WINNING THE BATTLE VS. WINNING THE WAR
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.5572/pub_detail.asp
Exclusive: Winning the Battle vs. Winning the War
Presidential Policy: Does It Make the Grade?, James Carafano, PhD
The Obama administration had a better than average week on the national security and foreign policy front. That was because of goods news on the Afghanistan-Pakistan front.
Defeating the Taliban and destroying al Qaeda are in the vital national interests of the United States. Losing the war in that part of the world would be a disaster for a number of reasons. Al Qaeda and its allies would be emboldened. They would move back in to Afghanistan and pick-up where they left off on 9/11. Relations between India and Pakistan, two-armed nuclear powers, would inevitably suffer – with catastrophic results. NATO, as an alliance, would likely not survive defeat in Afghanistan. Indeed, there are many reasons why this is a war that must be won.
Though the administration made a belated and inadequate commitment to operations in Afghanistan, at least it did make a commitment, giving commanders on the ground an opportunity to turn the war around.
Last week, we saw two positive signs of progress. The U.S. Marines started an offensive in the province of Helmand, a key Taliban stronghold.
Also last week, a U.S.-Pakistani operation captured a key Taliban leader. Both were positive steps.
Yet, winning a battle does not equal winning a war. There is lot more to be done. The administration could add points if the President more forcefully demonstrated his seriousness to prevail in this war. Too often, it still seems the White House strategy is to walk a fine line between not appearing weak and not upsetting the left wing anti-war movement. Playing politics with the war, however, does not earn you extra points.
The White House grade for this week is “C†for “see that you don’t forget job #1 – winning this war.â€
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., is a leading expert in defense affaires, intelligence, military operations and strategy, and homeland security at the Heritage Foundation.
R
Comments are closed.