Afghanistan: What Can We Achieve?
Posted by Michael Cohen
Over at Dissent I have a new article that offers an alternative perspective on what the US and NATO should do in Afghanistan. Short version: adopt a political strategy:
The U.S. war in Afghanistan started off with rousing optimism in the fall of 2001, but by the end of the decade has devolved into a quagmire for U. S. troops and potential disaster for the Afghan people. For all its twists and turns, it has had one striking constant—nearly every decision made by Western policymakers and Afghan leaders in fighting it has been the wrong one.
. . . It is a mind-numbing tale of failure that has brought the United States and NATO to a painful decision point about the war in Afghanistan. They must realize that it is time to move beyond the U.S. military’s dreams of winning in Afghanistan and focus instead on best preparing the country for a partial drawdown of U.S. troops and a shift in mission from population-centric counter- insurgency to counter-terrorism and stabilization.
. . . After more than nine years of war, few good options remain on the table. The Taliban insurgency has gained momentum across the country at the same time that falling support for the war at home will constrain the president’s ability to sustain a long-term military commitment.
“Winning” in Afghanistan is no longer in the cards, if it ever was. Instead, the president and his advisers must choose from a set of worst-case scenarios. Picking the least worse one—which protects U.S. interests while, one hopes, stabilizing Afghanistan—must be the focus of U.S. policy going forward. That begins with laying the groundwork for a political strategy to spur reconciliation between the Afghan government and Taliban insurgents.
You can read the whole thing here or if you want check out the link here and if you don't already have one, buy a subsciption to the magazine.
thank your
Posted by: canada goose | January 08, 2011 at 02:34 AM
"The Taliban insurgency?" Hey, those are the people the US insurged against, driving them out of the capital. How can there be insurgents against insurgents? So the Taliban anti-insurgent campaign is doing quite well because it's their country and that gives them a natural edge.
Posted by: Don Bacon | January 08, 2011 at 11:34 AM
There are growing reports of Afghans "awakening" (turning against the Taliban) on a local level. If that trend is real, does it still make sense to encourage the government to sue for peace?
Posted by: Taylor Wray | January 10, 2011 at 11:50 AM
Welcome to our website, the boots are very comfortable and cheap,you will like them and want to buy it.
Posted by: grace | January 16, 2011 at 02:59 AM
That begins with laying the groundwork for a political strategy to spur reconciliation between the Afghan government and Taliban insurgents.
seslisohbet seslichat
Posted by: sesli sohbet | February 09, 2011 at 03:36 PM
Thanks for the tip-I'm loving that doing this allows me to Links Of London distinguish my comments from my visitors' comments!
Posted by: Julian Schoffel | February 24, 2011 at 11:00 PM
I tried to think so, but I found it was not as the same in the actual process. As you mentioned, I still have doubts, but really thank you for sharing!
Posted by: Coach Bags | March 02, 2011 at 09:44 PM
onger in the cards, if it ever was. Instead, the president and his advisers must choose from a set of worst-case scenarios. Picking the least worse one—which protects U.S. interests while, one hopes, stabilizing Afghanistan—must be the focus of U.S. policy going forward. That begins with laying the groundwork for a political strategy to spur reconciliation between the Afghan governm
Posted by: 冷夜 | March 11, 2011 at 01:52 AM
Thanks for the tip-I'm loving
Posted by: seks izle | March 12, 2011 at 02:54 PM
The point I am making is that formations are often not the root cause of any problems'
Posted by: Armand | March 16, 2011 at 02:19 AM