Afghanistan: Cut Losses or Double Down?
The Obama administration's Afghan strategy review suggests that the war in Afghanistan is going reasonably well and that the United States should be able to draw down troops starting in July, but the real choice may be between pulling back faster and staying longer. Two views, by Robert D. Blackwill and Paul D. Miller.
Plan B in Afghanistan: Why a De Facto Partition Is the Least Bad Option
by Robert D. Blackwill
After so many years of faulty U.S. policy toward Afghanistan, there are no quick, easy, or cost-free ways to escape the current quagmire. Although it has problems, a de facto partition of Afghanistan, in which Washington pursues nation building in the north and counterterrorism in the south, offers an acceptable fallback.
Finish the Job: How the War in Afghanistan Can Be Won
by Paul D. Miller
Since 2001, Afghanistan's economy has grown at an impressive rate and major development indicators in the country have improved dramatically. Even security and the rule of law -- long neglected -- are now improving. Washington and its allies could still win in Afghanistan if they are given the time they need.
Related
As the United States and its NATO allies slog on in Afghanistan, it is Washington's mismanagement of local alliances that has proved to be the undoing of its strategy in the country.
The Taliban and al Qaeda may not pose enough of a threat to the United States to make a long war in Afghanistan worth the costs.
The first engagement in the new war on terrorism -- with Osama bin Ladin in Afghanistan -- poses severe challenges for the United States. Rooting out bin Ladin's network will require military success in a country that the Soviet Union could not conquer in ten years of trying, as well as support from unstable surrounding nations. Washington may be tempted to try to oust the Taliban regime, but doing so could rekindle Afghanistan's brutal civil war. The United States must proceed with caution -- or end up on the ash heap of Afghan history.
