The Afghanistan problem gets more difficult - by Jay Book
From the beginning eight years ago, the United States has failed to commit the resources and attention needed in Afghanistan. Barack Obama campaigned on correcting that problem and moved last spring to do so as president. Now he is once again being asked by military commanders to boost the number of U.S. troops committed to the effort.
So, in assessing the request for more troops, the most important question President Obama must ask of his commanders and advisers is this: How can the United States and its international allies succeed without a credible, legitimate Afghan government as a partner? How can we rally Afghan support for a government that does not deserve and doesn’t really even try to earn that support? The counter-insurgency approach drafted by Gen. David Petraeus and now being implemented in Afghanistan suggests that without a host government with some degree of credibility and legitimacy, such a war cannot be won. In the unclassified version of his assessment, McChrystal acknowledges that the Afghan war is a war of ideas and perception, and “The key to changing perceptions lies in changing underlying truths.”
Note EU-Digest: A less costly alternative in lives and materials would be to pull out of Afghanistan all together and rely heavily on aerial surveillance and unmanned attack drones to smoke out the Taliban and some special forces (stationed near the Afghan border)for mop up operations. Unfortunately unmanned attack drones could also mean more innocent local casualties, but at the same time these casualties would also create a threat to Taliban credibility and authority within the local Afghan communities. The sad fact today remains that a ground war with or without an unreliable Afghan government as a partner can never be won, whatever the military is saying. Just ask the Russians.
No comments:
Post a Comment