"This year, we will bring America's longest war to a
responsible end." So says Obama in a Rose Garden announcement, after
conferring with his military leaders in Afghanistan.
However …
"Bring the boys home by the winter solstice"
We will leave some 9800 troops in country by the end of
the year. Obama was able to say this
with some degree of confidence because the two remaining contenders in the next
presidential election there on 14 June, the always-a-bridesmaid former Foreign
Minister Abdullah Abdullah and former Finance Minister Ashraf Ghani, have both
pledged to support the bilateral agreement worked out with the Afghan
government, but which Karzai has refused to sign, leaving that to his successor
(so he says).
One of the first items that struck me (and which remains unreported)
is the enormous problem of logistics and security rearrangements that will have
to be overcome in order to ship over 22,000 troops and their gear back
stateside from that landlocked country, while leaving the remainder in a secure
position, all taking place within the timeframe of only six to seven months,
in what is still a combat theater.
Obama went on to say that by the end of the following
year, the 9800 figure would be halved to just under 5000, and by the end of
2016 the drawdown will be complete, leaving a "normal embassy
staffing" that would include about 1000 troops. (I have travelled widely in my time and was
familiar with several US embassies. I am
unaware that a normal embassy security staff would involve the equivalent of a
reinforced battalion of Marines. But
then the guy who makes the rules, or defines the terms, always wins the game.)
Thus the plan is to have the Afghan equivalent of
'everyone' out by what coincides (we are supposed to believe it is sheer
happenstance) with the end of Obama's regime.
Thus, whatever success accrues thereafter (extremely doubtful, but then
rest assured that the press will characterize it that way) will be gain to the
historians and hagiographers of Obama.
If it craters, they can blame his successor.
The 9800 figure (and dropping) is to allow for trainers
and advisory staff, and doesn't address the question that the number of those
remaining would be primarily focused on trying to defend themselves in the
middle of a large, sufficiently hostile country. Considering that a typical combat ratio would
have only around 2000 of them in combat arms, the predicament becomes more
exquisite.
One has to also pre-suppose, as Obama would have us, to
believe that the enemy will cooperate in our withdrawal, that Obama's simple
declaration that "the war is over" (speaking of 'victory' is
oh-so-twentieth century) suffices to make it so. But the enemy always has a seat in our
councils of war, and particularly so in our peace delegations, because it only
takes one side to make – and sustain – a war, not two, and I have to wonder at
the assumed patience, never before displayed, for the enemy to
resist the temptation to drive home their point by attacking the remnants of
our troops as they depart. That, after all,
is an Afghan tradition.
But the only remnants that Obama spoke of referred to the
"remnants of al Qaeda", never blushing at the fact that al Qaeda is
as strong, and certainly more widespread, than before. Sure, he has nailed some of the old time
guard, Osama bin Laden among them as he constantly reminds us, but others
remain, and younger fanatics have stepped up to fill in the gaps. This ridiculous attempt to parse "core
al Qaeda" from the "al Qaeda affiliates" is a distinction
without a difference, as if the terrorists in AQIM, AQAP, al Shabaab, ISIS,
Boko Haram, Lashkar e Taiba, Abu Sayyaf and many other franchises are no less intent on
killing us than did their predecessors, merely because we exist outside their culture. Al Qaeda, as we must remember (yes, we really
need to), means "the network", and it is still very much so.
And what of the resurgent Taliban just ticking away the
time, residing in the dark enclaves of the outlaw territory of Pakistan just
across the border, with a barely tottering democracy in a nuclear power? And Iran to the west? What influence will have in that savage
territory henceforth? That's not Obama's
problem.
Senator George Aiken was attributed to have said, in reference
to the Viet Nam War, that we should simply "declare victory and come
home", leaving the Vietnamese to fight it out amongst themselves. Obama falls heir to the quip that repetition
is the sincerest form of flattery, but in this case he would have us declare
victory but stick around for a while.
I was on board with a continuing presence in AFG if we were taking the fight to al Qaeda......but with spending the last decade fighting the Quetta Shura Taliban, Haqqani network and HiG [aside from various lesser warlords], our presence there should decrease to zero.
ReplyDeleteWe had the same problem in Iraq. In that part of the world, iy kind of comes with the territory - it's tough to tell the criminals from the terrorists. It's a matter of knowing how bad you want to blast through them to get to the terrorists. They do form a symbiotic relationship, so it's not all wasted effort.
DeleteBut I think I understand your point/frustration.
At least old peace-with-honor Nixon left no stones behind to gather moss.
ReplyDeleteThose leather cinc jackets really look funky on non-veteran presidents like Wormtongue and Slick Willie. Can't wait to see Shillary in her version, Will it have lace at the cuffs? Probably not, but it should. Heck theirs should also.
ReplyDeleteIt does seem to have some grandstanding to it. I was set to comment on Obama's horrible West Point speech but was overtaken by events, but I took particular artistic exception to him strolling down the ranks of the cadets lined up to salute him. It seemed Lord-like and out of place, over the top, and it reminded me of the picture of Clinton marching across the White House lawn with flag officers in field uniform flanking him.
DeleteOkay, you're the Commander-in-chief, you don't have to rub it in.
As for the flight jackets, at least the Bush presidents actually earned theirs. W's had the look of the one he likely wore as a F-102 pilot, though I didn't get a chance for a close-up look. I was taken, however, by his father's, which instead of the fancy Presidential gimmickry, had a name patch that said simply "George Bush, LT, USNR", from his days as a TBM Avenger pilot in World War II.
If Obama were to board a ship of the US Navy, he would rate only eight 'side boys', not the whole crew like the West Point photo portrays.
DeleteMore and more I Iike the idea of lace on the cuffs for the pansy boys. And of course for the Lizard Queen. Boy, four years of her. Or eight. I doubt I will be around for all of it. Mercifully.
ReplyDelete