In his speech to the West Point cadets, President Obama stated that he sees Pakistan as inextricably linked to Afghanistan. In fact, the President’s chief military and diplomatic advisers have said that the new strategy to win the war in Afghanistan will require a “strategic relationship” with Pakistan in order to have any chance of success. What a “strategic relationship” means is that Pakistan will do everything it can to drive Al Qaeda and the Taliban from their safe havens in the mountainous border regions, and that the government would crack down on the terrorist networks hiding within its borders. U.S military experts realize that if Pakistan were to return to the old habits of supporting the Afghan Taliban, the war will be almost impossible to win.

Unfortunately, the Pakistanis do not want a strategic relationship with the U.S. government. What they do want to do is to play both sides against each other for their own benefit. Most Pakistanis are convinced that the U.S. government is trying to bully the government into accepting an all-out war against their Islamic brothers in Afghanistan, and also trying to take control of their nuclear weapons. Although the U.S. is willing to provide them with billions of dollars in financial aid, the Pakistani people do not believe for a moment that the U.S. is interested in a long-term partnership with them. To the contrary, the Pakistani people see the U.S. government as far more closely aligned with their arch-enemy, India. Because of these deep-seated suspicions, the Pakistani government has not yet endorsed President Obama’s plan, nor have they endorsed an increase in U.S. troop strength within the region.

It is highly doubtful that the Pakistani government will ever co-operate fully with the U.S. strategy regarding Afghanistan, and highly likely that any increase in U.S. military forces will only drive Al Qaeda and the Taliban further within Pakistan’s borders. Likewise, a domestic crackdown on these terrorist groups would most likely result in further instability of the fragile Zardari government, possibly ending up with a military coup-de-etat. In essence, the Obama plan relies heavily on an predominantly Muslim country that has proven time and time again to be highly unreliable.

The risks of going ahead with the Obama plan for Afghanistan go well beyond the potential loss of American lives on the battlefield. In fact, the greatest risk is that Pakistan will be forced to move further and further into making political concessions to Al Qaeda and the Taliban, as these groups stream into the country and intensify terrorist activities. The greatest unknown consequence of all is that the government of Pakistan could come under Taliban control; nuclear weapons and all. For these reasons alone, the most prudent U.S. policy for Afghanistan would be to leave the country all together. Even if Afghanistan once again falls to the Taliban, at least they will only gain control of lots and lots of opium, and not control of nuclear weapons.

—Rich

Once again, a line seems to be drawn in the sand between Congressional Democrats and Republicans.  This time the issue is what to do about U.S. troop levels in Afghanistan, and when to do it.  Things were certainly not made any better by former Vice-President Cheney’s accusation that Obama was “dithering” in making a decision.  To their credit, Republican leaders Orrin Hatch and John McCain were quick to distance themselves from Cheney’s remarks.  Most foreign policy experts within the Obama Administration and outside of government generally agree that the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan has escalated considerably in terms of size and complexity.  The changing situation in Afghanistan, combined with the role being played by the Pakistani government have left the Obama Administration with few good options.

One of the central issues to be considered is the future of the corrupt and generally despised government of Hamid Karsai.  Recent elections showing Karsai being re-elected by wide margins have been proven to be fraudulent, therefore the Karsai Administration is not regarded as legitimate by the majority of Afghanis.  Rather than helping to promote democratic principles, the election has only strengthened the position of the Taliban.  A significant increase in U.S. troop levels in support of Karsai’s regime could have the undesired effect of boosting the strength and resolve of the Taliban even more.  Once the U.S. forces are widely perceived as foreign invaders, all of the Afghanistan tribes and factions will turn against them.  When that happens, no amount of U.S. troops will be successful in overcoming the Taliban.

I agree with General McChrystal that the troop levels in Afghanistan are too small to get the job done, if the job is defined as imposing the will of the Karsai government and the U.S. government on the majority. However, an addition of forty thousand soldiers, or even a hundred thousand soldiers will not change the situation over the long run so long as Afghanistan lacks a legitimate government.  The Obama Administration is right in being cautious under the present circumstances.

—Rich