iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Joe Peyronnin

GET UPDATES FROM Joe Peyronnin

The Tide of War

Posted: 06/23/11 11:39 AM ET

In his speech to the nation Wednesday night, President Barack Obama announced his plans to withdraw 33,000 American troops from Afghanistan by the summer of 2012, just a few months before November's presidential election. This will bring an end to Obama's surge strategy but it is unlikely to mollify a growing war weariness among the American electorate.

In addressing a growingly skeptical American public the president sounded both optimistic and realistic. At one point he said, "the light of a secure peace can be seen in the distance." But he tempered his hope by saying, "huge challenges remain. This is the beginning -- but not the end -- of our effort to wind down this war." The president's decision would leave 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan to continue the already decade-long war at least until 2014, assuming Afghanistan's forces will be able to take over.

The war in Afghanistan is costing U.S. taxpayers $2 billion a week, and more than 1,500 American soldiers have died there since 2001. Al Qaeda terrorists have been driven out of the country, and hostile Tailiban forces number perhaps 20,000 fighters. The Taliban have been degraded in some areas, but not defeated.

President Obama is facing criticism from hawks, such as Arizona Republican Senator John McCain who says that the withdrawal is too swift and an "unnecessary risk." South Carolina Republican Senator Lindsey Graham wrote a statement on Twitter, "We've undercut a strategy that was working." And House Intelligence Chairman Mike Rogers, a Republican from Michigan, expressed his concern; "We are in a very precarious place in Afghanistan right now. It seems the President is trying to find a political solution with a military component to it, when it needs to be the other way around."

The president is rolling the dice with this decision. The Americans have made progress in Afghanistan since Obama's surge, but the central government is frail and corrupt, and its president, Hamid Karsai, is unpopular and unpredictable. Afghanistan's military now numbers about 300,000, but it is unclear whether they can be molded into an effective and truly reliable fighting force. And due to the country's tribal nature creating a strong central government is highly unlikely. All of this uncertainty makes it difficult to see any light in the distance.

America is currently engaged in two and one-half wars that have already cost more than $1 trillion. Its military commitment in Iraq is slowly winding down but U.S. troops will still be there for the near term. Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is dead but the terrorist group has scattered to Yemen and other countries. And U.S. air forces are currently involved in a NATO effort to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi but he remains in power. The president says "the tide of war is receding," but it is still a flood.

At one point in his speech the president sounded like candidate Obama. "Now, we must invest in America's greatest resource -- our people," he said, "while living within our means...it is time to focus on nation building here at home." But this will be hard to do while maintaining the huge costs of war and dealing with America's enormous deficits.

So it appears that the president, as he so often does, is steering a middle course in confronting the extremely complex problem of Afghanistan. But in a year's time will the American public, already struggling with an anemic economic recovery, high unemployment and a weak housing market, be satisfied with the president's course? Or will a weary electorate choose another course?

 

Follow Joe Peyronnin on Twitter: www.twitter.com/joepeyronnin

 
 
  • Comments
  • 5
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
nokabosh1
My Dog Bites Progressives
01:15 AM on 06/24/2011
What's the point of either side continuing to fight given that we have announced when we are leaving. Fighting on to the last minute will just cause more casualties. Who is going to want to go out on patrol and maybe get killed the day before leaving Afghan? Why not just stop all hostilities. Have Karzai call a big beer party for all; he can afford it-- we paid him more than enough. Obama can go and hoist a few and then get back to his golf game in between campaign stops.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marignymitch
E pluribus unum percent
01:28 PM on 06/23/2011
No nation building at home will be budgeted because no money will be available for it, and so the national decline will continue.

Was Obama expecting dancing in the streets after his announcement that 68,000 troops and an untold number of Xe employees and other contractors will remain in Afghanistan forever? On top of the 50,000 troops plus mercenaries deployed permanently in Iraq? And the secret number of forces dedicated to hostilities in Libyan, Yemen and TBA?

At any rate those celebrations didn't materialize. I'm hoping this means Americans are growing wise to this 10-year-old Washington Ponzi scheme fostered by executive malpractice. (Not that this awareness will ever alter the shape of our suicidal colonial designs.)
01:04 PM on 06/23/2011
The whole thing is a waste.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:38 PM on 06/23/2011
'Change we can believe in' will occur only when Obama loses a Presidential primary in a mid-western state on this issue.
11:56 AM on 06/23/2011
For the president to use the language of those opposed to wasting more lives and money in Afghanistan while making it certain that the tremendous cost will continue well into 2014 was extremely cynical especially after he decided recklessly to intervene in the civil war in Libya and has already spent close to 1 billion dollars on that war as well. The president wants to continuing spending a fortune on these needless wars while negotiating in secret with the republicans to cut the social safety net which makes his talk of rebuilding America nothing but a sick joke.