Afghanistan -- The Need for a Timetable

July 2, 2010

by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Zaid Jilani, Alex Seitz-Wald, Tanya Somanader

AFGHANISTAN

The Need for a Timetable

Last night, House lawmakers passed a $37 billion war spending bill that will "pay for the 30,000 additional troops ordered to Afghanistan." The new troops are an addition to the 30,000 troop surge President Obama ordered in 2009 at Gen. Stanley McChrystal's request. After McChrystal's resignation last week over the now infamous Rolling Stone article, the new troops will fall under the direction of Gen. David Petraeus, the former head of U.S. Central Command "credited with the success of the 'surge' strategy in Iraq." While the Senate unanimously approved his confirmation yesterday, Petraeus' hearing was marked by "bickering over [the] Afghan troop withdrawal date." Set to begin in July 2011, the timetable is an essential strategic element in shifting responsibility for security and services from U.S. military forces to the Afghan government. And with American troops now engaged in "the longest war in our nation's history," the length and expense of the effort is making it increasingly unpopular in the United States. Many Republican leaders, however, are stubbornly resisting any clear exit strategy, arguing a timetable will intimate a lack of American commitment and thereby embolden U.S.enemies. Despite his original push for a timeline to shift responsibility from the U.S. to the Afghan government, President Obama may face intense pressure to back away from his original stance. His appointment of Petraeus may bring another shift in strategy. Without a clear commitment to a timetable and a strategy of operating in Afghanistan, the U.S. risks exacerbating the consequences of the conflict.

THE TIMETABLE: When he announced a surge of 30,000 troops in Afghanistan last year, Obama committed to begin a drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan by July 2011. Obama asserted that the "absence of a deadline" would tell Afghans "it's business as usual" and "an open-ended commitment" in which the U.S. will pay for Afghan security indefinitely. In his report that led to the troop surge, McChrystal agreed that "Afghanistan requires an Afghan solution" and that the work of military forces would "prove less decisive" than that of the Afghan government "in the end." But "as part of the short-term stabilization agenda," the military has been implementing "far too much development and governance assistance" when "Afghan civilians with international civilian support should be driving statebuilding and development assistance." The longer this continues, the more U.S. forces destabilize and delegitimize the Afghan state in the eyes of the population. As Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) said, a "flexible timetable" will "make sure we can do the most we can in the remaining time" while "showing the people there and here that we have a sense about when it is time to leave." Moreover, a timetable undermines the insurgents' message that the U.S. intends to occupy their nation forever. At home, our protracted military engagement, now in its 10th year, has led the majority of Americans to favor Obama's timetable. Excluding yesterday's supplemental funding, the U.S. has committed $350 billion for the war effort and $50 billion in development assistance to date. The length and expense of the war, especially when deficit spending is highly unpopular, make the timetable a responsible path forward. Recognizing this, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA) authored an amendment to the war spending bill to require a timeline for troop withdrawal in Afghanistan.While the amendment failed, he noted that without it, "people will keep going along" spending on the war "and not feel the pressure to change anything." Both McChrystal and Petraeus have recognized the value of the timetable. In his confirmation hearing, Gen. Petraeus noted that the establishment of the timetable was "the message of urgency to accompany the message of enormous commitment." Petraeus assured that "not only did I say I supported" the timetable, "I said I agreed with it."

AN UNCERTAIN RESOLVE: A timetable supported by both commanders in the war theater and the majority of Americans can serve as a constant measure of progress, or lack thereof, in Afghanistan. While key leaders like Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) recognized the timetable as "an important method of 'spurring action,'" Republican leaders have blasted the timetable without offering an alternative solution. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) called the timetable a "purely a political decision" on NBC's Meet the Press. During Petraeus' confirmation hearing, he insisted on the misguided notion that "announcing a date to begin troop withdrawals" makes "the war 'harder' and 'longer.'" Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) has followed suit, saying "if everybody in Afghanistan believes that we're going to begin to leave in July 2011 no matter what...we're gonna lose." Right-wing pundit Sarah Palin also chimed in on Facebook, stating that the the U.S. will pay "a very high price" for the July 2011 withdrawal by sending "all the wrong signals to our friends and to our enemies." This long-standing "source of contention between Obama and his Republican critics" has increased pressure on the need for clarification. During his appearance with Russian president Dmitry Medvedev last Thursday, Obama reiterated July 2011 as the beginning of "a transition phase" to "allow the Afghan government to take more and more responsibility." He immediately added, however, that "in December of this year, a year after this strategy has been put in place...we'll conduct a review and we'll make an assessment" as to whether that strategy is actually do-able. More recently at G-20 summit in Canada, he "chastised what he dubbed the current 'obsession' over a timetable," preferring to focus on "how we make sure what we're doing there is successful."

KEY TO SUCCESS: While the troop withdrawal is a fundamental aspect of the strategy, the key to long-term success in Afghanistan lies in developing stronger and more capable governance structure to better serve the needs of the Afghan people. In his 2009 report, McChrystal stressed "the weakness of state institutions, malign actions of power-brokers, widespread corruption and abuse of power by various officials" along with military errors "have given Afghans little reason to support their government." Only through an "Afghan solution" where improved governance and reforms that will introduce more power sharing and broader political representation are the focus will Afghanistan witness a sustainable reduction in the violence and instability that has plagued it for decades. As Center for American Progress analysts Caroline Wadhams and Colin Cookman said in May, "Absent a greater focus on governance reform that give the Afghan people at all levels greater powers to voice priorities, approve plans, and hold their leaders to account, the sustainability and legitimacy of the Afghan state in the medium and long term is in doubt with serious implications for regional and international security in the years to come." There is a "basic tenant" in the Afghanistan strategy "that combat operations, no matter how crushing, won't be enough to defeat insurgency." The Obama administration should complement its more aggressive military presence in Afghanistan -- which has been marked by "unprecedented toll of 100 deaths" for coalition forces in June -- with a political strategy that focuses on institutionalizing checks and balances in the Afghan political system. This will increase the government's ability to mobilize and sustain the support of the population. "Our objective must be the population," McChrystal stated. "In the struggle to gain the support of the people, every action we take must enable this effort."

ENVIRONMENT -- CONSERVATIVES CLAIM THAT 'JONES ACT' IS HINDERING OIL SPILL CLEANUP IS 'URBAN MYTH:' In an effort to paint the Obama administration as failing in its response to the BP oil spill, Republicans continue to push the claim that the government is not accepting aid from foreign countries. The latest talking point alleges that the Jones Act -- a longstanding law that "requires all trade delivered between U.S. ports to be carried in U.S. flagged vessels constructed in the United States and owned by American citizens" -- is impeding the Gulf clean up effort by blocking foreign aid. Former House Majority Leader Dick Armey said, "It's a little shocking to me that a president that has such a multinational orientation as this president didn't immediately see the benefits of waiving the Jones Act and allowing all of these resources to come in." Some GOP lawmakers have seized on the point and introduced legislation to repeal the law to, according to Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-TX), "cut through the red tape and get all available assets on scene as quickly as possible." However, McClatchy reported this week that the Republicans' claim is completely baseless: "Maritime law experts, government officials and independent researchers say that the claim is false. The Jones Act isn't an impediment at all, they say, and it hasn't blocked anything. 'Totally not true,' said Mark Ruge, counsel to the Maritime Cabotage Task Force, a coalition of U.S. shipbuilders, operators and labor unions. 'It is simply an urban myth that the Jones Act is the problem.'" In fact, Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, who is running the cleanup effort, said he'd received "no requests for Jones Act waivers" from foreign vessels or countries, and according to the State Department, there are "24 foreign vessels operating in the region and nine countries [have] provided boom, skimmers and other assistance." And more help is on the way -- the U.S. has just accepted offers of assistance from 12 countries. FactCheck.org sums it up, writing, "the Jones Act has yet to be an issue in the response efforts. ... Reports claiming that the federal government has refused help are not only incorrect -- foreign assistance has been utilized -- but are also misleading."

