What’s the Rush?
Critics who accuse President Barack Obama of “dithering” over a decision as to what to do about the war in Afghanistan should consider where the lack of deliberation has gotten us so far. The plain fact is that we have plunged ahead with too little consideration for strategy and he is wise to take enough time to get it right.
But what is the right course? America seems to be in a quandary over a war that has dragged on for eight years. Possibilities range from sending in the additional 40,000 or so troops that Gen. Stanley McChrystal has requested; holding the level at the 68,000 who are already there and are slated to go by the end of this year; or taking the advice that Vermont Sen. George Aiken gave at the height of the Vietnam War: Declare victory and bring the troops home.
All three have their downsides. Gen. McChrystal’s plan calls, at best, for a long slog of many years in an effort to defeat the Taliban, which was overthrown in the 2001 invasion but now increasingly controls much of the Afghan countryside. President Hamid Karzai is a weak reed to rely on as he heads into a second five-year term after a crooked election and a called-off runoff when his opponent quit. To many Afghans, the United States would be running a foreign occupation.
Holding the U.S. force at its present level would mean reduced hopes of pacifying the country and increasing reliance on the secret CIA campaign of sending unmanned drone planes to kill suspected Taliban and al-Qaida leaders. Vice President Joe Biden and others claim some successes for the drones, but the inevitable slaughter of civilians builds popular resentment and works as a recruiting tool for the Taliban.
The Aitken gambit would leave al-Qaida a free hand to once again use Afghanistan as its base for worldwide terrorist attacks. It also would open the Obama administration to charges that it was wimpy and defeatist.
President Obama has apparently ruled out this Aiken course. He reportedly told congressional leaders from both parties last month that he would not substantially reduce American forces or shift the mission to just hunting terrorists.
Yet, the situation keeps changing. A letter of resignation from Matthew Hoh, a former Marine and then a State Department administrator in Afghanistan, persuaded some that the war is hopeless. The New York Times reported that President Karzai’s brother was on the CIA’s payroll. And 1960s transcripts surfaced showing how Soviet leaders dithered over how to get their 110,000 soldiers out of their seven-year occupation of Afghanistan. It went on another two years before they finally quit.
Actually, the current drawdown in Iraq looks like a slow-motion Aiken solution. That may be what President Obama ultimately has in mind for Afghanistan. He certainly doesn’t want to preside over a third unwinnable war. He is wise to take his time on a fateful decision.
















