Let's Be Honest About Afghanistan Posted by Michael Cohen

So I've been following the intra-blog debate between Pat and Ilan with some interest and allow me to offer my two cents here.

Pat is right to dismiss both the all-in and minimalist approach. While Ilan is correct that they hold some currency in political circles neither has any chance of being implemented by the Obama Administration. After claiming during the campaign that Afghanistan was the central front in the war on terror - and declaring as President that we are losing the Afghan war -- there was simply zero chance that Obama would adopt a minimalist approach. Politically, he can't do it.

As for the maximalist approach, this is, frankly political background noise. The Obama Administration, from what I can tell, has zero interest in nation building in Afghanistan or maintaining a long-term miitary commitment - and even if they wanted to the constraints on the military probably make it impossible. The relevance of this approach is only as a talking point to be used by Republicans (and Joe Lieberman) to attack the Administration. This is not to mention the fact that I would imagine there is very little domestic support for such an approach.

So basically the Obama Adminstration, for strategic and political reasons, was always going to seek out some sort of middle ground. This was never truly a debate between three possible options; it was more of a Goldilocks debate - how we avoid getting into too deep, but how to we ensure we don't too little.

I'm hardly surprised that those arguing for a focus on counter-terrorism versus the COIN-dinistas have won the internal White House debate. I supposed what I'm more surprised by is that this was a serious debate. Let's face it, Barack Obama has big plans, both domestically and internationally. The last thing he wants to do is find himself mired in a guerrila war in Afghanistan, particularly when the adoption of a COIN strategy means more money, more soldiers and no definite chance of achieving a positive result.

The plan as I understand it basically involves building up the Afghan security services, using the US military to go after remnants of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan engaging Afghanistan's neighbors and strengthening Kabul's governing institutions (as much as that is possible). This is not a plan for turning Afghanistan into a Jeffersonian democracy or even a sustainable political entity - this is a plan for declaring victory in 18-24 months and going home. 

Perhaps if this strategic review had occurred 7 years ago there might be a different end result for the Afghan people. But tragically that didn't happen and instead the Obama Administration is left to pick up the pieces of a failed policy and a failed state. And thus the Goldilocks plan we will see unveiled tomorrow.

Comments

[spockamok]

"this is a plan for declaring victory in 18-24 months and going home."

Whoa- think he's really thinking of pullin it off that fast? It's only a little behind the Iraq withdrawal plan and that isn't even counting the "residual" presence.

[Kooba Handbags]

Whoa- think he's really thinking of pullin it off that fast? It's only a little behind the Iraq withdrawal plan and that isn't even counting the "residual" presence.

[fake Tiffany Bangle]

If you have a TypeKey or TypePad account, please Sign In

You are currently signed in as (nobody). Sign Out

[fake Gucci Jewelry]

fake Gucci Jewelry

[cheap coach handbags]

Thank you for your sharing! I like i very much!

[cheap coach bags]

Great comments! You are so nice, man! You never know how much i like'em!

[ds r4]

The Obama administration is taking the same approach to the policies of the Bush administration as it has in so many other areas: there are differences, but they're mainly matters of subtle emphasis and focus