The conundrum of Afghanistan: It might be managed, but never solved
James Meek, a reporter for the New York Daily News, was at Arlington Cemetery yesterday visiting the grave sites of friends, including a young man who had been killed in Iraq. Then he realized he had company.
“ARLINGTON, Va. – He didn’t introduce himself. He didn’t have to.
President Obama simply stuck out his hand and asked for my name as he stepped toward me amid a bone-chilling drizzle in the Gardens of Stone.
This was Section 60 of Arlington National Cemetery. I wasn’t there as a reporter, but to visit some friends and family buried there…. What I got was an unexpected look into the eyes of a man who intertwined his roles as commander in chief and consoler in chief on a solemn day filled with remembrance and respect for sacrifices made – and sacrifices yet to be made.
I’m sure the cynics will assume this was just another Obama photo op.
If they’d been standing in my boots looking him in the eye, they would have surely choked on their bile.”
Washington is rife with rumors about which way Obama might be leaning regarding further deployments in Afghanistan. The range of recommendations is vast, and the idea that the military is monolithic in its advocacy of a major increase in our commitment is incorrect, as the New York Times reports today:
WASHINGTON — The United States ambassador to Afghanistan, who once served as the top American military commander there, has expressed in writing his reservations about deploying additional troops to the country, three senior American officials said Wednesday.
The position of the ambassador, Karl W. Eikenberry, a retired lieutenant general, puts him in stark opposition to the current American and NATO commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, who has asked for 40,000 more troops.
…. During two tours in Afghanistan — from 2005 to 2007, when he served as the top American commander, and from 2002 to 2003, when he was responsible for building and training the Afghan security forces — General Eikenberry encountered what he later described as the Afghan government’s dependence on Americans to do the job that then-President George W. Bush was urging the Afghans to begin doing themselves.”
A similar division of opinion is apparent among other top Obama advisers, and among the American people as well. The latest Gallup numbers, as released today:
PRINCETON, NJ — As President Barack Obama prepares to make a decision on U.S. military policy in Afghanistan, 35% of Americans say he should follow the recommendation of the commanding U.S. general in Afghanistan and increase troop levels by about 40,000. Another 7% support a smaller troop increase, meaning a total of 42% of Americans support a troop increase of some size. However, nearly the same percentage, 44%, would like to see the number of U.S. troops in Afghanistan reduced.
And a lot of news outlets are reporting that President Obama is using this time to pressure Afghan President Hamid Karzai for concessions. If he wants more U.S. troops to defend his government, he’s going to have to make some changes. Says the Wall Street Journal:
“Administration officials have pushed hard to get Mr. Karzai to come up with a checklist of “deliverables” that would illustrate he is cracking down on corruption after his Nov. 19 inauguration.
According to a senior administration official familiar with the efforts, they have included a push for the Afghan president to fill top cabinet positions with competent technocrats — rather than rewarding warlords who backed Mr. Karzai’s re-election, such as Uzbek strongman Abdul Rashid Dostum.
“The president believes that we need to make clear to the Afghan government that our commitment is not open-ended,” said a White House official briefed on Wednesday’s meeting. “Governance in Afghanistan must improve in a reasonable period of time to ensure a successful transition to our Afghan partner.”
It’s a mess; a complicated, bloody, difficult mess. Coming home is not an option; if we leave Afghanistan to the Taliban, the Pakistanis are likely to do the same in their country, and the consequences of that are unacceptable. It is at best a problem to be managed, but likely never solved.
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Guides
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2011 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
320 comments Add your comment
FrankLeeDarling
November 12th, 2009
8:39 am
Why? why dose it have to be us? what can India ,China ,Russia do to help more?
stands for decibels
November 12th, 2009
8:42 am
The latest Gallup numbers, as released today:
“So?”
–Dick Cheney
Doggone/GA
November 12th, 2009
8:43 am
“what can India ,China ,Russia do to help more?”
Russia does not have exactly a stellar record of intervention in Afghanistan, and do you REALLY want China to have MORE influence there?
stands for decibels
November 12th, 2009
8:43 am
It is at best a problem to be managed, but likely never solved.
Try putting that on a bumper sticker.
Mrs. Godzilla
November 12th, 2009
8:43 am
Jay
I don’t buy this:
Coming home is not an option; if we leave Afghanistan to the Taliban, the Pakistanis are likely to do the same in their country, and the consequences of that are unacceptable.
