Commitment Issues Cont'd

The chatter about leaving Iraq and Afghanistan is constant now. I hear it on all the TV news channels, on the radio (yes, even non-NPR stations), and now on the street, too. I just. Don't. Get it.

Look. The debate isn't about which of these wars is "the good war" or "the right war." Those are misleading terms, anyway. The debate should be about how we change what we're doing in both countries to better fit our needs and the needs of these occupied countries. Inevitably, this leads us to the biggest problem we face: the goals we have are still too ambiguous to be helpful. Whether or not we have a moral responsibility to help build these countries up to a point that they remain stable and protect their people should not even be up for discussion. We do bear that burden, and I fear we are on the verge of leaving without fulfilling our obligations.

Before I go any further, let me point out that I am in no way condoning "endless war." That buzz term annoys me, but it's something I'll take flak for if I don't address it. I don't believe that our missions in Afghanistan or Iraq will take decades. Those who tout this argument seem to forget that America waged an almost 50-year long Cold War against another superpower and fought dozens of proxy wars and skirmishes while maintaining overall support from the American public. So let's be clear: the lack of objectives in Afghanistan and the lack of political stability in Iraq are the dominant obstacles to the success of both missions, but they are not the determining factor in whether or not we should stay.

I am in no way trying to trivialize the fact that American blood and treasure will be spent reaching these goals. I have friends in all branches of the military, and many of them are deployed overseas. I would love for the wars to be over tomorrow. However, we're engaged in a war against an enemy that feeds on poverty and misinformation (read: a lack of education), both of which exist on incredible scales in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's simply a fact of life that to help fix these issues, troops need to be there providing security.

Not surprisingly, a recent poll from NBC and the Wall Street Journal proves my point about American opinion on the wars we're mired in. Here's the good stuff:

(Click image for larger version)

Americans want to see a clear victory built on increasing reliance on the governments and armed forces of the countries we invaded. They don't know much else about what they want, but a victory is a must.

It's now up to the Obama administration to take in all the advice it can and make a decision. Time is of the essence, but I think the folks in charge understand that it's more important to make the right choices than to hurry up about making a decision at all. On the other hand, it would seem that we've already got our wires crossed. Fantastic.

Commitment Issues

I wonder what changed in the last several months, aside from Obama's inauguration, that suddenly has everyone declaring Afghanistan unworthy of our nation's time and effort. American support for the Iraq War has decreased significantly since mid-2003, but our involvement in Afghanistan has always been more popular (though not always more important).

Doing only a quick look at Gallup poll numbers, it seems to me that the war in Afghanistan is suffering less from a lack of coherent strategy than from general war fatigue.

The fact that Afghans hope we continue to work with them should not be taken lightly, and I think we have an overwhelming moral obligation to stay in both Iraq and Afghanistan until the job is done. I'll outline what that means to me another day... that post definitely requires more research and time.

Afghanistan's New Problems

Commentators have become increasingly aware (and adamant!) that the Afghan portion of the War on Terror now belongs solely to Barack Obama. Since he took office, the president has made a point to emphasize a dedication to the debatable success in Iraq in conjunction with an increased troop presence and focus on Afghanistan. I'll try to steer away from the temptation of discussing or blaming the Bush administration too much in this post, but no discussion of the current situation in Afghanistan would be appropriate with some context. To that end, it must be said that America's practical abandonment of the nation nicknamed "the graveyard of empires" between 2003 and 2007, and the consequential sacrifice of Pakistani security and stability has done incalculable damage to the prospects of Afghan unification and stability. If President George W. Bush's legacy in Afghanistan is one of underserved ideals and dysfunction, then how has President Obama begun to craft a new phase in the lives of the Afghan people? The answer has three parts: he has studied the situations in Afghanistan and Pakistan, he has begun a troop surge of his own, and he has begun to replace many of the people in roles of leading the effort in Afghanistan under President Bush.

An extensive review of American policies in Afghanistan and Pakistan was a brilliant political, but also necessary, maneuver that gave Obama room to nudge the War on Terror in a new direction without saying outright that the Bush administration completely mishandled its mission there. Perhaps not coincidentally, that sentiment, at least in public, has been saved for commentary on Iraq, allowing Obama to keep such a politicall damaging situation at arm's length. Continuously referencing Iraq in conjunction with President Bush also indicates where Obama's focus lies: for better or worse, this president considers Iraq a mostly finished job, and has chosen to focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan. While the study is not complete and thus not allowed Obama's team to put forth a complete outline of how America's role in the region will change, the administration has begun to reform policy gradually as conclusions are reached.

One of the earliest and easiest steps taken to show Obama's dedication to the Afghan situation was to request the resignation of General David McKiernan, who oversaw operations in Afghanistan under President Bush. Chronic lack of resources, civilian casualties, and a relatively static position in the major cities of the country characterized much of McKiernan's time in Afghanistan, though it's not clear how much of that was being steered by Iraq-centric policies. Regardless, the strategy that has brough much of the success in Iraq - clearing an area of insurgents, staying in that area, and building relationships with the locals - has been underemployed in Afghanistan, and constant air strikes by jets and drones have soured the Afghan population's feelings about the foreign troop presence. The appointment of General Stanley A. McChrystal as the leader of operations in Afghanistan indicates the beginning of a significant shift in the momentum of the situation there.

Lastly, and perhaps most significantly, Obama has begun a troop surge of his own. This will most likely mean that many veterans of the Iraq war are redeployed to Afghanistan, but since the Iraqi government has made no overtures regarding an extension of the U.S. presence there, it means that we are genuinely free to redploy and refocus our troops and efforts where they are needed most. The new offensive against Taliban and Al-Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan is incredibly important, and, like Iraq for President Bush, may ultimately determine how his presidency is remembered.

So far, President Obama has shown an incredible aptitude for adapting his policies and goals to fit any situation. His efforts in the War on Terrorism have so far shown us a man who reads and re-reads everything there is to know about an issue and then asks for more information before finally making a decision. Obama understands that the futures of Afghanistan and Pakistan are inseperable and that he must pursue security and stability in both nations if he expects to make real progress against those who would perpetuate global violence against innocents. We can only hope that the American people do not tire further of war, because without a dedication to seeing the mission in Afghanistan to a positive conclusion, we cannot hope to avoid opening another front in the name of ending the threat of terrorism.