Just a quick word on the strategy laid out by Obama before getting to other firsthand observations of the speech. As I have written, I basically support the entire counterinsurgency ‘surge’ strategy, but find the inputting of an exit date, July 2011 presumably, to be potentially counterproductive (how can we not expect the Taliban to just wait us out?). In short, a tough call that I support. Here’s the speech text:
– First off, these poll numbers really show how important this speech was for President Obama.
– As he did as a candidate when talking about Afghanistan, Obama began his speech by bashing the Bush administration’s handling of the effort. I hope this is the last time this is done as what is important is what happens tomorrow, not yesterday. Obama needs to leave it to the historians to judge Bush, it is his time to be Commander-in-Chief.
– The President once again reiterated that America’s central goal in this conflict is the defeat of Al Qaeda, but then laid out the reversal of recent Taliban gains, strengthening our partnership with Pakistan, and building up the Afghan state and economy as key to its success. Obama also voiced his belief that the Taliban and Al Qaeda are connected.
– Just seconds after he announced the 30,000 troop surge number, Obama told his audience that a withdrawal would begin 18 months later. Later he did use the word ‘transition’ and cautioned that ‘conditions on the ground’ would affect this decision, but it still comes across as trying to please all audiences. ‘We will go in to win, but we need to win in 18 months.’ I know the strategy is more complicated than this and I have faith that in the details to soon come we will hear a more thorough plan, but this was not reassuring to those who want to fight to win and are willing to give time for results and those who think it best to get out today, if not yesterday. I would have liked to hear more about what Obama wanted the conflict to look like in that 18 month time period.
– President Obama confronted the Vietnam and Counterterrorism arguments rather bluntly and effectively, but his defense against the ‘open ended conflict’, which of course is key to his already having a withdrawal date, was less impressive. Basically, that it would ‘deny urgency’ in the Afghan government and military to take the initiative, but doesn’t also likely instill patience in the Taliban insurgency? This was a key issue and Obama needed to really explain why he thought it a correct choice.
– In describing the United States’ enemy in this conflict, Obama consistently (really only) used the term ‘violent extremists’. Now I know the President needs to be diplomatic and I would do the nearly the same thing. Buuuuuttt….I think it would be appropriate to add ‘Islamist’ before ‘violent extremists’ at least one time. I mean that’s what we’re talking about right? The leaders of Al Qaeda and the Taliban after all are Islamic violent extremists. Not dwell on this factor, but acknowledge it. To have a serious debate on such an important national security we need to be as honest and forthcoming as possible.
– Lastly, Obama’s tribute to the positive impact that American power and influence have had on the world in the last 100 years was inspiring. Obama’s pronouncement that freedom for the people of the world is good for America (international liberalism in IR speak) was nice to hear from Obama as well.
This is just the tip of the iceberg in what will surely be a major national and international security issue facing the US and the world for years to come.
