The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill

‘Smart Security’ is what’s needed in Afghanistan

by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) - 05/10/12 5:40 PM ET

We will not bring stability to Afghanistan until we fundamentally alter our bilateral relationship to emphasize peaceful, civil engagement. The good thing about the Strategic Partnership Agreement is that it does include provisions relating to democracy promotion, economic development and reforming Afghan governing institutions. But these need to be the centerpiece of our Afghan strategy, together with major investments in development aid across the board.

{mosads}I won’t truly believe this war is winding down until we get a commitment from the White House that they will spend more money on diplomacy, development and reconstruction than they’re spending on the military occupation. We need a dramatic shift in resources — more to rebuild Afghan infrastructure; more to fight poverty; more to reduce infant and maternal mortality; more to send children (especially girls) to school.

As long as we maintain a military presence in Afghanistan, as long as that is the focal point of our relationship, we’ll be undermining all the important humanitarian work that needs to be done. To invest in the Afghan people is not just the right thing to do because of our common humanity…it’s the smart thing to do from the standpoint of our national security objectives. That’s why I call my plan Smart Security. It needs to be implemented not just in Afghanistan but other unstable parts of the world where terrorism poses a grave threat.

Thomas Friedman of the New York Times is on board with the principles behind Smart Security. In a column last week, he talked about how a $13 million scholarship program for Lebanese students is doing a lot more to advance our values than $1.3 billion in military aid to Egypt. He quotes a schoolteacher in Jordan who talks about how the former is for “making people” and the latter is for “killing people.” What is the point of our engagement with the rest of the world — to make people or to kill people?

As Friedman puts it: “So how about we stop being stupid? How about we stop sending planes and tanks to a country where half the women and a quarter of the men can’t read, and start sending scholarships instead?”

How about we stop being stupid? How about we make the shift to a Smart Security approach now that begins with bringing our troops home?