Where is NATO? Posted by Michael Cohen

Over at World Politics Review the "ever astute Judah Grunstein" makes a really important point about an unremarked upon element of the current debate on Afghanistan:

The Obama administration was asking for: more troops from our NATO allies; a crackdown on FATA safe havens from the Pakistani government; less corruption and better governance from the Afghan government; and a willingness to find a political accomodation from "moderate" Taliban.

See a pattern? Straight down the line, from all of the necessary partners on which this effort depends, Obama got nothing . . .

A lot of people, myself included, have been explaining the Obama administration's recent hesitation by pointing to what's changed under the initial strategy's feet: the Afghan presidential election, and an assessment on the ground by Gen. Stanley McChrystal that was even worse than expected.

But it's worth pointing out what hasn't changed as well. The American effort has gotten no additional support from any of our partners. That's not to say we're going it alone, because there are roughly 40K non-U.S. NATO troops in Afghanistan. But if the situation truly demands the kind of force increase being talked about, it would be a much easier political sell if the cost were distributed. And it hasn't been.

So for all the criticism Obama has taken for hesitating in public view like this, there's an audience for this spectacle that has so far gone unremarked. The U.S. is far from the only nation with interests at stake in Afghanistan. And the prospect of America limiting its goals there puts those interests in jeopardy. That seems to me to be a way of saying, Ask not what your global superpower can do for you, but what you can do for your global superpower.

If the answer still comes back, Nothing, that's even more reason to return to basic assumptions. Because even with help, there are no guarantees for success in Afghanistan. But we definitely can't do what the McChrystal report proposes all alone.

This is such a smart point I wish I had made it.  This isn't to say that the US strategy in Afghanistan is wrong (although clearly I think it is) but if you can't get the key allies to get on board - and not just in London, Paris and Berlin, but also Kabul and Islamabad -- then it tends to suggest that there are some divergent interests at play. I mean if you can't even get Karzai to play nice and say, not steal an election; or get the Pakistanis to crack down on Afghan Taliban safe havens, then a reassessment of the strategy is almost certainly in order.

For example, the simple fact that the Bush Administration had a very hard time getting key allies to support the Iraq War should have been a big red flag that the US was going to have to go it alone in Iraq. Now for some Bushies that was a net positive, but I don't the Obama folks share that view - and we now know what a disaster it was to go to war without allied support.

If support from key allies is not forthcoming now it's perhaps the best evidence possible that the US may have to - down the road -- shoulder the mission in Afghanistan alone. And something tells me that's a road the President may not want to go down.

Comments

[Dave Porter]

I agree. To do COIN effectively in Afghanistan will take many more troops, maybe over 500,000. The US could not and should not do this alone for many, many reason. The US should not provide more than half of the total foreign troops there. We also should be asking for new allies to send troops. China, as a regional power with a large army, should be asked first.

If we can't raise enough troops from others, the US should cut back or phase out.

[replica watches]

China, as a regional power with a large army, should be asked first.

[replica rolex]

I agree. To do COIN effectively in Afghanistan will take many more troops,

[muhtar]

Thank you for your sharing.! seslichat seslisohbet

[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!

[r4i gold karten]

Hi,
Since the end of the Cold War, and especially since September 11 2001, the future of NATO has been the subject of intense debate.