This is perhaps good considering the nature, quality, and effectiveness of whatever passes for foreign policy in the Obama White House and administration generally. If there is one area where Mr Obama and most of his henchmen (and women) lack competence, it is that of foreign policy and its close associate, military policy.
However, on occasion the President gets it right. On those rare moments the Geek is both willing and happy to acknowledge the fact.
A few days ago President Obama termed the war in Afghanistan to be a "war of necessity" while addressing the VFW annual convention. In this appraisal he was absolutely correct.
Later the President averred in response to the declining public acceptance and support of the war that it had not been underway for nearly eight years but rather for only those few months which have gone by since he approved the modest (17,000 personnel) increase in deployed US combat forces and appointed a new commander, General Stanley McChrystal. In this contention the President was absolutely correct.
The only point in then Senator Obama's record with which the Geek agreed a year and more ago was his opposition to the war in Iraq based on the view the Iraq effort diverted the US from the main goal of eradicating al-Qaeda and akin groups. While that is certainly not sufficient reason to elect a man president, it at least indicated that Mr Obama could be properly oriented as to time and place at least some of the time.
Afghanistan was and is a necessary war. The Taliban gave refuge and support to al-Qaeda including its jefe grande and refused to give him over following the 9/11 attacks. American and other diplomats placed all possible pressure on the Islamist jihadist regime to no avail. This meant that there was no meaningful option beyond invading the place.
There can be little doubt that Taliban and al-Qaeda of all ranks was shocked that the US would and did actually invade the sanctuary of Afghanistan. Previously our responses to outrageous attacks had been limited to ineffectual cruise missile strikes.
(Although, had Osama bin Laden not received a last second warning from a source in Pakistan on 20 August 98 there is a better than excellent chance he would have been caught by the incoming Tomahawks and the world would have been spared the rest of his handiwork. Osama's son, Omar recounts the tale in his new book thereby confirming what the Two Shops have long suspected.)
As the Geek has argued many times before in this blog as well as many other fora, had the Bush/Cheney administration waited a few weeks longer, brought more combat troops to the theater, and not depended so much on the locals from the Northern Alliance while at the same time giving the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence wallahs time and opportunity to spirit their Taliban clients and others out of harm's way, the "war of necessity" would have been over with both expeditiousness and full success. For reasons which may be adduced but defy both reason and logic, the administration opted to fight the war on the cheap, to send too few men and allow success to trickle away between their outstretched fingers.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman, Admiral Mullen, is both polite and politic enough to describe the effort in Afghanistan on the Bush/Cheney watch as being one of "an economy of force" nature. The Admiral undoubtedly knows full well that "economy of force" tactics are employed on the defensive--and only the defensive. The notion of "economy of force" in waging offensive missions is oxymoronic--and moronic.
Of course we well know that the neocon ninnies (or should that be morons) of the Bush/Cheney regime were cranking up for the main event--to quote Omar Bradley's famed comment on MacArthur's desire to go to war with China--"the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong enemy." The Bush/Cheney adventure in regime change in Iraq demonstrates in the most profound way possible (with the exception of Woodrow Wilson's performance at Versailles at the end of WW I) the ease with which ideologically driven True Believers can drag the US (and much of the world) over the cliff of blunder into the abyss.
(President Obama who has shown definite signs of being afflicted with the pathology of True Belief should take heed--and warning. But, history shows that True Believers are rarely, if ever, disabused of their ideologically based misapprehensions concerning how the real world works.)
The consequence of the previous administration's pathetic decision making and worse war fighting assured that the US never really fought a war in Afghanistan. Rather, it played at fighting with insufficient manpower, deficient material resources, an overly ambitious set of nation building goals, and commanders who reeked of the conventional war fighting mentality rather than that necessary to prosecute successful counterinsurgency in a large and rugged area populated by people long used to fighting against, not alongside, foreigners.
The results, which have been seen both on the ground and in the erosion of American political will to continue the war, are self-evident. The resurgence of both Taliban and to a lesser extent, al-Qaeda, were both predictable--and probably were.
Importantly, the growth of Taliban has made its destruction along with that of al-Qaeda more necessary than ever. The slightest indication that either or both have been or will be able to fight the US to a standstill will do nothing but assure the continued growth and horizontal escalation of Islamist jihadist entities around the world. Today, even more than on 9/12 it is utterly essential for American national and strategic interests that the US prove militarily superior to the Islamist jihadists in a clear and unmistakable way.
Anything less than a convincing military defeat of Taliban and al-Qaeda will place the US and other countries at far greater risk in the future. Anything less means that we will be fighting another war in another place in the not distant future with greater costs than those that will be incurred in Afghanistan.
Recently it has been reported that General McChrystal is going to recommend that somewhere between fifteen and forty-five thousand additional troops be deployed in country. If this report is accurate, and the Doctrine of Inherent Military Probability supports it, the Pentagon and President should approve it without delay.
Senator John McCain called for doubling the number of Marines in country from three to six battalions, that is from nine to eighteen thousand jarheads. This would be a good down payment on what is needed to clear and hold the Taliban dominated border regions.
The escalation for which President Obama takes the credit (or the blame) was probably the result of urgings by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and National Security Advisor James Jones. There is a high probability that these two experienced and monumentally realistic men would give the thumbs up to General McChrystal's request when it arrives formally next month.
Both Gates and Jones have been around the block often enough to know in their bones that counterinsurgency is a manpower intensive form of war. They both know that technology is no replacement for boots on the ground no matter how much it make those wearing the boots safer and more effective.
The US does not have much time to visibly reverse the tide of battle in Afghanistan. SecDef Gates opined a couple of weeks back that the American public would demand a pullout within no more than eighteen months. That estimate is, if anything, on the sanguine side. A very real change must be evident in less than twelve months. And, the only way to do that is by sending a lot more troops to the conflict.
The progressive base of the Democratic party will howl and protest mightily. Balancing this, the Republican party in Congress will have no choice except backing the escalation as well as the inevitable hike in casualties. Obama will have at least his right flank protected and, who knows, might even be able to demand some sort of Republican "pro quo" for the presidential "quid" of taking the heat for bailing out the Bush inspired failure in Afghanistan.
Some Europeans may wail in protest as well. But, you know who won't protest at all? Who will give tacit support including extending the new, liberal overflight policy?
That's right, bucko. Russia. Putin,, Medvedev, and Company, who face their own problems with Islamist jihadists, know perfectly well that any Islamist jihadist success anywhere, at any time, emboldens all Islamist jihadists. And, they are entirely too aware of this brutal fact to wish the Americans and their allies anything other than a complete victory in Afghanistan.
No comments:
Post a Comment