I think President Obama made the right decision to embrace a counterinsurgency strategy for Afghanistan and to resource it properly. I would have much preferred that Gen. Stanley McChrystal receive the entire force he had requested. But I have spoken with our military and civilian leaders, and I think the 30,000 additional U.S. troops that the president has called for -- plus greater force commitments from our allies -- will enable us to reverse the momentum of the insurgency and create the conditions for success in Afghanistan. I support the president's decision, and I think it deserves the support of all Americans, both Republicans and Democrats.
What I do not support, and what concerns me greatly, is the president's decision to set an arbitrary date to begin withdrawing U.S. forces from Afghanistan. A date for withdrawal sends exactly the wrong message to both our friends and our enemies -- in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the entire region -- all of whom currently doubt whether America is committed to winning this war. A withdrawal date only emboldens al Qaeda and the Taliban, while dispiriting our Afghan partners and making it less likely that they will risk their lives to take our side in this fight. COMMENTS (6) SHARE: Digg Facebook Reddit More...
Yes, our commitment to Afghanistan is not open-ended. Yes, large numbers of U.S. combat troops will not remain there indefinitely. And yes, this war will one day end. But it should end when we have achieved our goals. Success is the real exit strategy. And when conditions on the ground have decisively begun to change for the better -- that is when our troops should start to return home with honor, not one minute longer, not one minute sooner, and certainly not on some arbitrary date in July 2011, which our enemies can exploit to weaken and intimidate our friends.
Another concern I have has to do with the civilian side of our counterinsurgency strategy. Greater military force is necessary to succeed in Afghanistan, but it is not sufficient. I am confident in our military strategy and leadership, and I believe our troops can do everything that General McChrystal laid out in his assessment this summer. I believe we can "clear" and "hold." But I am concerned that we and our allies do not have a unified plan to "build" -- to work with and support our Afghan partners, in Kabul and beyond, as they build their own nation, their own economy, and their own free institutions.
I'm also concerned by reports of divisions in our embassy, and by major differences between our commander and our ambassador. We can only succeed in Afghanistan if we have a joint civil-military campaign plan-unified at every level, from top to bottom-much as Ambassador Crocker and General Petraeus established in Iraq during the surge.
I have been critical of the president during the past several months, but that is now behind us. Our focus going forward must be on winning the war in Afghanistan. And this depends as much on the substance of our policy as the signals we send to actors in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the region. The president was wrong to signal our intention to begin leaving Afghanistan on an arbitrary date. But the fact is, we now have the right mission. We now have the right leadership. And we now have a request for sufficient resources to succeed. So our friends can know that we will support them. Our enemies can know that we will defeat them. And all can know that we are committed to the long-term success of Afghanistan and Pakistan as stable states that can govern themselves, secure themselves, and sustain their own development. Though the nature of our commitment to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and their region will change over time, our commitment to their success will endure.
We now have an opportunity to build a bipartisan consensus in support of a vital national security priority: defeating al Qaeda and its violent extremist allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan -- and ensuring that these countries never again serve as bases for attacks against America and our allies. Americans need to know why winning this war is essential to our country's security. They need to know that things in Afghanistan will get worse before they get better -- that, unfortunately, casualties will likely rise in the year to come -- but that ultimately we will succeed.
I look to the president, and to his entire administration, to lead an unfailing effort to build bipartisan support for the war in Afghanistan, both among the public and here in the Congress. I will be an ally in this effort. And I will to do everything in my power to ensure that we win this war -- not just end it, but win it.
Mark Wilson/Getty Images
John McCain is the senior U.S. senator from Arizona and was the 2008 Republican nominee for president.
The Hidden CostOf Obama's Afghan Surge
Is There a New Pakistan Policy or Not?
Who Won the Middle East Soccer War?
Where Have All the Russian Geniuses Gone?
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE
SIR_MIXXALOT
4:54 PM ET
December 3, 2009
You are respectfully wrong, sir
Sorry senator, but you are wrong here, sir.
Here is what the CIA thinks:
"By now, as in so many other elements of the Global War on Terror, the U.S. has become more part of the problem than part of the solution. We are sending troops to defend troops that themselves constitute an affront to Afghan nationalism. Only expeditious American withdrawal from Afghanistan will prevent exacerbation of the problem. "
see: NYTimes
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/opinion/04iht-edfuller.html?_r=1&ref=global&pagewanted=print
December 4, 2009 Op-Ed Contributor Stretching Out an Ugly Struggle By GRAHAM E. FULLER
Many decades ago as a fledgling C.I.A. officer in the field, I was naïvely convinced that if the facts were reported back to Washington correctly, everything else would take care of itself in policymaking. The first loss of innocence comes with the harsh recognition that "all politics are local"� and that overseas realities bear only a partial relationship to foreign-policy formulation back home.
So in looking at President Obama's new policy directions for Afghanistan, what goes down in Washington politics far outweighs analyses of local conditions.
I had hoped that Obama would level with the American people that the war in Afghanistan is not being won, indeed is not winnable within any practicable framework. But such an admission "” however accurate "” would sign the political death warrant of a president to be portrayed as having snatched defeat out of the jaws of "victory."�
The "objective"� situation in Afghanistan remains a mess. Senior commanders acknowledge that we are not now winning hearts and minds in Afghanistan; indeed, we never can, and certainly not at gunpoint. Most Pashtuns will never accept a U.S. plan for Afghanistan's future. The non-Pashtuns "” Tajiks, Uzbeks, Hazaras, etc. "” naturally welcome any outside support in what is a virtual civil war.
America has inadvertently ended up choosing sides in this war. U.S. forces are perceived by large numbers of Afghans as an occupying army inflicting large civilian casualties. The struggle has now metastasized into Pakistan "” with even higher stakes.
Obama's policies would seem an unsatisfying compromise among contending arguments. Thirty thousand more troops are less than called for and will not turn the tide; arguably they present more American targets for attack.
Read Full Article »