The White House signaled Sunday that President Obama would postpone any decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan until the disputed election there had been settled and resulted in a government that could work with the United States. ... The question at the heart of the matter, said President Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, is not “how many troops you send, but do you have a credible Afghan partner for this process that can provide the security and the type of services that the Afghan people need?”There is no point trying to prop up an illegitimate government in Afghanistan. That is a fool's errand at best. Counterinsurgency requires a legitimate national government for without a legitimate government, it would be like building a house on quicksand. If raw military power was what was needed, the Afghan schools today would be teaching Russian as a second language.
I cannot emphasize this enough: Without a legitimate government in Afghanistan, all we can do now is to decide when we will leave the country to the Taliban. Not "if".
A lot also hinges on Pakistan's offensive into South Waziristan. With their recent bombing attacks, the militants may have overreached. They may have made the case to the people that the militants' presence in Pakistan can no longer be tolerated.
1 comment:
"Without a legitimate government in Afghanistan, all we can do now is to decide when we will leave the country to the Taliban. Not "if"."
That's it in a nutshell.
Post a Comment