I admit I cannot present a logical argument against it, and I will be mocked for this…..but it just does not feel right.
I Report (-: You Whine )-: mmm, mmmm, mmmmm!
November 12th, 2009
8:47 am
Oh yeah, I nice touching private moment of reflection, complete with the drive by media and all their cameras.
geez, mmm, mmmm, mmmmm!
stands for decibels
November 12th, 2009
8:49 am
nice touching private moment of reflection
Seriously, Andy? GFY.
Jimmy Carter
November 12th, 2009
8:49 am
Here’s the biggest issue I have with Afghanistan – I don’t know if we have, or ever had, a clearly defined mission. The poll, while interesting, doesn’t allow the “whys” to be answered. My belief is that we should send more troops. Why? Because the generals are calling for them. However, if we cannot clearly define our present mission (when it’s accomplished and the end result) then get the hell out.
Peadawg
November 12th, 2009
8:50 am
Godzilla, we are in a lose lose situation w/ Afghanistan. We leave, Taliban takes over and gets stronger. We stay, we lose more soldiers.
md
November 12th, 2009
8:50 am
On the flip side of leaving, that would give the Taliban free reign to regroup and harbor all the terrorists in the area. Once they regroup, then their easiest targets will start with Europe, and since Europe as a whole seems uninterested in sending more troops now, it would force them to deal with the problem. Then we can sit back and say no when they want help.
FinnMcCool
November 12th, 2009
8:50 am
We can’t solve every country’s problem. Heck, we can’t even solve our own. Let the Afghan’s deal with their own problems and let us prepare to work with whatever results they produce.
Normal
November 12th, 2009
8:51 am
The only correct decision the President can make is to bring them home. They are not robots. They have been used up. They are worn out.
So is their equipment. ABM will probably be able to tell better than anyone as to the look in their eyes.
Just day before yesterday evening, while I was in a Publix’s, I made eye contact with a soldier still in his uniform and with a bunch of flowers in his hand. I think he knew I understood his, what?…Pain?…It’s beyond that, somehow. But we nodded to each other and I said Welcome Home. What I really wanted to do was hug him and tell him I’m doing everything I can think of to bring you home for good. I wish you could have seen the look in his eyres, then you would know what had to be done. BRING THEM HOME! I crying now, G*ddammit!
GoingBroke
November 12th, 2009
8:52 am
Photo Op.. Wow.. I said it and didn’t choke on anything go figure. Guess I am not some starry eyed reporter that gets all weak in the knees when I see President Obama. Issues I have with this reporter.. Sooo.. he didn’t notice all the secret service running around, vehicle, support staff, etc. what a power of observation this reporter has..
Mrs. Godzilla
November 12th, 2009
8:53 am
Peadawg
I know that.
GoingBroke
November 12th, 2009
8:58 am
Leave or Stay? If we are going to stay, we need to give our troops all the support they can get and stop dragging it out. If we are going to leave.. let’s make our excuses and bail.
One of the HARDEST things to deal with for ME was the unknowing and uncertainty (sp?) Didnt matter if it was from direct command or higher up. We just appreciated someone making a decision about things.
Jimmy62
November 12th, 2009
8:58 am
Perhaps it could be solved, but not until we get serious and makes some plans and stop dithering. Obama has had his top General’s plan in his hands for over two months and done nothing but dither. From 9/11 to the fall of Kabul took less time than that, but we had decisive leadership back then. Agree with the decisons that were made or not, but it was definitely decisive, which is a necessary quality of leadership in war.
Gale
November 12th, 2009
8:59 am
Hmmm, interesting question, FrankLeeDarling. India is a democracy. China is communist with fledgling capitalism. I wonder if Afghanistan might be better able to govern under communism? We should entertain the idea that democracy might not be the best solution for a country that is still mostly feudal. Does anyone have thoughts on this?
Doggone/GA
November 12th, 2009
9:00 am
“From 9/11 to the fall of Kabul took less time than that, but we had decisive leadership back then”
Yep…which explains so WELL why we are STILL there 7 years later. Real decisive, that Bush crowd. They decided to kick the can down the road and let the next Pres deal with it.
