[Peace-discuss] Is the Pentagon Deliberately "Degrading" Afghanistan's Capacity for Peace?

[Robert Naiman]

> "...we cannot simply withdraw troops in a precipitous manner without risking
> further destabilization of this already fragile and war-torn region. We need
> to facilitate a political solution to the stabilization of Afghanistan and
> the defeat of terrorists in the region"

I also find this irritating, maybe not for exactly the same reason as Carl.

This part I strongly agree with:

"We need to facilitate a political solution to the stabilization of Afghanistan"

But this is awful: "defeat of terrorists in the region"

This sounds like a War on Terror to me. We don't need to "defeat
terrorists in the region" and we can't do it even if we want to.

We need to facilitate a political solution so that a huge chunk of
people who are now using methods that we call "terrorism" to achieve
otherwise legitimate political aims - e.g., the removal of foreign
troops from their country - will no longer have any reason to do so.

Furthermore, this part drives me up the wall:

"we cannot simply withdraw troops in a precipitous manner"

Who in God's name is calling for "withdrawing troops in a precipitous
manner"? This is a strawman. A peace deal will have a timetable for
the withdrawal of foreign troops. Even the plan put forward by the
Hezb-e Islami, which they claimed they had Taliban support for, called
for a 2 year timetable for the withdrawal of foreign troops.

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 3:55 PM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at illinois.edu> wrote:
> The goal of US policy surely seems to be, as you suggest, "to facilitate a
> long-term US military presence in Afghanistan."
>
> Despite Obama's lies about "stopping terrorism" - manifestly false (US
> war-making in AfPak increases terrorism), and an expedient he's driven to by
> his Constitutional situation at home - the USG wants the war as part of its
> generation-long policy of controlling Mideast energy resources.
>
> The danger is, as you point out, that  "a feasible peace deal almost
> certainly implies a timetable for the withdrawal of US forces."
>
> But a recognition of what the US is actually doing in AfPak and the region
> would prevent any credence being lent to fatuities like the following from
> the local Democratic candidate for Congress:
>
> "...we cannot simply withdraw troops in a precipitous manner without risking
> further destabilization of this already fragile and war-torn region. We need
> to facilitate a political solution to the stabilization of Afghanistan and
> the defeat of terrorists in the region"
>
> <http://www.gill2010.com/issues/foreign-policy/afghanistan/>.  --CGE
>
>
> On 10/28/10 11:24 AM, Robert Naiman wrote:
>> The Washington Post reports that *according to the US government's
>> own assessment*, military escalation has failed in Afghanistan. Yet,
>> the same report tells us that no change is expected in December when
>> the policy is reviewed. How could this be? One explanation would be
>> that the policy is failing according to the Pentagon's *stated*
>> objectives, but succeeding according to the Pentagon's *unstated*
>> objectives. The escalation has failed to degrade the Taliban
>> *militarily*, but is apparently succeeding in degrading the Taliban
>> *politically*: mid-level commanders and footsoldiers the Pentagon is
>> killing are being replaced by younger recruits who are more militant
>> and independent, thus degrading the ability of the Taliban leadership
>> to negotiate a peace deal and enforce the deal on its troops. If the
>> Pentagon's goal were to end the war, this would be dangerously
>> counterproductive; but if the Pentagon's goal is to facilitate a
>> long-term US military presence in Afghanistan, this could be useful,
>> since a peace deal would almost certainly imply a timetable for US
>> military withdrawal.
>>
>>
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-naiman/is-the-pentagon-deliberat_b_775353.html
>



-- 
Robert Naiman
Policy Director
Just Foreign Policy
www.justforeignpolicy.org
naiman at justforeignpolicy.org

Urge Congress to Support a Timetable for Military Withdrawal from Afghanistan
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/act/feingold-mcgovern