Saturday, October 04, 2008

The Man Who Would Be Dictator?

According to the NY Times,:
A coded French diplomatic cable leaked to a French newspaper quotes the British ambassador in Afghanistan as predicting that the NATO-led military campaign against the Taliban will fail. That was not all. The best solution for the country, the ambassador said, would be installing an “acceptable dictator,” according to the newspaper.
The big story here, I would argue, is NOT the fact that Western leaders think that, given the choice, our interests would be better served by an Afghan version of Mubarak than by the return to power of Mullah Omar. If it's going to be autocracy, certainly we're better served by a friendly autocrat than one who opens his country to training camps for terrorists who want to kill us.

The big story---or rather, the lack of story---is the near-complete absence in American public debate of support for the view that we should be disengaging from Afghanistan. In the Presidential contest these days, Obama and McCain agree that it's important to increase the American military presence in Afghanistan. They argue about who should get credit for the point: Obama says that he's been calling for greater attention to Afghanistan for years and that the Iraq war dangerously diverted American military resources from Afghanistan (and western Pakistan); McCain says that the reduction in violence in Iraq, which he attributes entirely to the surge, is what makes it possible to re-deploy troops to Afghanistan, and that doing so would be another surge (a term on which he apparently has the copyright). Top American officers in the field also seem to think that a heavier military footprint is needed in Afghanistan.

I want to register some skepticism. The very reasons why people were skeptical about the ability of the U.S. and/or other Western powers to occupy Iraq apply with equal force to Afghanistan. Here is a Muslim country with ethnic and tribal divisions, and a very long history of resisting foreign occupation. (Don't believe me? Ask Rudyard Kipling, per the title of this post.)

Why the conspiracy of silence on this issue by nearly everyone but the hard left? I suspect there are two reasons. The first is the widely shared view (which I too share) that U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan was justified in the first place, so that once we were there, we had no choice but to occupy. Here too a little skepticism may be warranted. "After ten days of U.S. bombardment, a senior Taliban leader, in secret Pakistani conferences, asked for a puase while moderate members of the Taliban tried to persuade their Supreme leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, to hand over bin Laden. But President Bush rejected every offer." (That's from p. 13 of After 9/11, which is, admittedly, a comic book, but it's an accurate comic book.) It's quite possible, of course, that the opening was a ruse, and that nothing would have come of it, but we'll never really know because Bush flatly rejected it. The point I'm making is simply that the initial decision to use military force against the Taliban was not itself a commitment to a decade-long or longer occupation of Afghanistan.

The second reason for the silence may be the apparent success of the surge. If it worked in Iraq, the thinking goes, it can work in Afghanistan, with its smaller population. Yet, as Bob Woodward has recently argued, the surge is only one factor, and probably not the most important one, in explaining the reduction in violence in Iraq. A new method of targeted killings gets the prize, according to Woodward. Since that method remains classified, we don't yet know whether it will, in the long run, produce stability or blowback.

Consider a variant on a point Obama made against McCain in their debate: McCain talks as though the Iraq war began in 2007. Yet the problem for everyone who assumes that more American troops in Afghanistan would be good for the U.S. (or the Afghan people) in the long run is obvious: History didn't begin with Iraq in 2007 or 2003. We have a great many more data points about the effect of military occupation of Muslim countries by non-Muslim powers, and they're not encouraging. Indeed, we don't even know whether the surge in Iraq will prove to be a long-term success. It's worth recalling that the Iraq Study Group (remember them?) said they considered but ruled out something like a surge because they thought that while it could contribute to a temporary reduction in violence, it would only postpone the day of reckoning. I hope that view is ultimately proven wrong in Iraq, but even if it is, that won't be proof that it's wrong everywhere.

Posted by Mike Dorf


Caleb said...

Of course, the reference in the title is about a story where two British soldiers succeed (temporarily) in occupying the country. Maybe there should be an "anti-surge"?

