“¦reinforced fears that NATOs front is crumbling and that other Western nations may bow to mounting domestic public pressure to withdraw their forces.
Added to this, domestic resistance to Washington’s war is also mounting to the point that it is no longer a tenable policy. According to an Agence France-Presse report, a group of U.S. lawmakers, led by representative John Conyers, allied with the White House, has joined the “Out of Afghanistan Caucus” opposing continued combat and called for an end to the Afghan War, labelling it an unwinnable drain on U.S. “blood and treasure” and comparing it to Vietnam.15
“On 01 December 2009, President Obama laid out his Afghanistan war strategy in an address at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. The President, while giving out his policy for a surge in US troops also gave out a time line of 18 months for withdrawal of US forces. A few days later, in their testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Hillary Clinton, Admiral Mullen and Robert Gates stated that they would execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground and that a review of the Afghanistan strategy would be carried out at the end of 2010. When contacted to resolve this apparent contradiction, the White House spokesperson reiterated that the US would withdraw in 18 months. The contradiction remains, for while the intent to withdraw is clear, it may perhaps be contingent on the situation existing at that time.”16
The writing on the wall is clear. Washingtons Afghanistan strategy is in a nearly irretrievable mess while there are many ongoing global and domestic policies that are in delicate circumstances and have a bearing on whatever decision President Obama may take.
So, the situation as it is on the ground in July 2010 is as follows:
The U.S. is:
In the unenviable position of trying to extricate its military from Iraq, which in time would erode its strategy to establish its foothold in the Middle East
- Under pressure to open a front against Iran in response to its non-proliferation strategy and the need to demonstrate its will to support its closest ally, Israel, thereby having to contain Iran by deploying military forces in Azerbaijan, the Persian Gulf and Afghanistan
- Struggling to maintain a meaningful military and political presence in the Caucasus and the Black Sea and on the threshold of being deserted by its NATO allies in Afghanistan and shouldering the military, economic and political costs of sustaining its war to occupy Afghanistan
- Taking incremental military and economic initiatives to suppress Pakistani-based militancy and stifling any possibility of that country’s nuclear capabilities falling into the hands of terrorist organisations
- Coping with piracy in the Arabian Sea off the Coast of Somalia
- In the process of establishing a military footprint in Africa with the recently created United States African Command (USAFRICOM)
- Struggling with the political dynamics of military basing in Japan to secure its East Asian assets and add to the credibility to guarantee a nuclear umbrella
- Trying to contain growing Chinese maritime potential, which threatens to neutralise America’s hitherto unchallenged capabilities to go to the defence of its allies in the Asia Pacific region.
There are numerous debilitating domestic economic, political and security issues that further erode the existing comprehensive power potential of the United States that are not being enumerated here. Suffice it to say that these issues are exacerbated by the economic17 and political strains of executing the military posture enunciated above and play a major role in Washington’s decision-making process vis-à-vis the future of its involvement in the war in Afghanistan, i.e. the fifth Afghan war after the British and Soviet misadventures.
“The war, as every Afghan watcher knows, is going badly for the US and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) forces. June was the worst month for foreign troops in that country with 102 combat deaths, which is the highest level of monthly casualties since the beginning of the war”¦”
In view of the above, it is safe to assume that President Obama will be taking some major decisions about the U.S. war in Afghanistan before the year is out that would have serious implications for the south, west and central Asian countries as also the foreign policies of the major powers. The process will entail clearly enunciating American objectives and prioritising the missions that need to be accomplished.
The possible options are to hunker down and continue the war till the U.S. suppresses the adversarial forces into submission, which may take 10 to 15 years, provided the U.S. has the economic, political and military staying power.18 In the prevailing situation, one can safely rule out this option.
The alternate is to cut losses and withdraw from Afghanistan, leaving the region to its devices. “The war, as every Afghan watcher knows, is going badly for the US and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) forces. June was the worst month for foreign troops in that country with 102 combat deaths, which is the highest level of monthly casualties since the beginning of the war. Also, the Afghan war by end June had officially become America’s longest war in history, longer than even Vietnam”.19
Please wait...
