America's Nation-Building at Gunpoint - Los Angeles Times Op-Ed by Gian Gentile.
... By most estimates, the United States has spent about $3 trillion on its nation-building efforts. What has this huge investment of blood and treasure achieved? Iraq is still mired in low-grade civil war, with worrisome indications that it is escalating.
By invading Iraq to depose Saddam Hussein and occupying the country for nearly nine years to rebuild it, the United States has replaced one dictator with another strong-arm leader. And that leader, Nouri Maliki, is closely aligned with America's primary foe in the region, Iran.
Then there is Afghanistan. Since early 2002, more than 2,000 Americans have been killed there, with many more seriously wounded. Thousands of Afghan civilians have been killed too. The United States has spent close to $1 trillion trying to turn Afghanistan into a modern, functioning state...
Comments
The problem with the COIN strategy that was developed and steered by Petraeus, Mattis, McMaster and a few notable others is that in the end it only allowed us to leave with some satisfaction that we did not leave the country while it was in massive turmoil. I think Petraus and company did well but this is not a very satisfactory ending even though victory was, or should have been, the goal. The fact that the Iraqi population suffers the proportional equivalent of a 9/11 terrorist attack every month now is disheartening but not a shock by any means. How different would the outcome be had we occupied Iraq with multiple thousands of troops for years and decades later like we did Japan and Germany? Having to settle for anything less then victory sucks but it looks like were going to have to accept such outcomes in the future, especially with the military shrinking from budget cuts and "GWOT burnout." I believe we never should have given so much in developmental assistance (short of HA and select essential services)until we were fairly certain we had eliminated nearly all of our enemies there. The final SIGIR report details the problems of conducting reconstruction while your still fighting...note to Uncle Sam, it's not a good plan. By the way, if you want a glimpse of what the future may hold for us read Ralph Peters book "The War in 2020."
I found this to be a well written and thoughtful article. But I submit that our Military's Counter Insurgency Doctrine accomplished what other doctrines could not -- an exit from Iraq, and soon from Afghamistan. This doctrine was promulgated by leaders who felt it was their duty to save the situation in which they had found themselves after our military involvement negatively unfolded in these countries. Saviors? Yeah, I'm good with that.
In the era of globalization, it would seem that the way that a "better peace" is measured has changed. Now the standard is:
a. Whether the subject state and society have been re-ordered along modern western political, economic and social lines; this, so that the state and society might better provide for and better benefit from the global economy.
Or, stated another way:
b. Whether the subject state and society have been re-ordered along modern western political, economic and social lines; this so that the state and society might become less of a problem for/barrier to the global economy and might, instead, become more of an asset to/conduit for the global economy.
All of our "nation-building" initiatives today -- whether undertaken at the barrel of a gun or via other, more peaceful means and venues -- to be understood within this context.
Thus, the above standard of a "better peace," I believe, is what people like Nagl and Petraeus would say that Iraq and Afghanistan must be measured against and not whether either country -- via our armed nation-building efforts -- had come to be better aligned politically with the United States.
So Nagl, Petraeus and others of their ilk, I believe, these folks fight a very different kind of a war today, one in which the wants, needs and desires of the modern world (not just the American people) are achieved by enlightened states and societies (such as those of the United States/the western world) protecting and providing for the needs of the global economy. This making nation-building, by whatever means, the order of the day.
Now for us to measure Iraq and Afghanistan along the lines that I have outlined at "a" and "b" above. (Indeed, Iraq and Afghanistan may be found wanting from this perspective also.)
The United States/the western world, one might suggest, saw successes and failures in their long struggle to contain communism. Yet they made modifications and continued on.
The United States/the western world, likewise today, may see successes and failures in their efforts at nation-building and, likewise, may make modifications and continue on.