Obama’s troop pullout plan serves notice to the Afghans

Obama’s troop pullout plan serves notice to the Afghans

President Barack Obama’s 92-day review of the war in Afghanistan has produced a thoughtful strategy aimed at reassuring Americans and at prodding Afghans. In announcing the deployment of 30,000 additional U.S. troops to target the Taliban-led insurgency and protect the population, the president set a target Tuesday night for American soldiers to begin leaving that war-ravaged country in 19 months.

The inclusion of an exit date in the prime-time speech to the nation from West Point, N.Y., was designed to let the government of President Hamid Karzai and America’s allies in the war on global terrorism know that the United States will not be bogged down in another costly conflict that ends badly. To be sure, the extra 30,000 troops will boost the cost of the already expensive missions in Afghanistan and Iraq. But the alternatives — doing nothing and allowing the current force to be overwhelmed by the Taliban, or the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. soldiers — were unacceptable.

In the beginning

The reason Americans are in Afghanistan must not be forgotten: After the Sept. 11, 2001, deadly terrorist attacks on America’s mainland, then President George W. Bush received irrefutable intelligence that the killers, mostly from Saudi Arabia, had trained in camps in Afghanistan operated by al-Qaida. The Taliban, which governed the country according to Sharia or Islamic law, had given safe haven to al-Qaida and its leaders, including Osama bin Laden.

A U.S.-led coalition force invaded Afghanistan, toppled the Taliban government and chased bin Laden and members of the inner circle into the mountains where they hide in caves. But before American troops captured or killed the terrorist leaders, the president redeployed U.S. forces to Iraq to bring down strongman Saddam Hussein.

The new government in Afghanistan was thus left with an inadequate coalition force to deal with the resurgence of Taliban militants. Additionally, the ability of bin Laden and others to elude capture or death was a moral victory for the global terrorist organization.

Thus, when he took office in January, President Obama was confronted with a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan and an Iraq that was stable, but politically uncertain. Obama has begun the orderly withdrawal of American troops from Iraq and has bolstered the force in Afghanistan.

The Taliban militants must not be permitted to gain any more ground and, indeed, must be chased out of the provinces in the east and south where they have made inroads.

An appeal to the coalition

The troop deployment will strengthen the president’s hand as he calls on NATO countries to commit an additional 10,000 soldiers to meet the 40,000 mark set by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top military commander in Afghanistan.

“Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011,” the president said Tuesday night “Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan’s Security forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But it will be clear to the Afghan government — and, more importantly, to the Afghan people — that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country.”

The president clearly articulated the mission’s goal: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al-Qaida in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to prevent the organization’s capacity to threaten America and its allies in the future.

“We are in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading through that country,” Obama told West Point Academy cadets. “But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan. That is why we need a strategy that works on both sides of the border.”

That’s important given Pakistan’s role as America’s ally in the war on global terrorism and its possession of nuclear weapons.

Obama defined the three core elements of the Afghanistan strategy as a military effort to create the conditions for a transition; a civilian surge that reinforces positive action, and an effective partnership with Pakistan.

There’s no argument that the American people have been losing faith in the ability of the U.S. and NATO to bring about positive change in Afghanistan, especially when it comes to ending the widespread corruption in the government. There is no longer room for error.

An uneasy Congress

If Obama cannot deliver on the pledges he made Tuesday night, he will hear the demands for a quick withdrawal of U.S. troops grow louder. Karzai should recognize and consider the implications of such a turn of events. The time for him to stamp out corruption and ramp up a viable police force is running out.

Given the record federal budget deficit, the national debt and domestic spending needs, the cost of deploying additional troops is a point of contention on both sides of aisle on Capitol Hill.

“All told, by the time I took office the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan approached a trillion dollars,” Obama said. “ Going forward, I am committed to addressing these costs openly and honestly. Our new approach in Afghanistan is likely to cost us roughly $30 billion for the military this year, and I will work closely with Congress to address these costs as we work to bring down our deficit.”

Congress has a responsibility to ask tough questions and get straight answers.