Sign In / Register
Make This My Home Page | Feedback |RSS
You are here: IE »   Story

Surge 2.0

  • Print
  • Mail This Article
  • Comments
  • Add to favorites
  • Later this month, the Obama administration will unveil a new strategy for the war in Afghanistan. This comes as most important indicators in Afghanistan are pointing in the wrong direction. President Obama’s decision last month to deploy an additional 17,000 U.S. troops was an important step in the right direction, but a comprehensive overhaul of our war plan is needed, and quickly.

    As the administration finalises its policy review, we are troubled by calls in some quarters for the president to adopt a “minimalist” approach toward Afghanistan. Supporters of this course caution that the American people are tired of war and that an ambitious, long-term commitment to Afghanistan may be politically unfeasible. They warn that Afghanistan has always been a “graveyard of empires” and has never been governable. Instead, they suggest, we can protect our vital national interests in Afghanistan even while lowering our objectives and accepting more “realistic” goals there — for instance, by scaling back our long-term commitment to helping the Afghan people build a better future in favour of a short-term focus on fighting terrorists.

    Ads by Google

    The political allure of such a reductionist approach is obvious. But it is also dangerously and fundamentally wrong, and the president should unambiguously reject it. Let there be no doubt: The war in Afghanistan can be won. Success — a stable, secure, self-governing Afghanistan that is not a terrorist sanctuary — can be achieved. Just as in Iraq, there is no shortcut to success, no clever “middle way” that allows us to achieve more by doing less. A minimalist approach in Afghanistan is a recipe not for winning smarter but for losing slowly at tremendous cost in American lives, treasure and security. Yes, our vital national interest in Afghanistan is to prevent it from once again becoming a haven for terrorists to plan attacks against America and US allies. But achieving this narrow counterterrorism objective requires us to carry out a far broader set of tasks, the foremost of which are protecting the population, nurturing legitimate and effective governance, and fostering development. In short, we need a comprehensive civil-military counterinsurgency approach backed by greatly increased resources and an unambiguous US political commitment to success in Afghanistan over the long haul.

    ... contd.

    Next123
    Surge 2.0By: Ghulam Muhammed, Mumbai | 21-Mar-2009 Reply | Forward Both McCain and Lieberman are suffering from the same delusion that did Bush in. Bush wrongly surmised that US will be welcomed by Iraqi people as liberators. The parting shoe was the last straw to remind him how welcome US was and is in Iraq. Both McCain/Lieberman feel the people of Afghanistan are so enamored of the US and NATO forces, that they will feel dejected, if US even so much as mention leaving Afghanistan. Far from it! Taliban had brought a rare interlude of peace in Afghanistan. Mullah Omar was even amenable to handing over Osama on condition. A settlement on Taliban terms will save the whole south east Asia, from untold misery of turmoil and tribulations
    Post a Comment
    Name:
    Email:
    Title:
    Maximum characters allowed     
    Comment:
    TERMS OF USE:
    The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
    I agree to the terms of use.