[Peace-discuss] Obama's prevarication on the war

[C. G. Estabrook]

[An even-handed account...  --CGE]

"...Act Now to Stop War & End Racism, an antiwar group, found Obama’s 
Afghanistan position similar to that of President Bush and presumptive 
Republican presidential nominee John McCain."

	Published on Wednesday, July 23, 2008 by McClatchy Newspapers
	Antiwar Activists Split Over Obama’s Troop Plans
	by David Lightman

WASHINGTON - Barack Obama’s plan to build up U.S. forces in Afghanistan while 
keeping perhaps 50,000 troops in Iraq has triggered a deep rift among antiwar 
activists, a reminder of the difficult tasking facing the presumptive Democratic 
nominee as he tries to broaden his appeal.

The Illinois senator wrapped up three days of tours and talks in the war-ravaged 
nations Tuesday, stressing in a news conference that the “situation in 
Afghanistan is perilous and urgent” and that “we should not wait any longer” to 
provide additional troops.

In Iraq, Obama won a tacit Iraqi endorsement of a plan to withdraw U.S. combat 
troops in 2010, but he also said that he backs leaving a residual force in Iraq 
to help train military personnel, provide security for U.S. interests and thwart 
terrorist threats. The residual force might total up to 50,000 troops, his 
campaign advisers have told reporters.

Some hailed Obama’s trip as an important breakthrough.

“So far the trip has been out of the park. It’s an enormous moment,” declared 
Eli Pariser, executive director of MoveOn.org, which supports Obama. He hedged 
about Obama’s troop commitments, however: He said he wasn’t fully aware of 
Obama’s call for a residual force in Iraq and was trying to get a sense from 
MoveOn members on their views about Afghanistan.

Sister Simone Campbell, executive director of NETWORK, the national Catholic 
social justice lobbying group, was less enthusiastic.

“It was a significant step forward,” she said, “but it was only a step.”

Others were simply annoyed.

Barbra Bearden, spokeswoman for Peace Action, called Obama’s comments about 
Afghanistan “a bit disheartening.”

Ian Thompson, lead organizer in Los Angeles for Act Now to Stop War & End 
Racism, an antiwar group, found Obama’s Afghanistan position similar to that of 
President Bush and presumptive Republican presidential nominee John McCain.

“What this shows is that Barack Obama does not really represent any policy 
shift,” he said.

Republicans thought that Obama supplied them with new political ammunition. 
Obama supports withdrawing U.S. combat forces within 16 months after becoming 
president, while McCain has called such fixed timetables artificial and 
unrealistic. He says troops should come home when conditions on the ground 
warrant it, and not before.

Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., a McCain backer, charged Tuesday in a conference 
call with reporters organized by McCain’s campaign that Obama has shown he’s 
“frighteningly inexperienced. The difference is Senator Obama’s (view) is based 
on the calendar, while Senator McCain believes the decision should be based on 
conditions on the ground.”

The trip’s chief political goal has been to bolster Obama’s stature among 
voters. The 46-year-old first-term U.S. senator is running against an opponent 
with a lengthy national security resume, and a Pew Research Center poll taken 
June 18-29 found 55 percent of voters thought McCain could better defend the 
U.S. against terrorism, while only 31 percent preferred Obama.

And they thought, by a 47 to 41 percent margin, that McCain could make better 
judgments about Iraq.

Experts were cautious Tuesday in measuring the trip’s political impact.

Obama took on some risk by “looking like he’s being tutored,” said Harold Cox, 
professor emeritus of history at Wilkes College in Pennsylvania.

“Things seem to be going as planned, and he could be helping himself,” said 
Kareem Crayton, associate professor of law and political science at the 
University of Southern California. “But we have to wait and see; we don’t know 
the public reaction yet.”

After Obama met Monday with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, Iraqi government 
spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said that while Iraq did not endorse a date certain for 
withdrawal, he hoped it could occur sometime in 2010.

Some thought Obama helped himself politically.

“The prime minister clearly supports Obama’s plan for exiting Iraq,” Pariser 
said. “This couldn’t really be better.”

The visit “appears to have given the Iraqis the courage to express some of what 
they’re thinking, without fear of the Bush administration reprisals,” said 
Campbell of NETWORK.

But Obama’s views troubled many peace activists.

Bearden of Peace Action said that “we’ve seen the results of these military 
actions. We create a power vacuum and try to create a government. We did that in 
Iraq, and now we’re talking about using the same failed strategy again in 
Afghanistan.”

Judith LeBlanc, organizing coordinator for United for Peace & Justice, said that 
“dealing with the threat of terrorism cannot be done on a military basis.” She 
and other activists wanted to hear more from Obama about a strategy for dealing 
with terrorism around the globe, including more use of diplomacy and economic aid.

The activists agreed on this much: They’re not going to vote for McCain.

But whether Obama generated new enthusiasm, let alone attracted fence-sitting 
independent voters as McCain continued to blast him as naive, remains an open 
question.

“I think it’s fair to say,” said Crayton, “that he hasn’t hurt himself.”

© McClatchy Newspapers 2008