…what’s so terrible with muddling through for a while, giving the new tactics a chance to work at the local level while preventing the worst-case scenarios from happening? Why choose between escalation or withdrawal at exactly the time when the political picture is at its least clear? Why not maintain a lousy Afghan government which doesn’t quite fall, keep the Taliban on the ropes without defeating it, cut deals where we can, and try to figture out a strategy to deal with the Pakistan part which all the smart set agrees is the real issue these days? Why not focus on applying the improved COIN tactics with available resources right now instead of focusing on more troops? If the American core objective in Afghanistan is to prevent its re-emergence as an al-Qaeda safe haven, or to prevent the Taliban from taking Kabul, those seem to be manageable at lower troop levels. Good for the President’s team to take the time to have a serious debate about this and not give in to the politically expedient path (in either direction). The readouts on yesterday’s big Afghan strategy meeting reflect exactly what you want to see from a President making a tough call. I would urge them to set aside both of these corrosive, misleading notions — that the choice is between “all in” or “getting out”, and that the time for decision ins now. Why is this not the right time to muddle through, avoiding the worst outcomes and changing strategy at the local level where possible, while waiting for the political situation in Afghanistan to clarify? Muddling through might not make for sexy headlines, but it’s probably good enough for what the U.S. needs to accomplish in Afghanistan for now and is closer to the resources actually available.
Leaving aside the obvious problems with this strategy — like we’ve been doing just that for eight years and look where it’s gotten us — it’s worth remembering that Obama specifically disavowed this approach when he accepted the Democratic nomination last year. At the time, Obama declared:
“When John McCain said we could just ‘muddle through’ in Afghanistan, I argued for more resources and more troops to finish the fight against the terrorists who actually attacked us on 9/11 and made clear that we must take out Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants if we have them in our sights…John McCain likes to say that he’ll follow bin Laden to the gates of hell. But he won’t even go to the cave where he lives.”
Digest that for a minute. McCain’s muddle through comment comes from 2003, when Afghanistan looked far different than it does today. But Obama…he made a promise to provide commanders on the ground with “more resources and more troops to finish the fight.” It was explicit. If Democrats want to reverse on this core issue, and if they want the president to abandon this central promise of his campaign, they can’t sell it as a brave and smart decision that “might not make for sexy headlines.” It is what it is — a complete abandonment of core principles.