For what it's worth (and I have no real proof of this beyond my own statements), I was against the military invasion of Afghanistan when it was proposed. BUT, I feel that we now have some responsibility to stabilize a situation which we helped to destabilize. I'm not at all convinced that a pull-out would be a faster way to do that than a "surge" - even if McCain supports it.

PS. Even if it's a bit campy, I think the movie with Sean Connery and Michael Caine is a lot of fun

Anonymous said...

免費A片, ut聊天室, AV女優, 美女視訊, 免費成人影片, 成人論壇, 情色交友, 免費AV, 線上a片, 日本美女寫真集, 同志聊天室, 聊天室交友, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 色情網站, 辣妹視訊, 美女交友, 微風成人區, 色美媚部落格, 色情影片, 成人影片, 成人網站, 免費A片, 上班族聊天室, A片,H漫, 18成人, a漫, av dvd, 一夜情聊天室, 微風成人, 成人圖片, 成人漫畫, 情色網, 日本A片, 免費A片下載, 性愛, 成人交友, 嘟嘟成人網, 嘟嘟成人網, 成人貼圖, 成人電影, 成人, 中部人聊天室, 080中部人聊天室, 成人貼圖, 成人小說, 成人文章, 成人圖片區, 免費成人影片, 成人遊戲, 微風成人, 愛情公寓, 成人電影, A片, 情色, 情色貼圖, 情色文學, 做愛, 成人遊戲, 成人影城, 色情聊天室, 色情小說, 一葉情貼圖片區, 情色小說, 色情, 寄情築園小遊戲, 色情遊戲, 成人網站, 麗的色遊戲, 色情網站, 成人論壇, 情色視訊, 情色電影, aio交友愛情館, 言情小說, 愛情小說, 色情A片, 情色論壇, 自拍, 癡漢, , 俱樂部, 豆豆聊天室, 聊天室, 色情影片, 視訊聊天室, 免費視訊聊天, 免費視訊, 視訊交友90739 情人視訊網影音視訊聊天室 免費視訊聊天室 視訊聊天 視訊交友 美女視訊 視訊美女 視訊 免費視訊 免費視訊聊天 視訊聊天室 辣妹視訊 一夜情 色情a片 aio交友愛情館 情色電影 情色視訊 色情遊戲 色情 情色小說 一葉情貼圖片區 色情小說 色情聊天室 情色交友 成人論壇 成人網站 色情網站 情色論壇 小高聊天室 女同志聊天室 6K聊天室 080苗栗人聊天室 080聊天室 聊天室尋夢園 UT男同志聊天室 男同志聊天室 尋夢園聊天室 UT聊天室 聊天室 豆豆聊天室 A片 成人電影 成人貼圖 嘟嘟成人網 美女交友 本土自拍 成人交友 成人影片

Anonymous said...

I am so happy to get some hero gold and the hero online gold is given by my close friend who tells me that the hero online money is the basis to enter into the game. Therefore, I should buy hero gold with the spare money and I gain some hero money from other players.

Anonymous said...

酒店喝酒,禮服店,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,制服店,便服店,鋼琴酒吧,兼差,酒店兼差,酒店打工,伴唱小姐,暑假打工,酒店上班,日式酒店,舞廳,ktv酒店,酒店,酒店公關,酒店小姐,理容院,日領,龍亨,學生兼差,酒店兼差,酒店上班,酒店打工,禮服酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,台北酒店,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,禮服店 ,酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工,酒店小姐,經紀 彩色爆米花,經紀人 彩色爆米花,酒店傳播,酒店經紀 彩色爆米花,爆米花,童裝,童裝拍賣,童裝大盤,童裝寄賣,童裝批貨,酒店,酒店,童裝切貨,酒店,GAP童裝,酒店,酒店 ,禮服店 , 酒店小姐,酒店經紀,酒店兼差,寒暑假打工

Anonymous said... .
[url=]puma shoes[/url]
[url=]chaussures puma[/url]
[url=]nike air max ltd[/url]

Anonymous said...