Our Public Debate About Afghanistan Posted by Michael Cohen

Andrew Bacevich asks an important question about Afghanistan:

What is it about Afghanistan, possessing next to nothing that the United States requires, that justifies such lavish attention? In Washington, this question goes not only unanswered but unasked. Among Democrats and Republicans alike, with few exceptions, Afghanistan’s importance is simply assumed—much the way fifty years ago otherwise intelligent people simply assumed that the United States had a vital interest in ensuring the survival of South Vietnam. As then, so today, the assumption does not stand up to even casual scrutiny.

Over at Abu Muqawama, Andrew Exum disagrees:

I'm sorry, I like Andrew Bacevich very much, but this is simply and demonstrably false. Plenty of us in Washington have in fact been having a very sober-minded discussion about U.S. interests in Afghanistan and the limits of our new counterinsurgency doctrine. To suggest otherwise reveals ignorance of the discourse here.

While sure some people have had this discussion; but to argue that it's been a key feature of the public discourse on Afghanistan is pretty hard to swallow. And for Andrew to use Stephen Biddle's tortured logic argument for staying in Afghanistan that offers a strawman choice between withdrawal and stay the course is not what I would call a robust debate.

For example, Biddle argues, "The United States has two primary national interests in this conflict: that Afghanistan never again become a haven for terrorism against the United States, and that chaos in Afghanistan not destabilize its neighbors, especially Pakistan. Neither interest can be dismissed, but both have limits as casus belli." To that end, Biddle endorses continuing on the path of a counter-insurgency mission and robust US military involvement.

On the flip side Bacevich argues that while the first part of Biddle's argument is sound, the notion of using the military to stabilize the country is not - because, as he argues, stabilizing Afghanistan is not that terribly important to keeping Americans safe:

"Averting a recurrence of that awful day (September 11th) does not require the semipermanent occupation and pacification of distant countries like Afghanistan. Rather, it requires that the United States erect and maintain robust defenses. Fixing Afghanistan is not only unnecessary, it’s also likely to prove impossible."

 . . . It would be much better to let local authorities do the heavy lifting. Provided appropriate incentives, the tribal chiefs who actually run Afghanistan are best positioned to prevent terrorist networks from establishing a large-scale presence. As a backup, intensive surveillance complemented with precision punitive strikes (assuming we can manage to kill the right people) will suffice to disrupt Al Qaeda’s plans.

Is that not a very different conception of the importance of Afghanistan and its relation to the national interest? And let me ask a question to DA readers, which argument do you hear more often in public debates, Biddle's or Bacevich's? And not only is the debate constricted around the strategy for Afghanistan it is too around the tactics. Exum argues that the debate has "moved on to strategic and operational concerns." Yeah, but only if you think that population centric counter-insurgency is the only way to further US objectives in Afghanistan.

And what's more I'll call your Stephen Biddle and raise you Peter Bergen's recent piece in the Washington Monthly. I like Peter and he is a colleague, but I think it's fair to say that his article focuses far more on the operational side of the Afghanistan war and tends to gloss over the larger strategic issues raised by Bacevich.

It's one thing to focus on cloistered debates among think tank denizens. It's quite another to call that a robust public debate. The level of public debate in Washington about US interests and objectives in Afghanistan has been frightfully constricted. The only discordant voices from political leaders is coming from the left of the Democratic Party, Russ Feingold and his ilk.  When Bacevich says "Among Democrats and Republicans alike, with few exceptions, Afghanistan’s importance is simply assumed" well I'm sorry, but if we're talking the political realm that certainly seems to be the case.

From a media perspective, the WP and NYT are filled with stories about operational elements of our mission in Afghanistan; a lot less on national interests. Indeed, not one reporter even bothered to ask President Obama in his recent press conference a single question about Afghanistan. And as the mission evolves from a counter-terrorism mission (disrupt, defeat and dismantle Al Qaeda) into a full-fledged counter-insurgency (protecting the populace and building Afghan government legitimacy) it's more important than ever that these questions are asked and answered.

I don't always agree with Andrew Bacevich, but he's right to be asking these core questions about US national interests in Afghanistan and he's right to offer military options other than population centric counter-insurgency. Not many other people in this town are.

