Friday, April 9, 2010

Afghanistan and the Decline of American Power

Fouad Ajami blames President Obama:

Photobucket

In Afghanistan, and throughout the Middle East, populations long in the path, and in the shadow, of great foreign powers have a good feel for the will and staying power of those who venture into their world. If Iran's bid for nuclear weapons and a larger role in the region goes unchecked, and if Iran is now a power of the Mediterranean (through Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Beirut), the leaders in Kabul, whoever they are, are sure to do their best to secure for themselves an Iranian insurance policy.

From the very beginning of Mr. Obama's stewardship of the Afghan war, there was an odd, unsettling disjunction between the centrality given this war and the reluctance to own it in full, to stay and fight until victory (a word this administration shuns) is ours.

Consider the very announcement of the Obama war strategy last November in Mr. Obama's West Point address. The speech was at once the declaration of a "surge" and the announcement of an exit strategy. Additional troops would be sent, but their withdrawal would begin in the summer of 2011.

The Afghans, and their interested neighbors, were invited to do their own calculations. Some could arrive at a judgment that the war and its frustrations would mock such plans, that military campaigns such as the one in Afghanistan are far easier to launch than to bring to a decent conclusion, that American pride and credibility are destined to leave America entangled in Afghan troubles for many years to come. (By all indications, Mr. Karzai seems to subscribe to this view.)

Others could bet on our war weariness, for Americans have never shown an appetite for the tribal and ethnic wars of South Asia and the Middle East. The shadow of our power lies across that big region, it is true. But we blow in and out of these engagements, generally not staying long enough to assure our friends and frighten our enemies.

Zia ul-Haq, the military dictator who recast Pakistani politics away from that country's secular beginnings and plunged into the jihad and its exertions, once memorably observed that being an ally of the United States was like sitting on the bank of a great river where the ground is lush and fertile, but that every four to eight years the river changes course and the unsuspecting friend of American power finds himself in a barren desert. Mr. Obama has not given the protagonists in the Afghan war the certainty that he is in it for the long haul.

In word and deed, Mr. Obama has given a sense of his priorities. The passion with which he pursued health-care reform could be seen at home and abroad as the drive of a man determined to remake the American social contract. He aims to tilt the balance away from liberty toward equality. The very ambition of his domestic agenda in health care and state intervention in the economy conveys the causes that stir him.
PHOTO CREDIT: Ruminating Out Loud, "Winning Hearts and Minds."

4 comments:

  1. I just read that a few hours ago and its spot on. Our ability to project our power is falling, but that's mostly in part to both Bush and Obama not taking stands to Russia and Iran. Bush did stand up to Iran more than Obama has, but it was the Russia-Georgia war that was the first crack in our perceived power projection. Bush said some thing, sent supplies by military plane, but there was no real threat to Russia. We need to be able to threaten aggressors with the threat of actual force, not with the threat of words. They need to fear that we will attack, not that we will speak harshly. This isn't a new problem. This is the same problem that has infected the CIA with its aversion to HUMINT and true covert ops.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Indeed. Obama dithered for I think 3 months between McChrystal's report and sending the troops. Then he only sent 2/3 of the ones requested. Finally, his speech was one of the most pathetic we've seen from a wartime president. Who could be inspired to go fight after listening to Obama? Sheesh

    ReplyDelete
  3. This post linked at Reaganite Republican… good stuff, sir- everyone who votes should read this

    http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2010/04/ascendant-new-media-right-speaks.html

    ReplyDelete
  4. karzai knows that he is puppet
    and his government extends only to kabul. he is president because of Americans soldiers.USA wants to end this game leaving behind a Govt which could ensure atleast minimum usa interests in the region/country . A wise idea for usa and kabul. Karzai knows if Americans leave he also leaves. So can a person like karzai support a usa honourable exit?? NO never.It is time to bring a man in kabul who has credibility and vision to bring peace in his country and also cares about usa sacrifices.

    ReplyDelete