Bosch
November 12th, 2009
9:01 am
Good posts this morning on the subject (for the most part) and I agree with most here. As md wrote, I think Europe has the most to lose right now and it should be their problem as well. Anywho – I think Obama is buying time to figure out how to scale back and be done with it (and save the nation’s collective face in the process). But if we chose to escalate this war, I’d be all for a tax to help pay for it – that way we all own it and have a stake in it.
And, did y’all hear? Lou Dobbs is gone from CNN! Now he’s free to join up with FOX and let his natural bigoted self roam free!!
Curious Observer
November 12th, 2009
9:01 am
I congratulate the President for refusing to tie our fortunes and the lives of our military personnel to the corrupt Karzai government without a thought about the ability of that government to maintain security and without a timeline for that government to assume responsibility for its own defense. The easy out would have been to commit more of our troops almost reflexively, without thought about an end-strategy. That seems to be the thinking of most of our right-wing friends and certain military officials, who seem to think that merely committing 40,000 more troops would somehow overwhelm the insurgents.
I agree with Mrs. G. that merely leaving Afghanistan to its own devices would be unacceptable. However, I’m also old enough to remember how we tied ourselves to the corrupt South Vietnamese government and the results that decision brought. We should not be sacrificing our troops to maintain an Afghan government that lacks popular support or the will to exert the military force that we are paying for and training. If in the end the President determines that the Karzai government is untrustworthy, we will be better off to rely on drones and other air strikes to control the insurgents at the Pakistan border than to shed more American blood to keep an ineffective government in power.
Donovan
November 12th, 2009
9:01 am
Well, well…Cynthia Tucker is now doing an about face on the war. Now, Bookman is stymied about the war. Batter Up, liberals! This one is all yours. Based on your liberal ideologies I don’t really expect for you two to have any concrete convictions.
stands for decibels
November 12th, 2009
9:03 am
I don’t care so much any more about this “we’ve got to eliminate the baddies’ safe haven” argument for continuing to pulverize Afghanistan. If not that safe haven, there’s Somalia, or maybe Yemen, or elsewhere. We can’t preemptively eliminate every haven. That’s impossible.
Fact is, if this is about avenging 9/11, we didn’t get The Big Guy. But we’ve already extracted plenty of revenge. How many more people, American, our allies and yes, Afghan citizens, both friendly and hostile, have to die before we feel quenched on this?
If the answer is “none” then we need to stop thinking about avenging an 8-year-old grievance.
Bosch
November 12th, 2009
9:03 am
“stop dithering’
There’s your wingnut meme and your sign!!!
Angry Black Man
November 12th, 2009
9:04 am
I still stand with my sentiments I’ve had since 2001. If its AQ we want, we have drones and Tomahawks that can handle that. The only problem is that blowing up a few will only create more jihadist. To bring AQ down will take resolve from the Muslim population. If Afghanistan wants to free themselves of the Taliban, the world community should offer assistance, but let them lead the charge. Likewise, with Pakistan having nukes, other nuclear countries should be helping protect their nukes from getting into the hands of extremists.
All the weapons that insurgents are using against our ground troops are completely ineffective against drones, B-52’s, B-1B’s, B-2’s, and Tomahawks. We’ve already paid for them. Why not use them?
Bosch
November 12th, 2009
9:04 am
Oh, missed this one:
“Photo Op.. Wow.”
There’s your other sign!!
DAVID- the Truth Detector
November 12th, 2009
9:05 am
Mr. B does not believe in the Bible …or scripture…….but somewhere it says……..”THERE WILL ALWAYS BE WARs & rumors of WAR……Mr. B. You need to read the Bible..then write your little pieces of WISDOM.
Jimmy Carter
November 12th, 2009
9:05 am
Tossup question – what is our present “mission” in Afghanistan? (Don’t attack me libs, I don’t think we originally had a clearly defined mission either).
Follow up question – if you can define our present mission, how will we know when it has been accomplished?
Mrs. Godzilla
November 12th, 2009
9:06 am
Curious Observer
I’m sorry but I think you misunderstand my thought.
I don’t buy that we can’t just leave.
I really don’t have a problem with leaving Afghanistan to its own devices and recognize that it would be problematic.
FinnMcCool
November 12th, 2009
9:06 am
Stay or go, neither one is a win. Why waste the lives and tax dollars on that?
Let Afghanistan set up what they want….too f’n bad if we don’t get the results we want – it’s not our country.
FrankLeeDarling
November 12th, 2009
9:06 am
Ok, Doggone then what? Going it alone is not going to work no matter how many troops we send,just ask Russia,the whole world seems to think this is just a problem for us to solve.
