Obama’s Afghanistan policy: Different but still the same

There is not a lot to like about President Barack Obama’s newly announced Afghanistan strategy.

First, there will be more troops and advisers. So, war remains the answer in Afghanistan, even if the Obama administration is bulking up diplomatic efforts.

Second, there is the rhetoric — which Rachel Maddow last night showed was similar, sometimes word for word, to the language used by President George W. Bush.

It is true that the strategy is a break from the Bush administration’s, but it is a falsehood to say that the war in Afghanistan was not one of choice as we are hearing from some. Afghanistan may have been the home to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda, but a full-out war was not necessarily something that had to follow 9/11. A narrower approach was still possible back in October 2001, one that could have resembled a police raid on a drug-manufacturing house — a coordinated effort that would not have resulted in the kind of indiscriminate actions that have poisoned our relationship with the region and now appears to imperil Pakistan.

Tom Hayden is correct:

The Obama plan instead will accelerate any plans Al Qaeda commanders have for attacking targets in the United States or Europe. The alternative for Al Qaeda is to risk complete destruction, an American objective that has not been achieved for eight years. A terrorist attack need not be planned or set in motion from a cave in Waziristan. The cadre could already be underground in Washington or London. The real alternative for President Obama should be to maintain a deterrent posture while immediately accelerating diplomacy to meet legitimate Muslim goals, from a Palestinian state to genuine progress on Kashmir.

Or as another Nation writer, editor Kristina Vanden Heuvel, said not too long ago,

Escalating the occupation will bleed us of the resources needed for economic recovery, further destabilize Pakistan, open a rift with our European allies and negate our improved image in the Muslim world prompted by our withdrawal from Iraq. Escalation will not increase US security or secure a better future for the Afghan people–indeed, more troops will certainly mean more dead civilians.

We need a much greater break with Bush policy than what President Obama is offering.

Author: hankkalet

Hank Kalet is a poet and freelance journalist. He is the economic needs reporter for NJ Spotlight, teaches journalism at Rutgers University and writing at Middlesex County College and Brookdale Community College. He writes a semi-monthly column for the Progressive Populist. He is a lifelong fan of the New York Mets and New York Knicks, drinks too much coffee and attends as many Bruce Springsteen concerts as his meager finances will allow. He lives in South Brunswick with his wife Annie. View all posts by hankkalet