Obama's Afghanistan policy doesn't go far enough

December 10, 2009

Edmond Life and Leisure

Mary Fallin

President Obama has announced a significant increase in troop levels for Afghanistan along with a determination to set an exit date for our troops in the region. The first part of this announcement is encouraging, but the second raises real concerns about this administration's long term commitment to our national security.
It is important to view this mixed message in the context of the reality that is Afghanistan, and where that campaign fits into the ongoing War on Terror.
America was right to go into Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks. The brutal Taliban regime then in control had harbored and supported al Qaeda. They had also oppressed their own people, banning girls from attending school, even beating men in the streets whose beards were not of adequate length. By any sensible measurement, the Taliban were and are a clear threat to Western nations.
Since then, the Taliban have attempted a comeback that threatens to topple the new Afghan government and once again make that region a haven for terrorists. Military leaders have made it clear: they need more forces to counter that threat.
It was unfortunate that the President took so long to make a decision. His promise of increased force levels is a move in the right direction to meet the needs our military leaders have suggested. However, his announcement also included statements that our commitment to victory in Afghanistan comes with an expiration date, and that is bad policy.
Imagine if, in 1944, allied governments fighting Nazi tyranny had said, yes we will land in Normandy, but if Hitler has not capitulated by January of 1945, we may bring those forces home. Such a time limit would have sent a dangerous message to the enemy that our commitment to our mission was limited.
American forces should never be sent into combat without two promises: our full support and a determination to see things through until we see the mission is accomplished. Wise leaders do not set time limits on victory. When they do, they tell the enemy our military strategy and make ultimate victory less likely.
As a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I have full faith in our military forces and the commanders who lead them. They are the best judges of what is necessary to assure a positive outcome in Afghanistan.
In Congress I will work for two goals in 2010. The first will be to protect American security and make sure that those we send to fight for us have every tool and every ounce of support we can muster. The second will be to insist that we see that mission through to accomplish our military strategy.
That takes leadership. I am concerned that President Obama is less than committed to provide that leadership. For those reasons I support his surge strategy while holding crucial reservations about his means of implementing it.

back