Boogers for the Children Fund
November 12th, 2009
9:07 am
The afghan and iraqi people are a lazy, cowardly bunch. We have invested money, lives in both of these hellholes for any number of years with zero dividends.
I will say it again…The afghan and iraqi people are a lazy, cowardly bunch. Pull out ALL TROOPS and the confiscate ALL THE heroin (I hear its really top shelf) immediately.
Hef
November 12th, 2009
9:07 am
You know the President is scheduled to be in the ATL later today.
Mrs. Godzilla
November 12th, 2009
9:08 am
…somewhere it says…..wow, just wow.
Bosch
November 12th, 2009
9:08 am
David,
Wow. Using the Bible to justify war……not sure if what you write is the truth, but here’s a question:
Do WE have to participate in these never-ending wars?
Jimmy Carter
November 12th, 2009
9:08 am
Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that we get Bin Laden. Do we then pull out of Afghanistan?
I’ll ask again – what is our mission and what is the end result?
jt
November 12th, 2009
9:08 am
stands for decibels-
Who says I’m white.
The jt stands for Jumping Turtle.
Get a clue white-eye.
Bosch
November 12th, 2009
9:09 am
MRS G.!!
Zen moment!
david wayne osedach
November 12th, 2009
9:10 am
No one has ever won a war in Afghanistan. Not even Russia! We won’t either. Why waste resources and lives trying?
Boogers for the Children Fund
November 12th, 2009
9:11 am
Hi jt!
RW-(the original)
November 12th, 2009
9:11 am
The military was never monolithic in how to handle force/troop requirements in Iraq either but if you got your news from the usual suspects you’d never know there was a voice other than Shinseki’s (sp?)
Amazing how putting someone in the CiC seat that the antique media approves of can change the reporting.
Oh well, I’m off to get a new computer and return a bag of parts. See y’all later…..hopefully….
Mrs. Godzilla
November 12th, 2009
9:11 am
Hef
got details?
Jimmy Carter
November 12th, 2009
9:12 am
Mrs. Godzilla
November 12th, 2009
9:08 am
Not that this is my fight, but….
“You will hear of wars and rumors of wars, but see to it that you are not alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come.” (Matthew 24:6)
md
November 12th, 2009
9:13 am
Bosch,
You keep mentioning Lou being a bigot, I’ve left a question for you on the last thread (twice), care to answer the question or is it easier to call others names without explanation.
Angry Black Man
November 12th, 2009
9:14 am
JC
Your question is the problem. We have no defined objective or mission. That’s why I think we back our ground troops out and knock down the extremist with a few Tomahawks as a parting gift. Tell Karzi and his peeps that we’ll back them up, but they need to deal with their own problems.
RW-(the original)
November 12th, 2009
9:14 am
sfd,
Believe or not I agree with nearly all of your 9:03. The problem Obama has is that he spent the last few years telling us this (Afghanistan) was the good war and even if he realizes it’s time to leave he’s sort of boxed himself in.
See ya!
Jimmy Carter
November 12th, 2009
9:14 am
Also, King Solomon said “a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace.” (Ecclesiastes 3:8)
Just giving specific reference. Not asking you to buy it, although I do.
extremerightwing
November 12th, 2009
9:15 am
Hey Jay, do you ever write any original pieces anymore or do you just copy the NYT and WSJ?? Must be a rough job you have there.
jt
November 12th, 2009
9:17 am
Jimmy Carter
November 12th, 2009
9:05 am
Tossup question – what is our present “mission” in Afghanistan? (Don’t attack me libs, I don’t think we originally had a clearly defined mission either).
Follow up question – if you can define our present mission, how will we know when it has been accomplished?
Here lies your answer. I neither support nor am against this policy, but it is the truth.
The current president was actually a lobbyist for UNOCAL. It is call NATIONAL INTEREST.
I do hate being lied to.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/oil.html
Bosch
November 12th, 2009
9:17 am
md,
Mr. Independent’s 7:00 Immigrants are Ruining the Country Hour.
lmno
November 12th, 2009
9:17 am
Can anyone find an example in the history of war when a General didn’t want additional troops?
I’m not saying its never happened, I just don’t remember a General ever saying, “We’re good with what we have. In fact, you could send some home, we’ve got more than we need”.