You don’t
have to be a soldier or diplomat to ask whether President Obama’s withdrawal of
our troops from Afghanistan on December 31 is a good idea or not. Consider what
happened when he withdrew our troops from Iraq in 2011. The answer to that is the Islamic
State which filled the vacuum left behind.
On
December 25, Obama addressed troops stationed at Marine Corps Base in Kaneohe
Bay, Hawaii. He told them that their service had given Afghanistan a chance “to
rebuild its own country” whatever that means. Having been invaded over and over
again for centuries, one wonders what country Obama was referring to.
“We are
safer,” said Obama, “It’s not going to be a source of terrorist attacks again.” This is an illusion. Obama cannot make such predictions anymore than the Afghans can. So far, when it comes to foreign policy, Obama has a nearly unbroken record of failure.
Since the
U.S.-led invasion in 2001, Afghan civilian casualties are estimated to have been 10,000 while 2,200
U.S. troops have been killed. The
war is estimated to have cost $1 trillion, plus another $100 billion for
reconstruction.
We have
been in Afghanistan for 13 years and are scheduled to completely leave the
country at the end of 2016 when Obama leaves office. As 2014 comes to a close,
the White House had planned to have 9,800 troops there. Together with Iraq, we
will have 15,000 troops where we have been fighting al Qaeda since 2001. In
Iraq, the war on Islamic terrorism forced the U.S. to return to fight
ISIS. There are about 6,000 other international troops aiding us.
Afghanistan
is likely to be a repeat of what occurred in Iraq. The cruel truth of the world
we share is that the United States must be the planet’s policeman, leading
coalitions of others who join us, or the bad guys who threaten us all will take
over. From the Roman Empire to the British one, this role is a vital one.
Corruption is the Enemy
Afghanistan
has a Taliban problem, but close observers identify its corruption as the main
enemy of progress. You can fight an enemy you can see, but fighting an inbred
cultural problem is a whole other problem.
In April,
testifying before a Senate subcommittee, framing his opening remarks in the
form of a letter to whoever would win the presidency in then forthcoming
elections, retired Gen. John Allen, a former commander of U.S. and NATO forces
in Afghanistan from 2011 to 2013, said that corruption, not the Taliban is the
greater threat. “For too long we focused our attention on the Taliban as the
existential threat to Afghanistan,” but compared to the scope and magnitude of
corruption, “they are an annoyance.”
Gen. Allen
is so highly regarded that he is the President’s “special envoy” to more than 60
nations and groups that have joined a coalition to defeat the Islamic State.
From just one reconnaissance mission per month after our withdrawal from Iraq,
the U.S. now flies 60 per day. That’s what happens when you don’t maintain a
force to defeat an enemy. Referring to the Islamic State Gen. Allen testified
that “We’re not just fighting a force, you know, we’re fighting an idea.”
Gen.
Allen’s view of the issue of corruption in Afghanistan was supported by John
Sopko, the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction who
addressed a gathering at the Middle East Institute in May, saying “corruption
is more serious than the insurgency.” Not only does it waste money, Sopko noted that it prevents helpful
projects from being completed, robs the Afghan people of the resources they
need, and makes them lose faith in their government.
Still
hopeful for change, Afghans went to the polls in September and elected Dr.
Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai, a former finance minister as their new president to
replace Hamid Karzai. He will share power with a former foreign minister,
Abdullah Avbudullah. Typical of Mideast politics, Ghani is an ethnic Pashtun
and Abdullah was backed by Tajiks.
When the
then-Soviet Union decided to invade Afghanistan in 1979 following a Marxist
coup, hundreds of Afghans left the country as refugees. By the time the Soviets
withdrew in 1983, there were 3.2 million refugees, mostly in Pakistan. The
invasion so weakened support within the Soviet Union that it collapsed in 1991.
When
President Bush struck back at al Qaeda after 9/11 he successfully bombed them
out of existence there, but decided to send troops as well. Bush’s goal was to
deprive al Qaeda of a safe base, but also to establish a modern democratic
government there as a model for the Islamic world. He repeated this in Iraq
when he invaded to remove its dictator, Saddam Hussain. A tribal culture, the
Middle East has had difficulties emerging into the
modern world.
Prior to
Obama’s reassurances to the Marines, the White House announced the release of
four more prisoners from Guantanamo. They were repatriated to Afghanistan. If he
continues to empty out Guantanamo, the U.S. will not lack for enemies bent on
revenge.
As for our
troops, they have remained in Afghanistan and Iraq ever since 9/11. Obama may want
to withdraw or at least reduce the number of troops, but recent history
suggests that until ISIS and comparable forces are defeated, future U.S.
Presidents will have to maintain our forces there for many years to come.
© Alan
Caruba, 2014
2 comments:
Possibly in the second paragraph from the end, you meant "four more" instead of "our more"? The article the straight truth beginning to end, and anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.
Very well done....
Thanks, the correction has been made.
Post a Comment