Local politicians, veterans weigh in on Afghan policy
| Sunday, Nov 29 2009 05:57 PM
Last Updated Sunday, Nov 29 2009 05:59 PM
American military forces have been deployed in Afghanistan for more than eight years, at a significant cost to American troops and treasure.
After spending weeks reviewing and refining U.S. strategy in Afghanistan, President Obama will announce a new Afghan strategy in an address to the nation on Tuesday.
Since the days of his presidential campaign, Obama has insisted it is in the nation's interest to make sure al-Qaida and its allies cannot operate effectively in Afghanistan, which borders nuclear-armed Pakistan and Iran.
The president is expected to announce an increase of between 30,000 and 40,000 troops to strengthen the 68,000 already in Afghanistan -- a decision that will likely anger liberals in his own party.
Meanwhile, Republicans have complained he is taking too long to come to a decision -- that he has squandered critical time and made it more difficult for America's allies to continue their support.
Polls show the war to be unpopular with Americans.
Nevertheless, Obama has promised to lay out clear goals, and for the first time, an exit strategy.
What do you think American strategy should be in Afghanistan? We asked a variety of local politicians and military veterans to share their views.
Here's a summary of what they had to say.
Rep. Kevin McCarthy, R-Bakersfield
After visiting Iraq and Afghanistan in April 2007, McCarthy said he came away with a better understanding of how different the two regions are.
When you travel through Afghanistan, McCarthy recalled, you can still find the occasional derelict Russian tank left to rust alongside the road, stark reminders of the defeat of a modern army by a guerrilla insurgency.
Only about 6 percent of the population have electric power, McCarthy said. And while many schools have been built and more children -- including girls -- are now in school, educating the masses remains a huge challenge.
McCarthy said a surge in Afghanistan must be "multi-faceted." It should include enough troops to allow ground forces to meet the enemy with overwhelming military might.
But it must also include sufficient troops to train a large Afghan police force -- while continuing to make improvements in the country's infrastructure.
"You can't do one without the other," McCarthy said.
McCarthy was critical of the president for taking months to come to a final decision regarding the Afghanistan strategy.
Not only has it made it harder politically for our British allies to support a surge, he said, it has left American policy treading water during a critical phase of the war.
He also disagreed with Obama's decision to communicate an exit strategy.
"He wants an exit strategy," McCarthy said. "I want a victory strategy."
Rep. Jim Costa, D-Fresno
Costa visited Afghanistan twice during the Bush administration, in 2005 and again in 2008, and both times he came away convinced that America's strategy in the region was lacking in real commitment.
"The challenge in Afghanistan is the flip-side of Iraq," Costa said.
In Iraq, approximately three-quarters of the population lives in cities, he said, while in Afghanistan, the vast majority live in rural areas.
There are other converse relationships, he said, such as literacy, wealth and life expectancy -- higher in Iraq, much lower in Afghanistan.
But as difficult as the challenges are, Costa said, the stakes are too high to cede the region back to the Taliban and its allies. Neighboring Pakistan is too strategically important, he said, and abandoning Afghanistan could serve to strengthen anti-Western forces in Pakistan.
The prospect of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal falling into the hands of radical extremists is unthinkable, he said.
Like McCarthy, Costa favors a multi-pronged approach, with more troops to engage the enemy and more training of Afghan police and regular army.
In addition, he said, a stronger coalition must be formed with U.S. allies.
Unlike McCarthy, Costa said he's glad the president took the time to consult with a number of military and regional experts before he established a new Afghan strategy.
He also applauded Obama for his determination to be clear with the American people about the main goals of the strategy and for refusing to make an open-ended military commitment.
But convincing the public is not going to be easy.
Americans have endured Afghanistan for eight years, Costa said, and they are not very happy with the result.
One of the lessons of history, Costa said, is "never commit American forces unless you have the clear support of the American public. That's the challenge the president is going to face on Tuesday."
Mike Cortez, Vietnam veteran
"We were in Vietnam for a long time," Cortez said of the war that lasted through the Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon presidencies. "But Afghanistan is a quagmire like 'Nam never was."
The Vietnam War was often referred to as a "police action," Cortez recalled.
"A standing military force is not a police force," he said. "We cannot win this as a police force."
To change the mindset of the average Afghan resident would take five generations, he said. "It's a religion. You can't change that.
"Afghans have to do their own job," Cortez added. "But they're not willing to commit."
Bob Otto, World War II and Korean War veteran
"My feeling, whether it's World War II, Korea, or any war, is get in, get the job done and then get out," Otto said. "The Russians were in Afghanistan for years and got nowhere. It seems like we are getting nowhere.
"Either get it over with or get the hell out of there."
Simba Roberts, Vietnam veteran, spokesman, Veterans at Large-Operation Recovery
"Why are we there?" Roberts said of Afghanistan. "You can't talk about winning or losing until a goal is set."
The past 35 years have seen nothing but war and upheaval in Afghanistan, Roberts cautioned, noting that the Russian military occupied the country for more than a decade before abandoning its efforts in disgrace.
Short of "radiating" the entire country, there's no winning, he said, because "you cannot kill an idea."
"If we don't get the hell out of there," he said, "it's going to be another meat grinder."
