President Obama is entering the final stages of his deliberations of Afghanistan. He's deciding whether to send more troops, or reframe U.S. policy to allow for something less than the counterinsurgency campaign he promised in March. As he ponders, it's hard not to feel a little sympathy for the commander in chief. He and his administration are trying to find a path to victory in a difficult war in Central Asia while at the same time navigating treacherous political terrain at home.
Popular support for the war has fallen rapidly over the last six months—the product, in part, of a near-decade of constant war that has left large portions of the American public drifting toward neo-isolationism. At the same time, the president is coming under pressure from political opponents and concerned moderates who worry Obama's caution is wasting a very short window of opportunity in which the United States can affect the situation in Afghanistan through the application of more resources to both train Afghan security forces and protect population centers targeted by insurgent groups in places like Khost and Kandahar. "Obama is dithering on Afghanistan" was the headline for the normally temperate Financial Times columnist Clive Crook Monday, and my colleague Tom Ricks, an Obama supporter and seasoned observer of military affairs, has expressed similar concern about the administration's decision-making process.
But there are two very good reasons why the Obama administration should take its time on its decision with respect to our Afghanistan policy. There are also reasons why both sides in the current debate should give the White House the time to do so...
More at The Daily Beast.
Comments
The President must make a decision to either concede to Gen McChrystal's request or demand the accomplishment of the mission with the current forces available. Under no circumstances, the President will pull-out the forces out of Afghanistan which are fighting the Global War on Terrorism.
The question then lies on why is the President deliberating and waiting to make a decision? Logically a decision must be made and while the President waits, disastrous events are happening daily in Afghanistan. Perhaps these disastrous events are evidence to justify Gen. McChrystal's request for troops.
Is there a question that increasing the troops level is a complete decision when compare to the original decision that sent troops to Afghanistan. After all, American troops are conducting intensive fighting in Afghanistan and Gen. McChrystals assessment is that without the requested additional troops current American forces are at a marked disadvantage and could potentially lose the war.
The President needs to reevaluate the US Strategic objective in regards to fighting an insurgency in Afghanistan that have the capability of destabilizing the region an successfully creating a cradle for the unrestricted launched of terrorists activities against the US. Therefore, the central justification of using the Afghan Government as the reason for holding out on sending additional troops is only hurting the US and more importantly the task outnumbered US troops. The focus or objective of this campaign is to fight the insurgency (Taliban/Al Qaeda). Whether the government is willing to adjust the corrupt behavior can be dealt with as the operation progress. We cannot afford to abandon the already committed US troops that are in intense need or reinforcements.
This is a war of military necessity in the ground and a war of political necessity in the White House. The political interest is about acceptance and re-election. Asked yourself: Do we have the option to pull-out, abandoned our outnumbered troops? Regardless, the President seen very sincere and committed to the military. We wish the decision is made on grounds of strategic objectives an no political parties interest.