On March 27, 2009, President Obama announced a major new direction in Afghanistan
Today, I'm announcing a comprehensive, new strategy for Afghanistan and Pakistan. And this marks the conclusion of a careful policy review, led by Bruce, that I ordered as soon as I took office.
Six months later, the careful policy review that resulted in the "New Strategy" is being reviewed again.
A senior administration official tells Fox that President Obama and his national security team began fresh analysis of the Afghanistan strategy on Sept. 13 in the White House situation room as part of an on-going review of war policy.
"There's this idea that there's a change of strategy looming,but there are difficult questions to ask as we continue to review this," the official said.
Back in March, the President said
...let me be clear: Al Qaeda and its allies -- the terrorists who planned and supported the 9/11 attacks -- are in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Multiple intelligence estimates have warned that al Qaeda is actively planning attacks on the United States homeland from its safe haven in Pakistan. And if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban -- or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged -- that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can.
But now, the President is not so clear
On Sunday he said: The first question is — are we pursuing the right strategy?” Even more tellingly, the President said that his core goal was to destroy al-Qaeda, which is not present in significant numbers in Afghanistan.
So the President's thinking now that maybe we can abandon Afghanistan (again) and it might not become a base for terrorists who want to kill us.
At one point, Senator Obama and Senator Clinton told President Bush to listen to his Generals:
General Stanley McChrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan, who said last week that the war was likely to be lost without a rapid surge of additional troops.
General McChrystal believes that the only way to avoid defeat in Afghanistan is significantly to increase US troop levels to safeguard the population, fight the Taleban and reconstruct the country’s civilian infrastructure — a strategy endorsed by Mr Obama in a speech on March 27.
But listening to Generals is not the top priority any more
In another sign of the stiffening resistance within civilian elements of the Obama Administration to a major military escalation, Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, on Monday expressed “respect” for the general’s assessment, but added: “There are other assessments from very expert military analysts who have worked in counter-insurgencies that are the exact opposite.”
But General McChrystal is the guy President Obama put in charge of Afghanistan, after relieving General David McKiernan of his command, presumably because the President trusted his judgment over that of General McKiernan. And what is General McChrystal's judgement?
In a confidential 66-page report leaked to the Washington Post, General McChrystal explicitly states that he needs additional troops within the next year or else the conflict in Afghanistan "will likely result in failure."
Back in March President Obama said
There is an uncompromising core of the Taliban. They must be met with force, and they must be defeated. But there are also those who've taken up arms because of coercion, or simply for a price. These Afghans must have the option to choose a different course. And that's why we will work with local leaders, the Afghan government, and international partners to have a reconciliation process in every province. As their ranks dwindle, an enemy that has nothing to offer the Afghan people but terror and repression must be further isolated. And we will continue to support the basic human rights of all Afghans -- including women and girls.
And now General McChrystal recommends
emphasizing the importance of protecting civilians over just engaging insurgents, restricting airstrikes to reduce civilian casualties, and sharply expanding the Afghan security forces and accelerating their training. He also signaled that he will seek to unify the effort of American allies that operate in Afghanistan, and possibly to ask them to contribute more troops, money and training.
Listening to the President back in March and McChrystal today, you'd think they were on the same page.
But the President's hesitation and re-examination of a strategy that is only six months old would cast doubt on that conclusion.
True, he is facing pressure from the Left and he is faced with a public that is growing sour on the war because casualties have grown since al Qaida lost in Iraq and began focusing more on Afghanistan.
But Bushed faced these same pressures and stood resolute.
You know, in reading through President Obama's speech in March I noticed that he did not use the words win, victory or success relative to the outcome of his new strategy in Afghanistan.
Yet another way in which he differentiates himself from Bush, I suppose.
