadership to change its once obstinate course, admit defeat and begin withdrawal.

NATO forces will meet the same fate. Advances in the Helmand province do not mean victory but rather falling into the Taliban’s trap, since rebel forces are not regular and can thus withdraw from direct confrontation with tanks protected by planes from the air, only to return and redeem themselves with an attack when those same forces pause in their tracks, leaving big losses in their wake.

The U.S. military leadership in Afghanistan is in a state of confusion caused by its increasing realization that it cannot win this war. This explains its wild and arbitrary attacks, whether within Afghanistan or along the tribal borders with Pakistan. Attacks like these are causing huge casualties among civilians while failing to hit their real targets, or are bombing civilian areas rather than Taliban ones, based on false strategic information. In both cases, the result is disastrous for the American military leadership, and repeated apologies count for nothing.

The coming days could in fact prove worse, as far as losses in NATO ranks are concerned. This will only increase criticism on the part of politicians and media men against this war as well as the clamor for withdrawal. For this reason, the bad news for Obama will get even worse, and have a negative effect on his already-waning popularity.