Afghanistan: Why don't we leave now?
| Washington
Why can鈥檛 we just leave Afghanistan now? It鈥檚 the unspoken question that top Pentagon officials are endeavoring to answer in their assurances that America must stay its course in the war-torn country.
It comes in the wake of a spate of 鈥渋nsider attacks鈥� by Afghan security forces that have left 51 NATO service members dead this year 鈥� a 45 percent increase in such attacks over 2011.
It also comes during a month in which the surge of 30,000 forces that President Obama ordered into the country in 2009 is ending. By the end of September, some 68,000 American troops will remain in Afghanistan.听
The majority of US troops are scheduled to depart in 2014, when US combat operations will come to an end.
The nation鈥檚 top military officer, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey, stressed this week that the surge鈥檚 purpose was 鈥渢o buy us some time on some Taliban initiatives,鈥� he said, 鈥渁nd to buy us some space to grow the Afghan security forces.鈥�
He says it worked, but grappled aloud with its cost. 鈥淭he surge had its intended effect,鈥� General Dempsey said. 鈥淚 think it was an effort that was worth the cost 鈥� and don鈥檛 forget, it did have its cost.鈥�
That cost continues, in both money and lives.听
One American is killed every day in Afghanistan, on average, this year.听
In a time of budget-cutting, the US treasury spends $60 billion a month on the war. On an annual basis, that鈥檚 enough to buy groceries for every American family for more than a year and a half.
鈥淎t some level, when you make a decision to continue waging a war, losing lives and money, you make a decision that hopefully what you can get in exchange for that is worth it,鈥� says Stephen Biddle, professor of political science and international affairs at George Washington University and a former adviser to retired Gen. David Petraeus.听
鈥淎t some point it will reach the point where what we get is no longer worth American lives.鈥澛�
Analysts point out that the bulk of the war is already slated to end in 2014. After that, some American advisers will stay on the ground. But with the spate of 鈥渋nsider attacks鈥� on US forces, the joint Afghan-American patrols that are a key part of the training mission have been suspended, deemed too dangerous to risk American lives.
Retired Army Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who commanded the Pentagon鈥檚 Iraqi security force training program from 2003 to 2004, says this latest round of green-on-blue killings will prompt tough questions among commanders and within the Pentagon. 鈥淵ou have to ask yourself, what has changed?鈥� says General Eaton, now a senior adviser to the National Security Network think tank.听
鈥淪hould we accelerate the cessation of combat operations from what the president laid out in the NATO conference in Chicago? These are valid questions, and that鈥檚 what [commander of US forces in Afghanistan] John Allen, his chain of command, the secretary of defense 鈥� that is precisely what they must be mulling over right now.鈥�
Eaton and others point out that simply ending US involvement in a war is a vast undertaking, and speeding it up comes with its own risks.
Anthony Cordesman, an Afghanistan analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, estimates that it will take 鈥渁t least 13 months to clear the equipment we鈥檝e got deployed. People forget that there are very real physical limits. We cannot leave the things behind at random 鈥� they鈥檙e worth too much and are potentially dangerous.鈥澛�
But these are logistics, a matter in which the US military has long excelled. Troops might still guard the equipment, moving it out in an orderly manner without risking US lives. 鈥淚t鈥檚 certainly isn鈥檛 true that this is something you have to continue,鈥� Dr. Cordesman says. 鈥淵ou can move troops out more quickly than planned. You can cut aid more sharply.鈥�
The larger question, he adds, is whether it is strategically desirable to leave Afghanistan now. With a focus on tamping down corruption and with a couple more years work with the Afghan national security forces, 鈥淚 think what you can accomplish is a reasonable chance that the Afghan government and economy can hold together鈥� with 鈥渟ome chance of a coherent structure in Kabul, and a reasonable chance that the Afghan Army can be strong enough that, with some cooperation,鈥� it can hold insurgent forces at bay,鈥� Cordesman says.听
鈥淐an we guarantee a future? No,鈥� he adds. 鈥淵es, it has been an incredibly costly and frustrating decade. And yes, we do not seem to have clear plans for the future.鈥澛�
However, 鈥淲e can create a situation where we can show the world that we were not defeated,鈥� he says, and at the same time avoid a decision that would "deprive Afghanistan of any chance of stability."
鈥淭here鈥檚 a very real difference between simply running for the exits and leaving in a way that provides some chance of structure and order,鈥� he adds.
Yet it remains an ongoing source of debate whether American forces can accomplish any more to make American any safer in the time they have left in the country 鈥� or more precisely, analysts say, whether what they might accomplish is worth any more American lives.
鈥淭he question of what we鈥檙e gaining there 鈥� that鈥檚 been a question for a number of years,鈥� says retired Marine Col. T.X. Hammes, a senior research fellow at the National Defense University.听
With Mr. Obama鈥檚 announcement of a 2014 withdrawal, 鈥淲e鈥檝e now accepted that strategically we鈥檝e gotten all we can鈥� out of Afghanistan. 鈥淲e now have a path out that we鈥檝e committed to,鈥� he adds.听
鈥淲e鈥檙e trying to leave, and have sufficient resources to cover our withdrawal. There鈥檚 nothing particularly ennobling in that, or anything that makes you feel good, but at least we鈥檙e leaving.鈥澛�
Some military officers say, however, that as the decade-long war in Afghanistan winds down, it brings to mind Sen. John Kerry鈥檚 famous lament of Vietnam, in 1971 Senate testimony: 鈥淗ow do you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?鈥�
Dr. Hammes recalls working with British forces in Iraq in 2008 鈥渨ho were asking that question.鈥� He adds that there was and is no good answer. 鈥淚t鈥檚 hard for those people who are going to lose family there鈥� in the months to come, and for the commanders and politicians who must answer for it. 鈥淭hat frankly is one of those leadership challenges that come with the conflict.鈥�
Eaton recalls asking himself the same questions as a young second lieutenant in 1972, after four years at West Point, as Saigon was still raging. 鈥淭he attitude was, 鈥業鈥檇 really rather not be the last guy shot as we get out of Vietnam,鈥� 鈥� he recalls. But 鈥渢hat鈥檚 been going on in warfare since we started wars 鈥� and since we鈥檝e hoped to end them. That is part of being a soldier.鈥�
