Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Losing the War in Afghanistan

Losing a war can take many forms - formal surrender, freezing territorial positions to create a stalemate, agreeing to negotiate while the other party takes de facto control on the ground. Today the United States announced that it will hold peace talks with the Taliban aimed at finding a political solution to ending nearly 12 years of war in Afghanistan, as the international coalition formally handed over control of the country's security to the Afghan army and police. The US announcement came after the Taliban pledged not to use Afghanistan as a base to threaten other countries, although the Americans said they must also denounce al-Qaida. President Barack Obama cautioned that the process won't be easy, describing the opening of a Taliban political office in the Gulf nation of Qatar as an "important first step toward reconciliation" between the Islamic militants and the government of Afghanistan, and predicted there will be bumps along the way. Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford, said the only way to end the war was through a political solution and reconciliation, and so he said, "I frankly would be supportive of any positive movement in terms of reconciliation, particularly an Afghan-led and an Afghan-owned process that would bring reconciliation between the Afghan people and the Taliban in the context of the Afghan constitution." Dunford added that he was no longer responsible for the security of the country now that Afghan forces had taken the lead. The transition to Afghan-led security means US and other foreign combat troops will not be directly taking the fight to the insurgency, but will advise and back up as needed with air support and medical evacuations. The coalition force numbers about 100,000 troops from 48 countries, including 66,000 Americans. By the end of the year, the NATO force will be halved. At the end of 2014, all combat troops will have left and will replaced, if approved by the Afghan government, by a much smaller force that will only train and advise. The Obama administration officials said the US and Taliban representatives will hold bilateral meetings, reflecting the Taliban's refusal to recognize or negotiate with Karzai's government or his High Peace Council. Karzai's High Peace Council is expected to follow up with its own talks with the Taliban a few days later. But in making their announcement in Doha, the Taliban did not specifically mention talks with Karzai or his representatives. The talks will be with the Americans only in Doha under the patronage of Qatar," he said. "We represent the people of Afghanistan. We don't represent the Karzai government." The Taliban office is in one of the diplomatic areas in Doha. Its sign reads: "The Political Bureau of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan in Doha." Despite Karzai's stated hope that the process will move almost immediately to Afghanistan, US officials do not expect that to be possible in the near future. The Taliban have refused to negotiate with the Afghan government's High Peace Council, set up by Karzai three years ago, because they considered them to be US "puppets." ~~~~~ So dear readers, the United States, like the British and Russians before them, has lost a ground war in Afghanistan. The goal now is to salvage what they can from the resurgent Taliban, which will surely become the "governing" force in Adghanistan when the talks are over and the West goes home once again. What will become of Afghan women and children we can only guess, hoping against hope, and without a shred of tangible evidence, that the Taliban have become civilized in the years since the last time they had a stint at governing the country.

5 comments:

  1. I wish there was something positive to say about this set of circumstances ... but there is not. not one simple thing to say. If we follow this "Road to Fruition" we will again, for the 3rd time in my life negotiate a loss that the military has/had/has the ability to successful win.

    We did this "negotiation" move in Korea - Oh, that's still being negotiated isn't it some 60 years after a cease fire was put into place. Viet Nam after 10 years of our blood being spilled. And now Afghanistan. 0 for 3 we will be.

    You ask what will happen to the women and children. SHARIA LAW will happen.

    Women will be 3rd class citizens. they will suffer beatings, rape, various other forms of abuse. The Female children will be sold into "marriages" at 9 years old - basically prostitution not marriage. Living standards will remain at sub year 1000 AD.

    The bright side is that all the drug addicts in the world will be happy. Afghanistan will have world wide distribution of it's heroin from the only product the country has - POPPY

    Dear Lord save us from this idiocy that we are about to debark upon.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "It is not a field of a few acres of ground, but a cause, that we are defending, and whether we defeat the enemy in one battle, or by degrees, the consequences will be the same".
    Thomas Paine

    So by Thomas Paine's reasoning it is the CAUSE that we should be defending ... not a battle here or a long lasting skirmish there. It is the end game, the real reason we ever got involved in a conflict so far from our shores - THE CAUSE.

    So our CAUSE is preservation of and extension of Freedom, Self Determination,Equality for Everyone, Freedom of Religion, Law that is just, fair, and impartial, etc. All those rights and ideals that we hold to be so important here in the US.

    So if we loose the fight for the Afghan people now (and we will the first day we step foot into a room to negotiate these rights that our soldiers have fought so valiantly in the hills of Afghanistan for the past 10 years) we will never give up the CAUSE.

    Maybe our battle cry in Afghanistan should have been ...

    "He Who Fights And Runs Away ... Lives to Fight Another Day"

    ReplyDelete
  3. When you hire a second rate painter to paint your house, you will not get a good professional job.

    When you hire a second rate politician to be your president, you will get just we have ... lost jobs, failing economy, repossessed homes in numbers never thought of, reduced International standing, etc.

    We made a mistake in 2008. let's all work towards fixing this mistake in the 2014 Mid-term elections.

    ReplyDelete
  4. De Oppressor LiberJune 19, 2013 at 7:29 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The U.S. has commenced negotiations with the Taliban. The Afghan government is excluded from the talks, which I consider a disgracefully stupid move on the US behalf.

    The U.S. has proved to be a worse than feckless partner. Why any state or group would ever again cast its lot with America, where there are other options, is beyond me.

    Quite apart from the exclusion of the Afghan government, the negotiations strike me as a classic case of “lose-lose” as far as the United States is concerned. The Taliban has no good reason to negotiate seriously with us. It knows that most of our troops will be going home soon and that, therefore, its prospects for winning a military victory are good.

    Under these circumstances, the Taliban cannot be expected to make concessions. Thus, the likely outcome is “no deal.” This is a loss for the U.S. because we will have gone to the Taliban, hat-in-hand and over the objections of our partner in the fight, and received nothing in return.

    But because our negotiating position is so weak, a deal would be even worse. God only knows what concessions we need to make to obtain a deal from such a position. And whatever those concessions are, a deal would describe the terms of our defeat for all the world to ridicule.

    I’m not cynical enough to believe that this is what President Obama wants, but the thought has crossed my mind.

    Having determined that the U.S. wants to (under Obama) and shall lose this war, Obama’s best option is to have America go home as quietly as possible

    Let's remember hat this war was all about getting the Taliban over 9/11

    ReplyDelete