From The Middle

Afghanistan

AFGHANISTAN

The United States is 12 and 2 when it comes to wars – we lost the Viet Nam war and just have not had the guts to admit we have lost the 40-year “War On Drugs”.  So what do we do about Afghanistan?

First, we need to study history.  Since the 1300’s no one has succeeded in conquering, much less controlling, Afghanistan.  This includes Genghis Kahn, Alexander the Great, the British (three times) and the Russians (a 10-year war).  Why?  Because of the terrain and the fierce independence of the Afghani people.

Why did America lose two wars?  Because we did not have clear objectives.  In Viet Nam we never had an objective like we had in previous wars.  We still do not know why we have the drug problem in our country that we do, and since we don’t know the cause, we have no hope of finding a solution, we are just treating the symptoms.

So, given that no one else in hundreds of years has been able to defeat the Afghanis, what makes us think we can “win”.  What is our definition of “win” – what is our objective, what is our goal?

Originally, in 2001, we went into Afghanistan to get those responsible for 9/11.  Who was that?  The Afghani people, the Afghani army, the Taliban, al Qaida? If it was either of the first two we could fight like we did in World Wars I and II, but they are not the enemy, so that won’t work.  Is it the Taliban?  The Taliban is a fundamentalist religious Muslim organization that took over the country after the Russians failed and they were removed from power with the help of the U.S. because the Afghanis did not like what their brand of fundamentalism did to their country.  Some of them are sympathetic with al Qaida.  Is the enemy al Qaida?  This is the extremist Muslim group that believes the west (primarily embodied by the U.S. and Israel) are “infidels” that the Koran tells them should be eliminated.  These are the ones responsible for the 9/11 attack on the United States.

OK, now we know just who the enemy is, al Qaida and their sympathizers .  So, as one walks through Afghanistan, how do you tell who is al Qaida and who is not?  You can’t.  Does this sound a lot like Viet Nam?  Who was North Vietnamese (Viet Cong) and who was South Vietnamese?  The only way to tell was when they started firing on us.  That puts our men and women in uniform in a totally defensive position, which is no way to fight a war and win.

In addition, al Qaida does not have any geographical boundaries.  They are based in Afghanistan and Pakistan, hence the term Af-Pak.  In particular, they are based in the worst of the incredibly difficult terrain of that area, so difficult that the U.S. military has had to develop replacements for the Humvee just to be able to get around.  The conditions are so bad that even with our incredible equipment and technology, getting support, supplies or medical help to our soldiers in combat sometimes takes hours – is this what we want to send our men and women into?  Does this sound “winnable”?

Knowing who the enemy is, what is our objective?  Is it to establish a “democratic” central government in a country that has been run by tribal “warlords”, or governors, of various regions, or states, for thousands of years and are willing to fight anyone who tries to take that system and power away from them?   When the word “power” comes into play, the best approach to solving the problem is to FOLLOW THE MONEY.

These warlords, governors, or whatever you want to call them, are in power because they provide what security they can for their people.  They will generally work with anyone who offers them the opportunity to improve the lot of the people, particularly economically.  That is why they grow the world’s highest percentage of poppies – because al Qaida pays them well (by their standards) so al Qaida can use the drug money to support their cause.

Given the history, who the enemy is, and the battle conditions, should we send in 150,000 American men and women to fight a war with no clear objective, where we do not know who the enemy is until they fire on us, where the rules of engagement tie the hands of our men and women in uniform, in an incredibly hostile terrain, where we are seen by the majority of Afghanis as just another invader, especially when we destroy their poppy fields – their only means of support?

Or, should we send in 150,000 soccer balls, 150,000 tons of seeds for planting cash crops other than poppies, 1,500 consultants and funding to help start local construction businesses, along with 20,000 troops to train Afghani police and security and focus our technical and intelligence combat efforts on finding and destroying al Qaida leaders and followers.

We must accept that Afghanistan will not become a “democratic” country like the U.S. for at least another generation or two.  We must recognize their tribal system and work with it, not against it.  By providing them with an alternative to supporting al Qaida, demonstrating that America cares about the future of the Afghani people and their history and customs, by helping them improve their own security, over time they will become an important friend to America and will help us destroy al Qaida.

World War II was fought against Germany and Japan.  We defeated them with traditional warfare methods.  Those methods will not work in this situation for all the reasons above.  What kept Germany and Japan from not only fighting us again but becoming powerful allies is how we helped them recover and rebuild.  We won their hearts and minds by demonstrating we cared and providing them the means to economic security.  I believe that this is the only “winnable” strategy in Afghanistan.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE, AND MAY GOD BLESS AND PROTECT OUR MEN AND WOMEN IN UNIFORM AND THEIR FAMILIES