I have mixed feelings about this business in Afghanistan. The good liberals are saying get out. General McChrystle is saying more troops. Our NATO allies are saying McChrystle is right. Joe Biden is saying we ought to focus more on Al-Qaida in both Afghanistan and in Pakistan and forget trying to fix everything in Afghanistan. The President is silent while he considers all the facts. Dick Cheney is against anything that the current administration does, even if it is the same thing his administration did. So what's the solution?
Anyone who was alive on 9/11/2001 knows that Al-Qaida is dangerous and committed to attacking targets in the U.S. and within the borders of our Western European allies. Anyone who was paying attention back then knows that the Afghan government, then run by the Taliban, gave aid and support to Al-Qaida. Well the Taliban government is long gone. Al-Qaida went into hiding and for the most part has been operating out of Pakistan.
It's a given that we shouldn't have gotten involved in Iraq in the first place and the Obama administration seems committed to withdrawing from Iraq, leaving the Iraqi people to iron out their differences or blow each other up or whatever they want to do within the confines of their own borders. The question is, is Afghanistan a threat to the U.S.? Well, only as much as the possibility of the Taliban returning to power there is a possibility. We know what happened last time they took over in Afghanistan.
So is it a possibility? Apparently General Stanley McChrystal thinks so, and he seems to have convinced European Defense Ministers from NATO. He recommends sending more troops to stop the Taliban insurgency in Afghanistan and the Europeans seem to be buying the argument. So are they committed to sending more troops? Are they willing to invest money and lives from their countries to this task? All too often it seems that Europe is willing to support a military action as long as its American money and troops being committed. Want a war in Afghanistan? Well commit your fair share. The whole world is suffering from the current economic malaise, the U.S. included and we have suffered our fair share of loss of lives in this conflict already.
There are those, the President and Vice President of the U.S. included who seem to be advocating a focus on stopping those elements that would pose a terrorist threat to the U.S. (and our allies) and kicking their butts. That would mean turning over the protection of Afghanistan from internal enemies to the Afghan people. Ultimately, that would mean leaving some U.S. troops in Afghanistan for a while until the Afghan government can be trusted to take on its own military actions, but it would mean withdrawal over time, as is happening in Iraq.
The value in this tact is that the U.S. could focus on one thing, stopping the operations of the radical Islamic elements that operate with impunity along the porous border between Afghanistan and Pakistan. And the Europeans need to be more than just cheerleaders for the U.S. NATO is an alliance and an alliance has duties and requirements for all members of that alliance, not just some. When Afghanistan is stabilized, then they could contribute to the effort. Pakistan has already begun some efforts at cleaning up the situation on their side of the border, but a great deal more needs to be done.
Furthermore, radical Islamic militancy does not just threaten the U.S. and Western Europe from this base of operations. Russia and China are both just on the Northern side of the border from Afghanistan. Russia has been making a lot of noise about the heroin epidemic there, and the heroin has its beginnings in the poppy fields of Afghanistan. They are also experiencing small Islamic insurgencies in portions of their country. It is in their interest to get involved. Why aren't there Russians helping out? (Could it have something to do with the previous war they had in Afghanistan in the 1980's when they got their butts kicked?) There are Chinese areas where radical Islamic elements would like to get hold. Where are the Chinese troops to stop the spread of this scourge of the planet?
We all know that Afghanistan is a difficult place to control. The British pacified all of India and at that time India included Pakistan. They were never able to control Afghanistan, however. The Russians set up a puppet Communist government in Afghanistan and could not keep it in power. An Islamic insurgency toppled it. Now the U.S. is mired there. What are our chances of pacifying Afghanistan and controlling the Islamic radicals?
"It takes a village to raise a child," and it takes a planet to stop a radical movement that threatens to destabilize an entire region of that planet, while making life unsafe for anyone different from themselves all over the planet. This is not just a threat to the U.S. It is a threat to every advanced nation of the world. This is not a job for just the U.S. It is a job for all of the advanced nations of the world to share, in order to make this go away. We all have to share in the protection and in the cost of that protection. The U.S., at this juncture, can ill afford to continue throwing money and lives at a problem that belongs to everyone. Not our job, even if there are elements of our society who think it is. Not our job, even if everyone else in the world has become accustomed to the U.S. taking on the lion's share of military responsibilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment