Largely overshadowed by President Obama’s trip to Afghanistan, the Pentagon has released a congressionally mandated report on the progress of the war that acknowledged a “resilient” Taliban and pointed to “long-term and acute challenges” for a US military whose presence on the ground will decline considerably in many of the most violent areas of the country in the months to come. The President made a surprise trip to Afghanistan on the anniversary of Osama bin Laden’s death in a Navy SEAL raid. Though the report emphasizes some security improvements, plenty of problems that the US military has been grappling with for years remain unresolved. Many are simply “beyond the capability of the US military to address and beyond the capacity of the military to fix,” says Brian Jenkins, a former special forces officer and senior adviser to the president of the RAND Corp., a defense consulting firm that works closely with the Pentagon. First among these, US defense officials widely agree, are the Taliban and Al Qaeda safe havens in Pakistan, from which the insurgent fighters who battle US troops “operate with impunity,” the report notes. These remain among “the biggest risks to the process of turning security gains into a durable and sustainable The Pentagon has for years touted “security gains,” while noting that they are “fragile and reversible.” This week’s report, which is due to Congress every six months, is no different, acknowledging that insurgents “will likely attempt to regain lost ground and influence this spring and summer through assassinations, intimidation, high-profile attacks, and the emplacement of improvised explosive devices (IEDs). At the same time, the US military is in less of a position to handle such counterattacks. Today, there are some 88,000 US troops in Afghanistan, down from 101,000 last year. That number will decline by another 20,000 by year’s end. In the violent southern Afghan province of Helmand, the US Marines are slated to withdraw more than 60 percent of their forces from the country by October, dropping from 18,000 troops to less than 7,000. There is, too, the problem that affects and upsets most Afghans: “widespread corruption” that limits the effectiveness of the government. When Afghan officials rip off average citizens, it also bolsters the cause of insurgents, who use such cases to recruit followers. But the capacity of the US military to grapple with these issues remains limited. While the mere presence of foreign forces in Afghanistan “provides a great deal of economic benefit to the country, on the other hand, those kinds of sums of money also create enormous opportunities for corruption,” says Mr. Jenkins.
When President Obama was promising a 2024 U. S. presence in Afghanistan on our taxpayer dollar, why did he fail to recognize an opportunity to gain something very valuable in return? That something? Cessation of the cultivation of opium poppies; so that our taxpayers and citizens of other nations as well might be relieved of an estimated $3.86 trillion dollars in societal costs over the next 12 years. That's a lot of money. To the U.S. taxpayer alone, where 20% of Afghan opiates are utilized, the U.S. only savings would be $750 billion in the same period–and all without a penny of new taxation. Has President Obama never considered 'carrot and stick' diplomacy as a budgetary tool? That way, Afghanistan would get continuing support from us only if we got continuing support from them. And in that process of cooperative reciprocity the whole world, including Afghanistan, would gain much toward addressing global health and other problems..
Walton Cook
Comments are closed.