Nation Building is Our Responsibility in Afghanistan
The United States military has a history of leaving a conflict before the job is finished. Vietnam, the first Persian Gulf War as examples. I was surprised to hear Kate Mc Farland, a former Regan, national security advisor suggest that we might consider pulling out of Afghanistan. Some people feel the costs are too high and we have lost too many lives.
I understand people's weariness with the war. We are going on our 10th year there and like every conflict it has had its ups and down. The current occupant of the White House ran on an election plank that this was the war we should be fighting rather than Iraq. He promised to pull us out of Iraq which he has not done, and promised to end Afghanistan by July 2014, which now appears to be a noble goal. With huge budget deficits and calls for reduction of spending some argue we can ill afford the 2 billion dollar a day price tag. Some will argue that Afghanistan is a rugged terrain that cannot be conquered and point to the Soviet defeat there as an example of indefatigable determination of the Afghan people. What all of these people overlook is the Afghan people did not defeat the Soviet, but the United States of America did, and the reason it fell into its current dismal situation is that we left before the we finished the job.
Our first conflict there has come to be called "Charlie Wilson's War," because a single West Texas democratic Congressman became interested in the oppression of the Afghans by the Soviet's in the 1980's. He was the prominent figure who influenced the CIA to fund, train and direct Afghan mujhadeen fighters to defeat the Russians. While the Afghan's provided the soldiers, the strategy, the tactics and the logistics were run from Langley, and the funding came from Congress. It was not a roguish band of Afghan war lords using 14th century, weapons and tactics that defeated the Soviet Union. It was the United States of America through our Afghan surrogates. However, as is often the case in US military operation political and economic realities at home caused us to leave too soon.
When the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan Congress lost interest in helping the Afghan people cast off the crippled government that the Soviet Union left behind. Wilson and others lobbied for the U.S. to continue funding infrastructure projects and social reconstruction but found little interest. President Regan himself said we should not put further money in Afghanistan. This failure to help the country rebuild
created anarchy and gave the Taliban its foothold there and in northwest Pakistan. These Taliban despots became part of the Osama Bin Laden's network that launched the 911 attacks.
As costly as it has been we can neither afford to lose in Afghanistan nor to leave too soon. To leave now before the Taliban are routed would be disastrous. The covert nature of Charlie Wilson's war create a misconception among the mujahadeen (of which Osama Ben Laden was a part) that they had somehow defeated the Soviet Union on their own. That gave them the motivation and the power among Arab people to rise up against other great Satans, the United States and Israel, and led to the creation of Al Quaddyai. To leave now would only strengthen that misconception and the resolve of our enemies. General Petreus's strategy is working. He is helping to rebuild infrastructure and gain the confidence of the Afghan people as he did in Irag after the surge. It will take much more time in Afghanistan
To win in Afghanistan will take more than a military victory. We may have to do nation building. Some people object to nation building. They question whether we have the right to impose our ways and values on others. My response is: isn't that what we did in World War II in both Europe and Japan?
After the war Europe was devolving into anarchy and chaos. To prevent the Soviet Union from sweeping through Europe and imposing their values President Truman created NATO and sent billions of dollars to Europe through the Marshall plan. We made the investment of resources to make sure Europe adopted democratic values and a capitalistic economy. Truman understood the military victory would fail without a political and social one as well. Some argue Europeans are Western People's we shared common value's and world views anyway, but that is not the case with Afghanistan, but neither did pre-World War II Japan. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries few nations were more isolated or anachronistic or held a different world view from ours than did Japan. Yet few called President Truman's decision to send Douglas Mac Arthur to Tokyo to oversee the transformation of nation to a democratic capitalistic culture imperialism. It was our responsibility as arbiters of the peace.
Nation building is the necessary prerogative of the victor. If a nation is left to fend for itself after a war. Whatever group is strongest will re-established infrastructure the quickest way possible. The victors turned away from Europe after World War I and left them on their own. Out of the ruins arose the Nazi's in the West and the Communist in the East. Because we failed to finish the job in World War I we got World War II. Neglecting our responsibility to nation building after World War I created the climate and conditions that lead to World War II. The fact is if the victor in a war does not rebuild his conquered people someone else will. It will seldom be someone interested in improving the life of the defeated people.
