In 30 June remarks to the United Nations Security Council U. S. Ambassador Susan Rice pointed out that President Obama has clearly stated the U. S. goals in Afghanistan are "to disrupt, defeat, and dismantle Al Qa'idah and to build up the Afghan government's capacity to secure its people and its territory." That would seem to be a straightforward accounting of what we are trying to achieve in Afghanistan, but developments over the last few months leave me skeptical and wondering at the administration's competence.
If the first part of the goals really was "to disrupt, defeat, and dismantle Al Qa'idah", well, that mission was accomplished almost before the troops assigned to the latest "surge" boarded the aircraft for Bagram Air Base. It was certainly achieved before Ambassador Rice proclaimed it to the world as part of our mission in Afghanistan.
On 13 June my friend and acknowledged Middle Eastern expert Rick Francona published a report citing intelligence information that indicated Al Qa'idah operatives were fleeing Pakistan. Long ago removed from Afghanistan by U. S. forces and with their sanctuaries in neighboring Pakistan's Swat Valley and Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) now feeling the heat from the Pakistani Army's offensive against their Taliban allies, Al Qa'idah was forced to disperse to the safety of the chaos in Yemen and Somalia. That chaos allows them to fade out of sight until they are ready to strike again, something they will be able to accomplish with no trouble whatsoever since we are not closely pursuing them.
So it seems that the real mission of U. S. forces in Afghanistan is really "to build up the Afghan government's capacity to secure its people and its territory." But does anybody really know what that means? There is some evidence that the Obama administration doesn't and is only now formulating a plan on how to measure progress.
This was supposed to be the good war. The war that was still going on only because President Bush diverted critical assets to the war in Iraq. Candidate Obama almost came right out and promised the American people that if elected he would set the situation right forthwith. And then he sends the troops out to fight and die with the primary enemy already withdrawn from the battlefield and the rest of the mission undefined?
I've repeatedly criticized this administration's foreign policy and believe it has been defined by blunder after blunder which will certainly leave the U. S. in a weaker diplomatic position in the Middle East if not the entire world. But this fiasco makes the foreign policy seem positively Dulles-like. If, like me, you have relatives over there in harm's way I recommend taking the attitude I have assumed: Generals Petraeus and MacChrystal are so competent, they'll save us from the idiots that have been elected to run the country. At least I hope so.