Comments

[Peace]

I personally believe that some experts such as Biddle and the MSM really do not understand strategy. The MSM is mainly writing short articles that describe military tactics but not strategy because they probably believe that the American people cannot understand strategic concepts. While in the case of Biddle, he seems merely concetrated on the tactical side. In his recent work "Military Power," he concentrates only on tactics. For instance in the book Biddle mentions the tactical success of the Germany army in World War I and II, but fails to mention the flawed strategy that led to German defeat.

[Zathras]

Some might say most of the blame for the lack of a public debate over Afghanistan strategy rests with a certain Presidential candidate in last year's election who spent about two years contrasting the worthy commitment in Afghanistan with the unworthy commitment in Iraq.

Candidates tend to remember their campaign promises once they win, and in this case there are a pair of powerful reinforcing factors. One, obviously, is that al Qaeda made its primary base of operations in Afghanistan prior to 9/11. The argument has been made that it couldn't do that now, or that we could easily stop that from happening, or even that the Afghan sanctuary wasn't essential to the 9/11 operation. Officials in the administration and Congress as well as the mainstream media are not unaware of the argument. They simply don't believe it.

The second factor, equally obvious, is that public and media attention right now is focused on the economy, and on domestic policy debates related to that subject. The great majority of the American public knows no one directly engaged in the Afghan campaign; American casualties are, as yet, light and pictures for the media are few and far between; the issues involved are murky. It goes without saying that no one in Washington has even proposed funding the Afghan operation by raising taxes on anyone. To expect a high-profile public debate on Afghanistan strategy in these circumstances is to hope against all experience.

There is finally the question of what those demanding such a debate expect to come from it. Andrew Bacevich comes down in favor of withdrawing support from Afghans now dependent on us, while still relying on them to facilitate "intensive surveillance and precision punitive strikes" on terrorists. We would no longer protect Afgahn tribal chiefs from the Taliban, but we'd offer to pay them instead. America would withdraw from Afghanistan, but not really, and could always come back in a big way if things got really bad.

I have doubts of my own as to the direction of current American policy in Afghanistan, but if I decided to take Bacevich's side here I'd have real trouble making an argument that anyone I know could understand. The course he's advocating is as clear as mud, and if it's the best the critics of the Obama administration's efforts to make could on their chief's campaign promise have a public debate wouldn't lead anywhere.

[Bart]

Its absurd, as Exum suggests, that there has been anything approaching a serious debate about Afghanistan in Washington DC.

[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!

[cheap coach purses]

Yes, that's cool. The device is amazing! Waiting for your next one!

[r4igold]

Hi,
I also came to know there are sharp internal debates in Afghanistan involving parliamentarians, clerics, bureaucrats, the media and local NGOs concerning the acceptability of a rights agenda that mandates the expansion of women's constitutional, political and civic rights. These internal tensions reflect the power struggles between contending political factions that use women's rights as a litmus test of Islamic legitimacy.

[SesliChat]

Im a peaceable fellow, but Ive been saying for YEARS- its well past time to go to War with Mexico & make them take Texas back.
Thank You. For sesli sohbet seslisohbet Sesli Chat

[sesli sohbet]

Very informative and trustworthy blog. Please keep updating with great posts like this one. I have booked marked your site and am about to email it to a few friends of mine that I know would enjoy reading...

[TıkLa-SohbeT]

SesLiSohbeT siteleri arasında ekol bir adres SesTonum hemen sohbette başlamak icin SesTonum 'tıklayınız..! SesLiSohbeT Ve SesLichaT adreslerinin gözdesi hemen tıklayarak SesLiSohbeT yapmaya başlaya bilirsiniz..!

SesTonum
SesLichaT
SesLiSohbeT

[watches]

