Commentary By Ron Beasley
We have been comparing the war in Afghanistan to the quagmire in Vietnam. While there are many similarities they differ in one key respect - the debate. People knew very little about the US involvement in Vietnam until the mid 60s when Americans began to die. American involvement started in the late 40s. Our only knowledge of that involvement came from Graham Greene's 1956 novel The Quiet American. I don't think that many recognized how much truth there was in the fiction until the New York Times published the classified Pentagon Papers in 1971.
By contrast the military adventure in Afghanistan is being publicly debated. While the no such thing as a bad war militarists hate the debate most think it's a good idea. That includes Marc Lynch.
I've been hearing two things a lot about the President's choices on
Afghanistan strategy: first, that it's time to either "go all in or
get out", the second that he is "dithering" in the face of an urgent
decision. Both seem to me profoundly unhelpful, driven more by
political positioning than by serious analysis. Sending more troops
may in fact be the right call -- I'm open-minded on
that question -- but the attempts to bull-rush the process are
problematic on their face.
And here is where Lynch's realism really kicks in:
The overwhelming odds are that if the escalation option is chosen, in a
year or two we will be confronting the exact same questions. More
troops will once again be needed, a new strategy will once again be
demanded, we�ll still be reading about how the Taliban is
out-communicating us and about how the corruption of the Karzai
government
poses a serious challenge. And then the exact same debate will recur�
the Kagans will demand more troops, dark mutterings about tensions
between the administration and the generals will roil the waters, the
Washington Post editorial page will publish debates where everyone is
on the same side, the smart think-tankers will agonize over the tough
choices but ultimately come down on the side of escalation. Might as
well have this debate now, and get it right.
And it begins to look a lot like Vietnam.
Ron, I was thinking about this very subject as I listened to Terry Gross interviewing Ahmed Rashid just now on Fresh Air. In a long, insightful commentary he made two points that bear thinking about.
ReplyDeleteFirst, a lot of people in the area (there, not here) see this as "year one" of US presence, dismissing the first four years or so as a period of neglect more than anything else on the part of the Bush administration. Many see Obama as the start of something new.
Second, he mentioned the "Taliban model" as a kind of fundamentalist, extremist expression of power that has spread into Pakistan and back into much of Afghanistan. He predicts a Taliban takeover of Kabul within a year and a half and a strengthening of that "model" even among Indian Muslims as well as the Uighers in China.
I got interrupted twice and didn't hear the whole interview but I plan to find it now and hear it again. Rashid is an excellent journalist and has keen instincts.
He also implied that Iran might be enlisted as a regional player controlling the spread of Taliban influence. Lots to think about.
I listened to the same program and in fact it is about to be repeated on my NPR station and plan on listening to it again. I don't really buy his fear of the "Taliban Model" - the Taliban has lost support in Pakistan and they were never that popular in Afghanistan. They are radical thugs with no plan and long term can't survive.
ReplyDeleteWe're waist deep in the Big Muddy, but we'll just keep on marching forward. Again. I've seen this movie before so I already know how it will end.
ReplyDeleteAt 63 I've seen this movie before as well and it had an impact on my life. I graduated from college in 68 - right before the Tet offensive and a few months latter I was a soldier. But as I said this is different - the war is being debated and I would imagine that Obama is familiar with the LBJ tapes from 64 and 65 and knows what happened to LBJ's presidency.
ReplyDeleteSo Ron how does Obama get himself out of this mess? He seems to me over his head and, though I'm not a US citizen, I'm worried he doesn't have it and we'll all wear the consequences. Dumb as hell I know but, foreign wars/policy aside - his effectiveness lives and dies on domestic policy, I think - he must get some reasonable/creditable healthcare reform package jammed through or he and, sorry to say you are screwed 'cause then it will only be another war. The ultimate aphrodisiac and potential lifejacket for all modern - never been in the military - presidents. I'm not sure of jimmy Carter though I don't think his military adventure was to save his presidency.
ReplyDelete