Just as our victory in Iraq gave us the right to rebuild a nation there. We must not neglect our responsibility to the Afghan people. Twice we have fought for their liberation. After our first victory our negligence allowed them to be conquered by the Taliban, and resulted in the rise of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. Just as it took many years, many dollars and many lives in Europe and Japan. We must make the same investment in Afghanistan. Our safety security and way of life depends on it
I understand people's weariness with the war. We are going on our 10th year there and like every conflict it has had its ups and down. The current occupant of the White House ran on an election plank that this was the war we should be fighting rather than Iraq. He promised to pull us out of Iraq which he has not done, and promised to end Afghanistan by July 2014, which now appears to be a noble goal. With huge budget deficits and calls for reduction of spending some argue we can ill afford the 2 billion dollar a day price tag. Some will argue that Afghanistan is a rugged terrain that cannot be conquered and point to the Soviet defeat there as an example of indefatigable determination of the Afghan people. What all of these people overlook is the Afghan people did not defeat the Soviet, but the United States of America did, and the reason it fell into its current dismal situation is that we left before the we finished the job.
Our first conflict there has come to be called "Charlie Wilson's War," because a single West Texas democratic Congressman became interested in the oppression of the Afghans by the Soviet's in the 1980's. He was the prominent figure who influenced the CIA to fund, train and direct Afghan mujhadeen fighters to defeat the Russians. While the Afghan's provided the soldiers, the strategy, the tactics and the logistics were run from Langley, and the funding came from Congress. It was not a roguish band of Afghan war lords using 14th century, weapons and tactics that defeated the Soviet Union. It was the United States of America through our Afghan surrogates. However, as is often the case in US military operation political and economic realities at home caused us to leave too soon.
When the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan Congress lost interest in helping the Afghan people cast off the crippled government that the Soviet Union left behind. Wilson and others lobbied for the U.S. to continue funding infrastructure projects and social reconstruction but found little interest. President Regan himself said we should not put further money in Afghanistan. This failure to help the country rebuild
created anarchy and gave the Taliban its foothold there and in northwest Pakistan. These Taliban despots became part of the Osama Bin Laden's network that launched the 911 attacks.
As costly as it has been we can neither afford to lose in Afghanistan nor to leave too soon. To leave now before the Taliban are routed would be disastrous. The covert nature of Charlie Wilson's war create a misconception among the mujahadeen (of which Osama Ben Laden was a part) that they had somehow defeated the Soviet Union on their own. That gave them the motivation and the power among Arab people to rise up against other great Satans, the United States and Israel, and led to the creation of Al Quaddyai. To leave now would only strengthen that misconception and the resolve of our enemies. General Petreus's strategy is working. He is helping to rebuild infrastructure and gain the confidence of the Afghan people as he did in Irag after the surge. It will take much more time in Afghanistan
To win in Afghanistan will take more than a military victory. We may have to do nation building. Some people object to nation building. They question whether we have the right to impose our ways and values on others. My response is: isn't that what we did in World War II in both Europe and Japan?
After the war Europe was devolving into anarchy and chaos. To prevent the Soviet Union from sweeping through Europe and imposing their values President Truman created NATO and sent billions of dollars to Europe through the Marshall plan. We made the investment of resources to make sure Europe adopted democratic values and a capitalistic economy. Truman understood the military victory would fail without a political and social one as well. Some argue Europeans are Western People's we shared common value's and world views anyway, but that is not the case with Afghanistan, but neither did pre-World War II Japan. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries few nations were more isolated or anachronistic or held a different world view from ours than did Japan. Yet few called President Truman's decision to send Douglas Mac Arthur to Tokyo to oversee the transformation of nation to a democratic capitalistic culture imperialism. It was our responsibility as arbiters of the peace.
Nation building is the necessary prerogative of the victor. If a nation is left to fend for itself after a war. Whatever group is strongest will re-established infrastructure the quickest way possible. The victors turned away from Europe after World War I and left them on their own. Out of the ruins arose the Nazi's in the West and the Communist in the East. Because we failed to finish the job in World War I we got World War II. Neglecting our responsibility to nation building after World War I created the climate and conditions that lead to World War II. The fact is if the victor in a war does not rebuild his conquered people someone else will. It will seldom be someone interested in improving the life of the defeated people.
Just as our victory in Iraq gave us the right to rebuild a nation there. We must not neglect our responsibility to the Afghan people. Twice we have fought for their liberation. After our first victory our negligence allowed them to be conquered by the Taliban, and resulted in the rise of Islamic fundamentalist terrorism. Just as it took many years, many dollars and many lives in Europe and Japan. We must make the same investment in Afghanistan. Our safety security and way of life depends on it
Comments
Post a Comment