Compromising security in Afghanistan

Recent debate in Washington is dominated by rhetoric including “Rebuild America, not Afghanistan.” It was pervasive throughout Obama’s June 22 speech. However, such reasoning misses the point. The goal should not be rebuilding Afghanistan. That is a task for Afghans. The goal should be to help them achieve a basic level of self-sustaining stability, which may lead to an opportunity for nation-building from within. This will be an arduously long process. External assistance at all levels is essential, particularly on the security front.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, candidate Obama largely convinced the American public that Afghanistan was the “right war” and not Iraq. Since assuming the presidency, he has struggled to make a compelling case for Afghanistan. His Afghan policy has lacked consistency. It has puzzled allies, confused publics in NATO member-states and undermined the international mission’s credibility. Furthermore, changing commanders three times in two years has also proven counterproductive.

Obama’s drawdown decision was reached more for short-term political convenience, with an eye on the 2012 elections, and less on long-term strategic calculation in the national interest, and broader international security. Mounting political pressure from his party’s grass-roots, House Republicans, broader public opinion, economic difficulties and the influence of Vice President Joe Biden are largely responsible for this decision. A token drawdown would have sufficed for the President to save political face without seriously risking operational effectiveness.  

The departure of Bob Gates from the Pentagon marks a considerable loss for U.S. foreign policy. Since the start of Obama’s presidency, Gates has been its dominant figure. As a sober voice of reason, he towered over other administration officials and remained above the fray. His stature, experience, credibility and non-partisanship set high standards. Compared to others, he was the grown-up in the room. 

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s opposition to the drastic reduction is no secret. Obama’s former presidential primary opponent has never been part of the inner circle. Vice President Joe Biden, who brokered her appointment as Secretary of State and leads the Afghan-skeptic camp, has prevailed for now. With Gates’ departure, Biden now becomes Obama’s most influential policy advisor. The incoming Secretary of Defense, Leon Panetta, is the numbers-man who will finally carry out Obama’s budget-slashing agenda at the Pentagon. Gates publicly warned not to cut too deep so as to undercut the long-term effectiveness of the U.S. military.

The appointment of David Petraeus as CIA Director amounts to a demotion with honor. As one of the finest soldiers of his generation, he deserved the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It would have ranked him as the President’s chief military advisor and the U.S. armed forces’ highest ranking officer. However, his immense stature and strong views were too much for the President to handle. Differences on Afghanistan regularly surfaced. Containing him at Langley yet benefiting from his expertise was the President’s most feasible option.

Undoubtedly, a lasting political settlement with insurgents in Afghanistan presents the only way out of the current conflict.  However, Obama’s public eagerness for negotiations creates the risky perception of a rush for the exit door. Sensing weakness, insurgents may drive an even tougher bargain. With Obama’s self-imposed deadlines, they can simply buy time and wait him out. Furthermore, the insurgency is far from monolithic. Unless a broad consensus emerges in its ranks, negotiations will prove futile. In addition, it is naïve to think Osama Bin Laden’s death or increased drone attacks alone will force rebels to the table. Most grievances remain local. Unless substantially addressed, little will change in the long-term.

Marco Vicenzino provides geo-political risk analysis and regular commentary on leading global media outlets. He is director of the Global Strategy Project.