US reconsiders options in Afghanistan
By Daniel Dombey at the United NationsPublished: September 24 2009 00:03 | Last updated: September 24 2009 00:03
The US said on Wednesday it was rethinking whether to embark on a full-fledged counter-insurgency campaign in Afghanistan, despite calls from top military officials for more troops and President Barack Obama’s past pledges of support.
The White House’s examination of alternative options – such as a scaled-down war effort concentrated on hitting al-Qaeda in Pakistan – comes as the administration grapples with the aftermath of the fraud-stricken Afghan presidential election.
“It may be that counter-insurgency is the ultimate method they can decide to continue to pursue, but there’s going to be discussion about it,” said a Pentagon spokesman on Wednesday, referring to the administration’s deliberations. “I don’t think anybody thinks that’s unreasonable.”
Nevertheless, the debate comes six months after Mr Obama unveiled a wide-ranging strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan and barely a month after he described Afghanistan as a “war of necessity ... fundamental to the defence of our people.”
Just this week a leaked report by Gen Stanley McChrystal, the commander in Afghanistan, called for more resources to help US troops take the initiative in threatened areas. The Pentagon said on Wednesday that Gen McChrystal is expected to make a separate request for thousands more troops to Robert Gates, defence secretary, this week. But Mr Gates is likely to wait before he hands it on to Mr Obama.
Highlighting the consensus among military leaders in favour of reinforcements, Gen David Petraeus, Gen McChrystal’s immediate superior and architect of the “surge” in Iraq, added on Wednesday that he endorsed Gen McChrystal’s assessment of the Afghan war.
The Pentagon spokesman denied that US advocacy of counterinsurgency was “imperilled”, adding that Gen McChrystal was “operating under the assumption that his job is to defeat al-Qaeda and use counter-insurgency to do it.”
But the aftershocks of Afghanistan’s election have left the administration looking at alternatives – including greater efforts to win round Taliban fighters.
Asked on Wednesday about a New York Times report that Joe Biden, US vice-president, was pushing for a smaller effort against extremist safe havens in Pakistan, Susan Rice, US ambassador to the United Nations, said: “All options will be considered,” highlighting the push against al-Qaeda. Mr Biden has worried about an escalating conflict in Afghanistan, a fear increasingly voiced by Democrats in Capitol Hill and the US public.
Expressing the opposite view, Senator John McCain, the former Republican presidential nominee, told CBS it was clear additional troops were needed. “The longer we delay, the more Americans will be at risk because we haven’t implemented a new strategy that will succeed,” he added.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009.
What next in Afghanistan? The five people Obama is asking.
President Obama has said he is reviewing US strategy in Afghanistan. Here are five of the most important people he is listening to – and what they might be telling him.
When he announced his administration’s new strategy for Afghanistan this spring, President Obama added an important asterisk.
“Going forward, we will not blindly stay the course,” he said March 27. “We will review whether we are using the right tools and tactics to make progress towards accomplishing our goals.”
Now, he is making good on that promise.
Mr. Obama has already held one meeting of his top foreign policy and military advisers to discuss the Afghan war, according to news reports. Several more are expected, beginning next week.
What comes out of this high-level review could determine whether tens of thousands more American troops head to Afghanistan or whether America essentially pulls back and focuses on targeted counterterrorism operations against Al Qaeda.
Here is what is known about where the members of the National Security Council might stand.
President Obama
Back in March, Obama said his goal was “to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan, and to prevent their return to either country in the future.”
He has consistently repeated that goal. But his strategic calculus about how to do that appears to be changing.
b Media reports suggest that Obama has been shaken by the allegations of widespread fraud in Afghanistan’s Aug. 20 presidential elections. The results have sowed doubt about whether President Hamid Karzai is a reliable partner.
Also a factor is the dire battlefield assessment by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who is expected to request as many as 40,000 more troops. At a time when Obama is strained to his political limit by the healthcare debate, the prospect of having to sell an Afghan troop surge is decidedly unpalatable.
The shift in Obama’s outlook was evident Sunday, when Obama told “Meet the Press”: “I’m not interested in just being in Afghanistan for the sake of being in Afghanistan or saving face.”
The comment contrasted strikingly to the tone of an Aug. 17 speech – three days before the Afghan election – when he said that the war in Afghanistan “is fundamental to the defense of our people...”
So he wants to do some M.O.A.Bombing in Pakistan?
Zero really does want to start WW III, doesn’t he?
Thanks for the ping, RonDog.
the two generals on BOR —Hunt and Peters— both said that the best plan is to pull most of the troops out, forget redoing Afghanistan the way we did in Iraq and keep a unit of special forces in there and target specific targets.
That would not be withdrawing in the classic sense of ‘giving up” but changing strategy...in this case, that may not be a bad way to handle this. That is if we also go into Pakistan to get the bad guys with special ops also.
I listen to Peters and Hunt. Hunt also said to leave some more troops there for back up to special ops.
It is very very difficult to ‘win” Afghanistan in traditional ways...major army moving in, or nation building.
I heard on one of the Salem Radio talk shows, I think it was Michael Medved, that 0bama is turning to Biden as his main advisor on Afghanistan, A GUY WHO HAS NEVER BEEN RIGHT ON ANY MAJOR FOREIGN POLICY ISSUE.