As Chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus's Afghanistan Taskforce, I want to offer my thoughts on the war in Afghanistan in light of Rep. Kucinich's resolution, H.Con.Res. 248, considered today on the House floor. I firmly believe our current strategy falls far short of bringing stability to Afghanistan or security to America. My serious concerns about U.S. strategy have led me to oppose the war funding supplemental bill in 2009, oppose increased funding for the 30,000 troop surge, support a war tax, and call for an about-face in funding priorities. My concerns have led me to host innumerous congressional briefings on Afghanistan, pursue the commissioning of GAO reports to audit aspects of U.S. engagement, and author multiple op-eds on the subject. In short, I take my chairmanship very seriously.
As long as we continue to pursue military solutions to this conflict, paying little to no heed to economic, political and social solutions, security will remain elusive. As long as we continue to forego the building of Afghan capacity and instead prop up a privatized defense industrial complex, as well as an increasingly privatized development industrial complex, Afghans will never be able to answer our call to "stand up". As long as we remain unwilling to bring to justice our allied warlords and corrupt officials in Afghanistan, our calls for an end to corruption in Kabul ring hollow.
Washington must face up to the alarming reality that the hundreds of billions of dollars being pumped into Afghanistan are simply not benefiting the Afghan people whatsoever and are not being used effectively in the long-term U.S. strategic interest. Washington also must realize that hard power is utterly limited in its capacity to eliminate an ideological enemy, who is not finite in number. What must be pursued, instead, is the build-up of Afghan state capacity to provide policing and legal enforcement, systems of justice, and good intelligence (in addition, of course, to the socio-economic policies capable of educating and employing a vulnerable population).
Ending this war (and with it, the loss of additional American lives), a policy prescription which I certainly support, will not end the pursuit of a failed security strategy. It is this failed strategy, inaugurated by the previous administration in Iraq and Afghanistan nearly a decade ago, which I want Washington to rethink immediately, before we continue similar strategies elsewhere. This is the conversation I wish my colleagues in Congress would host, before we are soon engaged in the very same debate about failed strategies in Pakistan, Yemen, or Somalia.
As Clausewitz taught us almost two centuries ago: to win war, you must correctly identify the enemy's center of gravity and attack it, either directly or indirectly, with the correct element of National power. The U.S. no longer possesses the correct element of National power to effect the battle that is happening in Afghanistan (really all over the World) because a minority of people decided we didn't need God involved in our government.
* Limited to 250 words, so must stop here.
As far as those private interests are concerned, ours is not a failed policy. It doesn't matter how many suffer and die, what kind of "kill ratio" there is, or whether or not we achieve "stability" - for them it is a success, because they are making money. If we think they really care about anything else, then we've already lost. Once we admit what we're up against, and why, for instance, yesterday's debate is a joke to so many people - people in a position to make a difference, no less, then we can begin a serious discussion. As long as we deny this reality, there will be no serious debate.
What we should do is come home. There is still nothing of value there. We should tell them that if they allow someone else to attack us from their borders, we will come back and stomp on everyone, guilty or not, I mean stomp hard.
Safety, security, equality, choices are all ideas that have to be grown from inside the people not given as a gift and then expect it to grow.
We have rebuilt the world after WW2 except the USA and England.
Now we need to remove our forces and the billions, perhaps give them a billion a year for education and security but put that money to work in the USA.
The reason we are there is control, keeping China or Russia's out.
We armed the warlords of the Northern Resistance in order to give the USSR their Waterloo. The idea is that control of the east Asia and the caucus is key to maintain hegemony.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zbigniew_Brzezinski He's on the Obama's presidential advisory board, still determining this strategy.
Ossama's plan was to keep us mired in an endless war until we're broke, and he's winning.
9/11 Terrorists were from Saudi and Germany. They are not hiding in "strategic hamlets" in Af/Pak. They were even our mercenaries at one time.
Afghans will always fight against invaders. They think we are at war with islam, & to take their home away. Most can't even read a map; they don't know where America is.
Our real burden is the "White Man's Burden" mentality, & manifest destiny ideology. Who are the barbarians really? We have embraced torture. Spend the money on PR to deprogram our own culture of bigotry and war.
Why is our type of society/economic system is what is best for them (or us)? The Loya Jirga, they have used it over millennia, it is a more devolved system than ours, more democratic in ways.
We should respect and protect their right and choice to govern themselves.
Clean up DU, unexploded cluster bombs, educate teachers, build schools, get out, and make sure everyone else does too.
Domestic economic issues far outweigh the years of Foreign policy and investment it will take to stabilize the Afghan nightmare. Get your heads out of you buts and represent your constituents.