Where Our Focus Should Be: Pakistan
08 October 2009 11:06 am by kris
http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurarozen/1009/Obamas_Pakistan_problem.html
Pakistan is where our focus should be. I understand the AfPak view the Administration has taken, but Pakistan in my view is the key to resolution.
We cannot afford to nation build in Afghanistan at the expense of our young men and women in uniform. As I have asked before, if we are going to follow that path where else are we willing to do the same? Will we be viewed as occupiers as we were in Iraq? Will be seen as violating nations sovereignty as Rozen asks?
The Obama administration better come up with a clear concise argument for continued presence in Afghanistan and a strategy with an end game. Definition of success was an issue in Iraq and good lord we know it is in Afghanistan.
What will readers consider success? What arguments from the Administration will you accept to justify years, lives and billions we don’t have?
This post was submitted by kris.
No tags for this post.
I haven’t been commenting much in the last few days as my plate has been full, so to speak. But I have been reading the different diaries and I want to thank Taylor for the focus on the AfPak problem.
It is an issue I feel passionately about.
One more article from Politico. I saw the eye roll. It isn’t in question.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/28066.html
I’ve been studying the Afghanistan – Pakistan issue since the 1980s, unlike most people. I was around and involved in the 1990s when Mavis Leno and others came out against the Taliban’s brutality against women. It’s why I was the only site in the primary election season that featured guest blogs by Joe Biden on Pakistan, when most progressives were scoffing at him.
As for Rozen’s article above, the premise is the aid. We’re shifting focus, which is being met with resistance.
But you can’t focus on Pakistan without aiding Afghanistan, which should NOT be about Western faces and aid orgs, but about getting money to Afghans. And without women developing countries cannot stabilize. Period.
KEEP POSTING on this, kris. Disagreements & debate encouraged!
And who does the money go to Taylor? Karzi? Don’t think so. There isn’t a viable government in Afghanistan which is a given. How do we resolve that issue. And do we or do we leave it to the Afghani’s to resolve?
We chose not to help Iranians protesting the results of their recent election because it would be interfering in a nations internal affairs. I believe that was the argument at the time. So do we reverse course in Afghanistan?
First, Iran and Afghanistan are not remotely comparable to one another. So, let’s not go there.
Money needs to go to the Afghans.
Look up the cell phone industry in Afghanistan, which is how they’ve been paying some cops in local districts, bypassing the crooked structure. The cell phones allowed these policemen to get their full pay, using pin numbers, etc. This is one simple example on which we must help Afghans build.
Secondly, Karzai no doubt pulled the election in his direction, but he’s astute enough to also get Galbraith sacked, and he’s with whom we have to deal on one level. But Obama is CLEARLY not buying into supporting him directly any longer. He caught on quickly to that one.
“Leave it to the Afghans” right now would mean the corrupt win. There are Afghans who want to build their country, but so much aid is going to Western orgs that reallocate continually causing a big part of the fraud, to name one problem. Western faces isn’t the issue. Getting aid to AFGHANS is.
Again, it’s a long haul issue, as is Pakistan. This region is of strategic importance to the U.S. and the world.
I realize I’m alone on this, but it doesn’t bother me at all.
Just keep debating!
I understand that Iran and Afghanistan don’t mirror each other, but the basic belief that we don’t interfere in other countries elections remains. Over the years we have been fed a steady drumbeat that Iran is a threat to the MidEast therefore to us. Nuclear capabilities, helpful to terrorists around the world, etc. Isn’t terrorism the excuse for being in Afghanistan for the last 8 years.
This President was critical of the Bush Administration and his opponents during the election for neglecting AfPak. Good grief, he has no strategy himself after nine months. McChyrstal, imo, had to force his hand publicly and now we have the incessant dithering. No discussion of more troops in any on the meetings the last few days? We’re back to square one of defining the mission.
A long haul issue indeed.
ummmm…. We’re not interfering in the Afghan election.
And we went into Afghanistan because we were hit on 9/11, with bin Laden inside that country. I don’t think Bush knew why he was still in Afghanistan, as he ignored it once he preemptively invade Iraq.
Obama will send troops, likely 20,000, though less are likely on the table; with the real worry that he’ll pick a Smorgasbord Strategy in Afghanistan (COIN + counterterrorism + etc.etc.), with Pakistan strategy still unclear, even as we fight a very weak gov. re: aid, in which your point that we should get out will become stronger, though it will not happen.
ummmmm….back at you. I didn’t say we were interfering in Afghanistans election. It went to my point of Karzi’s government being viewed as not being legitimate within his own country. Creates a problem for us no????? VP evidently is fed up with the leadership and rightfully so. How can we press forward on anything if we don’t believe Karzi’s the right guy?
It’s a flat out circle jerk and in the end we aren’t going to enjoy it.
As for sending less troops that requested kind of reminds me of the wonderful decision making by the Bushies on Iraq. And I can almost guarantee it will be pick one from this column, pick one from another column, strategy from this President. He is a pleaser of all with, so far anyway, a result of pleasing none.
I don’t think anyone doubts the significance of Pakistan’s role in regards to national safety, for ourselves and of the region.
The hindrance is that Afghanistan needs to be secure and stable, with American and it’s allies help. What the resources or strategy are, remain to be seen. Like I said previously, I’m glad the administration is debating this, you would not have seen this from the previous.
I can’t imagine Afghanistan becoming a failed state and collapsing. It would be far too dangerous for Pakistan, the region, and the millions of Afghans who want a better life.