Seriously – We Really Need to Start Paying Attention to Afghanistan

Posted by Enrique on 07.02.2008

Priorities



Why did we stop caring about Afghanistan? After 9/11, the thing that united Americans across the political spectrum was our shared desire to invade Afghanistan, depose the Taliban, and destroy Al Qaeda's operational capabilities. Almost seven years later, the War Everyone Loved has become the War We Pretend Isn't Happening. It's a pity, because we're ignoring the fact that the conflict in Afghanistan is going very, very badly right now.

Even though it's one of the two major military engagements America is involved in, candidates Obama and McCain are never asked about Afghanistan. And why would they be? America isn't interested. For our unusually serious story this week, let's examine the current state of the conflict, what the candidates' positions on the Afghanistan war are, and why we need to start giving a crap about Operation Enduring Freedom.

The story so far…

As I mentioned in a previous post, June marks the second straight month that casualties in Afghanistan have exceeded those in Iraq:

In June, 46 foreign troops died in Afghanistan and 31 troops died in Iraq. In May, 23 foreign troops died in Afghanistan and 21 died in Iraq.

A Pentagon report issued last week about Afghanistan said that security in many areas of the country is regarded as "fragile" and that Taliban militants have regrouped into a "resilient insurgency" after the Taliban was toppled from power in 2001.

June was the deadliest month for foreign troops in Afghanistan since the conflict there began in 2001. Twenty-eight Americans, 13 Britons, two Canadians, one Pole, one Romanian and one Hungarian died in Afghanistan. The latest deaths were three American troops who died in a vehicle rollover while on patrol in Kandahar province.

In America, we've become so chauvinistic about our own combat deaths, it's easy to forget the sacrifices made by other nations. As of this writing, allied forces in Afghanistan have incurred 872 fatalities. In addition to 541 U.S. deaths, other countries that have suffered at least double-digit losses are the United Kingdom (110), Canada (85), Germany (25), Spain (23), Netherlands (16), Denmark (14), France (12), and Italy (12). According to iCasualties.org, soldiers representing 21 different nationalities (not including Afghans) have died during the course of Operation Enduring Freedom. And speaking of iCasualties.org, they provide a number of sobering statistics regarding the conflict in Afghanistan, including this dispiriting chart:



Sweet Christ, 2008 is poised to be the single bloodiest year for coalition forces since the beginning of the war. And the worst year was 2007. For those of you keeping score at home, that was last fucking year. This is the war we supposedly won. There have been no less than 546 combat deaths in Afghanistan since the beginning of 2006 – 63% of all fatalities have occurred in the last two and a half years. Why don't we care about this?

Maybe our short attention span doesn't permit us to pay attention to more than one war at a time. Maybe most Americans can't resolve the seeming inconsistency of supporting one war while opposing another. Maybe we're deluded into believing that because the moral underpinnings of Operation Enduring Freedom were solid, the conflict will somehow magically resolve itself. Maybe we all secretly understand that Afghanistan requires a massive strategic reorientation, but we're afraid to deal with it while the other (more interesting) Iraq war is still going on.

Whatever the reason, our two major presidential nominees aren't exactly demonstrating leadership on this issue. John McCain has an entire page on his official web site devoted to Iraq filled with all sorts of "stay the course" themes, but nothing specifically devoted to Afghanistan and Operation Enduring Freedom. On the National Security page of McCain's web site, there are several oblique references to Afghanistan, but they're always lumped together with Iraq and the "global war on terrorism." Even though it's an entirely different conflict requiring its own strategy, McCain offers no specific plans for addressing Afghanistan's unique challenges.

And then there's Barack "Powered by Hope" Obama. I hold Obama to a higher standard, because I truly believe he will defeat McCain in November and become our 44th POTUS. You can imagine my dismay, then, that there is only one mention of Afghanistan on Obama's web site. It appears on his Iraq page, naturally: "I made a different judgment [about Iraq]. I thought our priority had to be finishing the fight in Afghanistan…" Pray tell, Sen. Obama – exactly how the hell do you plan to finish the fight in Afghanistan? Your web site says you plan to remove two combat brigades from Iraq per month – how many of those troops will be redeployed to Afghanistan?

The best I can find in terms of Obama's plan for Afghanistan is this recent Reuters interview with Richard Danzig, former Navy secretary and current Obama national security adviser:

Obama has also said he wants to send at least two more combat brigades -- the equivalent of between 6,000 and 10,000 soldiers -- to Afghanistan, where violence has climbed as the Taliban and Al Qaeda regrouped...

Danzig said he could not say precisely when more troops would go to Afghanistan under Obama but stated: "I don't see it as very far off, I think it's a priority."

The violent south of Afghanistan in particular needed a "more muscular U.S. presence," he said.

"More muscular?" "I think it's a priority?" This simply will not do. Afghanistan is inarguably worse off than Iraq RIGHT NOW. If anything, Obama should be screaming his head off RIGHT NOW about the Bush administration's latest demonstration of loathsome incompetence. Dubya is letting yet another war fall apart in front of our very eyes, and the man most likely to succeed him isn't saying anything about it. I'd hate to think it was because Obama isn't sincere about winning the war in Afghanistan.

There is some good news. Despite rising casualties on the coalition side, the war isn't exactly peaches and cream for the militant side:

The US-led international force has carried out an air attack in eastern Afghanistan, killing about 33 Taliban militants, the coalition says…

The rebels, armed with rocket-propelled grenades and other weapons, were spotted by a coalition reconnaissance aircraft on Monday night, alliance spokesman Lieutenant Nathan Perry was quoted by news agency AFP as saying.

Of course, dozens of militants escaped back into Pakistan, which is a line coalition forces won't cross. I wonder if Future President Obama has completely abandoned his intention to use the U.S. military in Pakistan without Pakistan's permission, as he infamously said last year. Hopefully, Obama will demonstrate leadership on this issue. He could start by talking about it.