Examiner Editorial: No more dithering on Afghanistan strategy

President Barack Obama is right to insist that U.S. military leaders produce a reasonable strategy for winning what he calls the “war of necessity” in Afghanistan. But judging by Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s memo describing the results of his review of the situation in Afghanistan and Obama’s comments over the weekend, it remains unclear exactly what “winning” means.

This is no small thing, because it is impossible to have a strategy when you don’t know what victory looks like.

Obama says the U.S. remains in Afghanistan eight years after 9/11 “because al-Qaida killed 3,000 Americans and we cannot allow extremists who want to do violence to the United States to be able to operate with impunity.” That means preventing the establishment of a government in Afghanistan that would give al-Qaida freedom of movement, which is what they had when the Taliban controlled Afghanistan prior to the U.S. invasion in 2001. So, winning means defeating the Taliban and establishing a government in Afghanistan strong enough to prevent a Taliban resurgence once the U.S. withdraws its forces.

McChrystal has prepared a separate memo containing specific numbers of additional troops and other resources he believes will be required to defeat the Taliban militarily. But that memo has not been made public because the White House fears it would incite a heated fight in Congress before health care reform is wrapped up. In addition to the 17,000 added troops Obama approved earlier this year, McChrystal reportedly will request as many as 60,000 more. And, according to the unclassified version of his memo published by The Washington Post, McChrystal believes the U.S. has no more than a year in which to act before the Taliban becomes too strong to oust.

If Obama is indeed serious about winning the war in Afghanistan, he must put it on the front burner ahead of health care reform, cap-and-trade and other domestic issues. There is no justification for delaying decisions that, by Obama’s own description, are central to the federal government’s most basic duty, protecting the American people from another 9/11.

As commander-in-chief, Obama should take care to avoid the mistakes of Vietnam. The U.S. lost its way in that conflict because it chose gradual escalation over a decisive stroke, and because civilian leaders micromanaged the ground and air wars.

Obama should review the merits of McChrystal’s troop request and quickly decide how many more Americans should go to Afghanistan. He should base his decision on military realities, not politics. Then, he should get out of the way and let the generals do their business, which is fighting wars. Either do whatever is necessary to defeat the Taliban as quickly as possible, or get out.

editorialsOpinion

If you find our journalism valuable and relevant, please consider joining our Examiner membership program.
Find out more at www.sfexaminer.com/join/

Just Posted

BART Ambassadors are being called on to assist riders in social situations that don’t require police force. <ins>(Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)</ins>
Unarmed BART ambassadors program formalized with a focus on community service

Public safety and police reform are key elements in campaigns of Board members Dufty and Simon

On Oct. 13, people lined up to vote early for the presidential election in Southlake, Texas. <ins>(Shutterstock)</ins>
<ins></ins>
Five things to watch for in the run-up to Nov. 3

Down-ballot races, as much as the presidency, will determine the future course of this nation

WeChat (Shutterstock)
U.S. District Court denies Trump request to shutdown WeChat app

A federal judge in San Francisco denied a request by the U.S.… Continue reading

School board members Gabriela Lopez (left) and Alison Collins (right) say they have been the subject of frequent hateful, racist and sexist attacks during their time on the school board. (Kevin N. Hume/S.F Examiner)
Angered by Lowell decision, SFUSD grad targets school board members with violent imagery

Facebook page depicts two women of color on board with swastikas and x-marks on their faces

Supervisor Sandra Lee Fewer, a former school board member, said it was ‘ridiculous’ that the school district did not yet have a plan to reopen. <ins>(Kevin N. Hume/S.F. Examiner)</ins>
Supervisors demand SFUSD set a timeline for reopening

Pressure grows on district to resume in-person learning as The City’s COVID-19 case count goes down

Most Read