Parsing Obama - AfPak Edition
In his remarks after meeting with Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Pakistani President Zardari, American President Obama said:"The United States has made a lasting commitment to defeat al-Qaeda, but also to support the democratically-elected sovereign governments of both Pakistan and Afghanistan. That commitment will not waver and that support will be sustained."
Well, OK then. In light of my strongly held opinion that there is no compelling challenge to American security that requires a large US or NATO troop presence in South Asia, a couple of pieces of this statement jump out at you.
First, what has to be considered the good news. Obama specifically says that the US commitment of support is to the "democratically-elected sovereign governments" of Afghanistan and Pakistan. I'd like to think that contains a pointed message that a military coup or other extra-constitutional transfer of power in either nation would be grounds for the US to re-examine it's commitment of support. This is particularly important in Pakistan, where the military has been and remains the overwhelming political and economic power, and cannot be assumed to be a passive or even neutral player in Islamabad. While the Zardari government is fairly weak and the civilian leadership is fractured between the majority Punjabis and the population of Sindh and it's Urdu speakers and quite reasonably might not be expected to survive, it's important in the long term that the military stay out of parliamentary politics and, if possible, reduce their influence on the government in general. If Obama is sending them a message that American aid is strictly premised on their adherence to their own constitution, and if that is a message they take seriously (much less likely), then that will go a long way towards supporting real democracy and the rule of law in Pakistan.
The second point raises more questions than it answers. If the US commitment is to defeat al Quaeda, and nowhere in that statement do we see a reference to a US commitment to defeat the Taliban, then much of this entire discussion is rendered moot. al Quaeda is a small, trans-national extremest organization that uses terrorist attacks against other nations as its primary tactic. Any fight against al Quaeda should clearly be led by intelligence and law enforcement organizations, with the support of small, covert special operations strikes when actionable intelligence is uncovered.
As I have said repeatedly, the Taliban in no way constitutes a security threat to the United States of America. If a small, local, religious-extremist political/militant movement is a threat to American security, then I could list something on the order of twenty or more we should be fighting with Division-level long term military operations. al Quaeda, on the other hand, is inarguably a threat to the United States, and should be confronted and defeated. But what will it accomplish to defeat the Taliban? Asked another way, if we allowed local religious/tribal/ethnic conflicts in South Asia play out the same way we allow them to play out in Asia, Africa and other parts of the world, how exactly would that endanger American security, and if it does, why don't other similar conflicts do the same?
I don't know how it happens, but I have to believe that Barack Obama is smart enough and thoughtful enough to eventually come to understand that there is no value in spending American blood and treasure in South Asia, and withdraws the vast majority of our troops, all of our combat brigades, and starts putting significant conditions on aid to both Pakistan and Afghanistan. From an American Security standpoint, there is nothing special about these nations or this region that makes it necessary, or even slightly prudent, to engage in counter insurgency warfare to support these marginal governments. There is a place for the State Department, for economic development, micro-loans, public health, clean water and entrepreneurial support, but no reason, NONE, to be fighting the Taliban with American soldiers...
posted by mikey @ 4:41 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home