Obama and Afghanistan 11/14/2009
A few thoughts on Obama’s decision-making process for Afghanistan:
1. He is not going to simply agree to a 40,000 troop increase. Otherwise, he wouldn’t be taking so long.
2. Publicly questioning the military leadership on strategy takes immense courage. I agree with Sullivan—Bush could never have done this. Bush had no credibility, nor confidence, and so outsourced the responsibility to Patraeus. If the surge failed, he was simply following his expert general. If the surge succeeded, Bush could take credit, and he did. Furthermore, its always easier to double down on sunk costs and thus postpone the final day of reckoning, even if it’s the wrong move.
3. Obama is determined to connect any influx of troops to the political process in Afghanistan. When he refused to say that he was wrong about the Iraq surge during the campaign, he meant it. The Iraq surge was supposed to open up room for political reconciliation, which has yet to happen. Iraq could still very plausibly descend into civil war when the U.S. pulls out.
Similarly, a surge in Afghanistan has to be for something, not just a temporary reduction in violence. But that’s why the recent election was such as disaster. Karzai is illegitimate and ineffectual. Obama does not want to sacrifice more American blood and treasure just to prolong Karzai’s corrupt rule.
War is politics by other means. It's a tactic for achieving a political goal. That is what the Eikenberry cables were about, and that is what is keeping Obama up at night. This week will be interesting.
1. He is not going to simply agree to a 40,000 troop increase. Otherwise, he wouldn’t be taking so long.
2. Publicly questioning the military leadership on strategy takes immense courage. I agree with Sullivan—Bush could never have done this. Bush had no credibility, nor confidence, and so outsourced the responsibility to Patraeus. If the surge failed, he was simply following his expert general. If the surge succeeded, Bush could take credit, and he did. Furthermore, its always easier to double down on sunk costs and thus postpone the final day of reckoning, even if it’s the wrong move.
3. Obama is determined to connect any influx of troops to the political process in Afghanistan. When he refused to say that he was wrong about the Iraq surge during the campaign, he meant it. The Iraq surge was supposed to open up room for political reconciliation, which has yet to happen. Iraq could still very plausibly descend into civil war when the U.S. pulls out.
Similarly, a surge in Afghanistan has to be for something, not just a temporary reduction in violence. But that’s why the recent election was such as disaster. Karzai is illegitimate and ineffectual. Obama does not want to sacrifice more American blood and treasure just to prolong Karzai’s corrupt rule.
War is politics by other means. It's a tactic for achieving a political goal. That is what the Eikenberry cables were about, and that is what is keeping Obama up at night. This week will be interesting.
Comments
Leave a Reply
Loading