It's etched and inked with a very nice rendition of the Blancpain Replica Watches which, as an engineer and pilot myself, has always been one of my favorite planes. The alarm is good, though not as loud as the 80dB Omega. Luminox managed this compromise while still maintaining 100m water resistance, though, which is a good tradeoff and a strong point in their favor.The face and dial are, in contrast to the Raptor just reviewed, quite sparse and understated. Stark white hands, minimal text and graphics, and a reverse LCD display; it all adds up to outstanding legibility. The sapphire crystal minimally domed with an inner camber and inner A/R coating also helps quite a bit. And, of course, at night the tritium tubes rock. Note, however, that the digital portion is not backlit, and therefore not useable in the dark. The Swiss Chanel Ceramic Watch has some really unusual features you might enjoy like the compass, and the "week of year" and tachymeter modes. I like that you can select a display mode that suits you: time, full date (day/date/year/month), seconds only (very clean), time, second or third timezone, alarm or countdown timer. It's an extremely functional Japanese Rolex Replica, and as with the Bedat & CO Replica Watches, the large curved segments are easy to read and use. The buttons and pushbutton crown are well-sized and spaced, and work fine even with gloves on; that's one advantage for the crown design. Case and packaging are quite good; it comes in a very nice travel pack with padding and cleaning cloth that you can actually use as opposed to something you store on a shelf or discard. It also has internal pockets to hold the manual and warranty card another thoughtful touch.The bracelet is good and fully PVD coated, including the inside bits of the clasp. It has snap closure, fliplock, four micro-adjustments, solid links with pins, and solid end links a good match for the Zenith Replica Watches, and with standard lugs on the case so you could try your own strap if you want. I suspect it would work well with a dark leather strap, as well.On the wrist, this is a fun Patek Philippe Replica to wear: substantial, but not massive, uniquely styled, and tremendously legible day or night. The sculpted bezel and profile mean that it's more cuff-friendly than you might expect which is one more thing to like about the design. List price on the Blackbird is $1,500, consistent with Luminox's recent push into higher-end Rolex Ladies Replica Watches. For a Tudor Replica Watches that compares well to the X-33, that seems like a reasonable price, especially given the discounts usually available, and how much easier the Luminox will be to find.If you like analog-digital Piaget Replica Watches as much as I do, this one is a clear winner: more waterproof than the X-33, tritium illumination, good alarm, tons of functions, cool inner bezel, cuff-friendly profile, and a clean, understated dial.Our thanks to Luminox USA for the review loan.By Paul Hubbard; For updates on content, follow Franck Muller Replica Report on Twitter.

[FFXIV Gil]

Are you fighting in Final Fantasy XIV for FFXIV Gil or Final Fantasy XIV Gil?
Can you suffer yourself being called newbie in FFXIV Gil game?
Are you seeking unofficial Buy FFXIV Gil cheats or Final Fantasy XIV guides in order to make Final Fantasy XIV Gil faster?
Can you get millions of Cheap FFXIV Gil in one day?
Even if you know how to farm Buy Final Fantasy XIV Gil you have to prepare enough Final Fantasy XIV Power Leveling first to buy height class Final Fantasy XIV Items, to upgrade your Final Fantasy XIV characters.
Buy aika gold
Then why not Buy FFXIV Gil from us?
In Final Fantasy XIV it's the fastest way FF14 Gil,for you to get rich. We are online 24 hours a day ready and 7 days one week to power up your FFXIV Gil accounts with FFXIV Gil. Here is the best place for the Final Fantasy XIV Online players to buy your Final Fantasy XIV Gil.
We are the professional website in FFXIV GIL sale.FFXIV GIL here,We are professional FFXIV Power Leveling online. We update price every single day to make sure we are the lowest in the market.(we don't compare price with scam sites which uses unbelievable low price to deceive.)
Our slogan:Cheapest price, Fastest delivery, Best service!

Cheap aika gold
In the 2 years we are in this field , AIKA Goldbuilt many business with tens of thousands of customers. They are very satisfied with our service.So if you want to get a log of Cheap FFXIV Gil ,no doubt ,come to our website to buy. Our customer service is ready for you on line now!(GM MMO)

[cheap air yeezy]

You are quite right, I support your article, and his clear and logical thinking so, I really like, I hope you have a good time.

[cheap jordans]

In your blog I feel your enthusiasm for life.It is nice!thank you.

[explosion proof light]

We are committed to developing environmentally friendly and energy-saving explosion-proof light, led flashlight, led mining light,spotlight and light towers use of new technologies and materials.

[Sohbet Arkadaslik]

our nice public dabte..

[knockoff handbags]

i am glad to study your opinion. m41414 Keepall 55, m41416 Keepall 50, m41522 Speedy 40, m41528 Speedy 25, 219704, m40249 artsy mm, m40259 artsy gm, M45257 Messenger Bag, M40156 Neverfull MM, m40144 Tivoli GM

[seks shop]

You are quite right, I support your article, and his clear and logical thinking so, I really like, I hope you have a good time.

[replica jewelry]

This is a wonderful site! I’ve been looking for something like this
for a while now! Thank you!