The economy lost 125,000 jobs last month, largely due to a decrease of 225,000 jobs in the number of temporary employees working on Census 2010. Private-sector payroll employment actually increased by 83,000. The unemployment rate fell from 9.7 percent to 9.5 percent.

Mega lobbyist Tony Podesta brushed off concerns that lobbying reform could impair his business. "Whatever they're gonna do, they'll do," he said. "They can ban lobbyists from having drivers licenses. We'll all get cars and drivers."

In a new New York Times Magazine article, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) called the tea party movement "unsustainable" and said it will "die out" because it lacks vision. "Graham argues throughout the story that the Republican Party will eventually move away from the fringe and join him closer to the political middle but that, for now, it has shifted too far to the right."

The House approved an $80 billion war supplemental bill after the leadership added $10 billion for school districts to win the votes of war skeptics. An amendment by Reps. Jim McGovern (D-MA) and David Obey (D-WI) that would have required the president to submit a timeline for withdrawal from Afghanistan failed by a 162-260 vote, but it did net the support of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).

After signs of "a fledgling recovery from the worst downturn in decades, the U.S. housing market appears to be heading back toward the doldrums," as a tax credit for buyers expires and home sales plummet. The National Association of Realtors said yesterday that "an index that measures sales contracts signed on existing homes plunged 30 percent in May, more than twice what analysts had forecast."

Afghan President Hamid Karzai has "approved a plan intended to win over Taliban foot soldiers and low-level commanders." His decision to sign the reintegration decree followed pressure from Afghan and NATO officials as well as "a recent phone call to Mr. Karzai from the incoming American military commander, Gen. David H. Petraeus."

An investigative panel at Penn State yesterday cleared scientist Dr. Michael Mann of accusations that he manipulated climate science research -- "the latest string of reports to find little substance in the allegations known as Climategate." The panel said Mann had not "seriously deviated from accepted practices within the academic community for proposing, conducting or reporting research or other scholarly activities."

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) announced that she will vote for Congress's financial regulatory reform package, a reversal from her earlier vote against the bill before the Senate. "This legislation is not perfect, and I will continue to push for even bolder action -- including a return to the Glass-Steagall separation of commercial and investment banking -- to rein in Wall Street, put an end to the concept of 'too-big-to-fail'," Cantwell said of her switch.

The National Rifle Association (NRA) announced its opposition yesterday to Elena Kagan's Supreme Court bid, and said it will "note" which senators vote for her. The NRA said Kagan had "demonstrated a clear hostility" to gun rights, despite the fact that she told senators that an individual's right to bear arms is "settled law."

President Obama signed new unilateral American sanctions on Iran into law yesterday "that go beyond the penalties imposed by the United Nations." The sanctions, which "passed by Congress on overwhelmingly bipartisan votes," try "to further restrict investment in Iran's energy sector and cut off financing for the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps that oversees nuclear and missile programs."

And finally: Stephen Colbert says Joe Scarborough is "clearly racist against Tangelo-Americans."

On average, charter schools are about average.

The waiting lists for HIV drugs are growing again.

New space policy includes cleaning up space debris.

FEMA trailers haven't only appeared in the Gulf.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) likes his fake tans cheap.

Don't focus on personalities at the expense of Palestinian politics.

Electricity protests continue in Iraq.

Your guide to union-made beer.

"President Obama, from January to January of last year to this year, did nothing to lay the groundwork for [immigration reform] -- no meetings, no visits, no discussion whatsoever."
-- Fox News' Karl Rove, 6/30/10

VERSUS

"We have just finished what I consider to be a very productive meeting on one of the most critical issues that I think this nation faces, and that is an immigration system that is broken and needs fixing."
-- President Obama, 6/25/09

Jun	JUL	Aug
	06
2009	2010	2011

Think Progress

The Need for a Timetable

Blogroll