Op-Ed

PrintPrint EmailEmail ShareShare CiteCite
Style:MLAAPAChicagoClose

loading...

Two Arguments for What to Do in Afghanistan

Authors: Leslie H. Gelb, President Emeritus and Board Senior Fellow, and Peter Lampert Bergen
October 1, 2009
Time Magazine

Share

In August, President Obama laid out the rationale for stepping up the fight in Afghanistan: If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al-Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting. This is fundamental to the defense of our people. Obamas Af-Pak plan is, in essence, a countersanctuary strategy that denies safe havens to the Taliban and al-Qaeda, with the overriding goal of making America and its allies safer. Under Obama, the Pentagon has already sent a surge of 21,000 troops to Afghanistan, and the Administration is even weighing the possibility of deploying as many as 40,000 more.

This is a sound policy. If U.S. forces were not in Afghanistan, the Taliban, with its al-Qaeda allies in tow, would seize control of the country's south and east and might even take it over entirely. A senior Afghan politician told me that the Taliban would be in Kabul within 24 hours without the presence of international forces. This is not because the Taliban is so strong; generous estimates suggest it numbers no more than 20,000 fighters. It is because the Afghan government and the 90,000-man Afghan army are still so weak.

 

View full text of article.

More on This Topic

Op-Ed

McChrystal's Fuzzy Math

Author: Leslie H. Gelb
The Daily Beast

Leslie Gelb writes that the U.S. military's request to increase troops in Afghanistan by 44,000 ought to be closely scrutinized. He adds...

Op-Ed

How to Win Afghanistan

Author: Leslie H. Gelb
The Daily Beast

With debate raging on whether to increase troops in Afghanistan, Leslie H. Gelb writes that the United States can succeed there by empowering...