Afghanistan: Too Late to Play the Heroes
February 22, 2009 by Julia King · 4 Comments
I remember standing in my neighbor’s backyard one day many months after September eleven. He filled his bird feeder as we talked about the impending war. He supported invading Iraq. I did not. But we both agreed that attacking Afghanistan had been reasonable. This meant, of course, that I (a presumably loving person) had endorsed the killing and maiming of old women and children, of sinister Al Qaeda terrorists and innocents alike, anything to put the universe back in order. In 2001, such a plan seemed workable.
It’s 2009 and none of it seems workable anymore. By shifting away from Iraq and refocusing on Afghanistan, sending a new wave of troops to the region, President Barack Obama is attempting to do the impossible. He’s trying for a “do-over” of legendary proportions.
Had Obama been president in the wake of 9/11 (or Al Gore, a more likely scenario), things would be different. For one, the United States would not have carried out a preemptive war on Iraq, thus squandering world sympathy and the accompanying potential for global cooperation as we tried to find and capture Osama Bin Laden. Just as the Bush administration did, a Democratic administration would have likely invaded Afghanistan, but it would have done so with undivided military and intelligence resources.
Would a different war in Afghanistan have worked, one carried out with singular focus and in another political (and economic) climate? Would American forces have charged in and fixed the place right up, lassoing Osama Bin Laden and all the other bad guys? Knowing what we know now (and hearing from others who have fought for years in the country), it seems unlikely. But the effort would not have been entirely irrational.
It is Obama who insists we use common sense regarding Iraq and the Middle East, asking us to honestly evaluate the situation, including our relationships in that part of the world – relationships that have tremendous bearing on our ability to operate effectively in both Iraq and Afghanistan (and anywhere else we put up our dukes). Now he’s asking us to abandon that common sense, to believe something other than what he has often expressed, which is: “…that you cannot solve the problem of Afghanistan, the Taliban, the spread of extremism in that region solely through military means.” (Obama as quoted in a recent Time article by Mark Thompson.) Remove the word “solely,” and I agree with the president completely.
The difficulty here is that the Taliban (and Osama Bin Laden, Al Qaeda, and all the loosely affiliated yet slightly different extremist elements in the area) are unequivocally horrendous. They are so horrendous that on some days it feels like a stretch to even count them as part of humanity. So, what do we do? We wipe them out, of course, the best way we know how – with our unrivaled military might.
When I (and millions of other Americans) supported the initial Afghanistan invasion it was not only because the people who attacked the World Trade Center were so obviously deserving of punishment; and it was not only because we were raw with emotion. It was also because we believed the war could do some good. I imagined myself living under the rule of the Taliban and thought the invasion (in addition to capturing and punishing Bin Laden) could offer a better way of life to those monumentally unfortunate Afghanis caught in the clutches of Islamic extremists. But it turns out (surprise) that adding additional violence to an already turbulent mix does no one a favor. Civilian deaths in Afghanistan are soaring and trust in U.S. military personnel is plummeting. More Americans with guns will not improve those numbers. We have simply done too much in recent years to claim the moral high ground (Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay). Even Obama can’t undue the past, can’t right the wrongs of the Bush administration. We cannot begin again.
It is all too much. It’s too much for the American soldiers who leave their families and go half way around the world to discover the horror of killing fellow human beings. And for the families who bury their loved ones in flag-draped coffins. And especially for the men and women of Afghanistan whose homes are destroyed and whose lives are one wave of loss after another.
We should not give up the fight against Islamic extremists (or any other violent extremists, for that matter) – but we must change tactics. Meaning, it won’t be uniformed soldiers who make real progress against extremism. It will be people like Greg Mortenson (see Three Cups of Tea post), people brave enough to enter dangerous places without weapons and sincere enough to build relationships there. And (despite the awfulness of it) by others less gentle, by those who can trick and connive and speak the language and commit clandestine acts of violence to reduce the numbers of the ruthless and immovable (acts that mercifully leave no lifeless children behind).
Ultimately, however, the rate of progress is out of American hands. We can hold our own government to better standards of justice and compassion around the globe (and we must), but we can not quell Afghanistan violence. It is ordinary (and extraordinary) Afghanis who will have to do that, the friends and neighbors, brothers and sisters, the grandmothers of those who would systematically oppress or murder their fellow countrymen and women.
