Author: Ben Dalgetty
My uncle, a doctor and Commander in the Navy, just left for Afghanistan. He is going to be the senior medical officer for a clinic/mobile trauma unit based in Kandahar, which serves Afghani nationals as well as American and coalition troops. The man he is replacing was killed by incidental fire in a non-combat situation a few months ago.
On a fundamental level, I oppose war. I think the war in Afghanistan, which has been going on for eight years and has cost close to 800 American and over 7,000 Afghani civilian lives, was, despite some nominally noble intentions, ill-conceived and lacked a thought-out conclusion, a characteristic of President Bush’s actions. But when I look at the dilemma President Obama currently faces, either acceding to liberals and withdrawing troops or acquiescing to General McChrystal and inserting up to 60,000 additional troops into the fray, I find myself advocating greater involvement.
As laid out in an Oct. 17 Economist article, Obama’s two options are a “manpower-intensive counter-insurgency, which aims to win over the Afghan population and build a stable government; and counter-terrorism, which seeks to deal narrowly with threats to the West, mainly through air strikes or raids by special forces.” In the former, we would fight the Taliban, the hodgepodge of native Pashtun tribes which ruled the country before the invasion and are sheltering al-Qaeda. In the latter, the U.S. would focus on pursuing only al-Qaeda, the transnational organization responsible for 9/11 and the primary target of the war on terror.
The decision to send more American men and women into harm’s way is never an easy one, and Obama is right to gain as many perspectives as possible before committing to action. But Afghanistan is not a responsibility we can safely shirk.
Counter-terrorism and targeted drone missile strikes are well and good, but they ignore the systemic problems that have allowed al-Qaeda to flourish in the region for so long. We need to accept the responsibility of state-building and development in Afghanistan, notably weaning its economy from opium dependence. Despite rampant corruption and continued misunderstanding of the country’s needs, a failed Afghani state cannot be an option.
It is time to revise the strong central government envisioned in the Afghani constitution, as it clearly is not working in what is one of the world’s most diverse and divergent regions. By refocusing on more localized government and democracy and moving past the fraudulent government of President Hamid Karzai, a stable government can and should be instituted.
But the call to throw up our hands and abandon this conflict is compelling. How many American lives can be sacrificed for a mountainous country a world away before we say enough is enough? Unfortunately, for now, the quagmire demands more before we can safely extricate ourselves.
Long-term stability in Afghanistan is essential in maintaining stability in nuclear-armed Pakistan and surrounding countries. The already porous border between the two countries will become an unceasing torrent of radicalism and violence if the U.S. cheats this responsibility, and the consequences, both from our perspective and the region’s civilians, will be dire.
Insurgents and the ubiquitous terrorists will undoubtedly gain more freedom and power if we withdraw, and anyone who doesn’t see probable attacks on U.S. forces and other long-term consequences is just as short-sighted as we were entering this war.
The questions of whether we should have entered the war, whether it is worth noting that the power vacuum we left behind following the failed Russian invasion allowed the Taliban to come to power or how the war has been bungled thus far are, at this point, irrelevant. President Obama and his dynamic duo of General McChrystal and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates need to reclaim and revindicate this conflict.
We have learned a lot of lessons from Operation Iraqi Freedom, which Bush’s last-ditch surge somewhat salvaged. Although not all of these lessons are readily applicable, there is clearly the possibility of at least moderate success in Afghanistan if we stick around and stay the course. If, on the other hand, we tuck our tails and try Vietnamization again, the results will be disastrous.
Obama should be lauded for his careful and comprehensive review of Afghanistan policy, but ultimately his choice must be the necessary rather than the expedient one. As I pray for the safe return of my uncle and all of our brave men and women, I am confident that, however convoluted the conflict becomes, they are striving to make the world a safer place both for myself and the Afghani people.
Ben Dalgetty is a senior Politics major. He can be reached at bdalgetty@oxy.edu.
This article has been archived, for more requests please contact us via the support system.
