This article was published by the Guardian (Comment is Free website)
We can't abandon Afghanistan
21 August 2009
So the doomsayers are again proved wrong. Afghan citizens queued in their millions to vote. They defied the Taliban and took an even bigger risk in defying the British, American, European and Islamist wiseacres who are urging a precipitate withdrawal.
Expect these cries however to get stronger as Afghanistan drains blood, money, and political support from Europe and North America. The easy cry of withdrawal, aka surrender, is the trope of the defeatist who care nothing for democracy, human rights or the need to send a "No Pasaran" signal to those who hate democracy.
It would be nice to believe that leaving Afghanistan to rot in its own internal feuds, corruptions and incompetences would solve the problem. The quixotic imperialism-cum-nationalism of the wannabe Tory MP, Rory Stewart, that Kabul is not worth the bones of an English Grenadier Guard of course has resonance.
Britain did not fly home to tearful funerals its men killed in the Falklands or Ulster. British prime ministers and leaders of the opposition did not in the past spend Question Time expressing condolences to fallen soldiers. British generals serving and retired did not become TV pundits fighting their Whitehall wars for more funding for their service and operations.
Can Britain quit and become a new Sweden or Switzerland? Is neutrality in the face of anti-democratic jihadi Islamism an option? Will the terrorist cells and the assault on women from Islamist extremists in Europe stop if Afghanistan is handed back to the warlords and the Taliban?
President Obama does not think so. Having been elected as the anti-Iraq war candidate he finds, like President Johnson, he has his own war. What is missing is a political strategy. The generals are making their case and deciding tactics. Are these working?
It is clear that Britain's foot-dragging on creating a more integrated European defence profile has left America to do the heavy lifting. The Conservatives bemoan the lack of resources but their policy of public spending cuts will hit the army hard.
But might the Germans, French and Spanish be right in occupying ground and promoting development rather than bring-it-on combats with the Taliban? What diplomatic strategy do Nato member countries have to persuade India to ease pressure on Pakistan? Which is more important – conflict with Iran or working with the odious regime in Tehran, much as we allied with Stalin in the second world war, to contain Taliban and Sunni Islamist extremism?
We could leave Afghanistan tomorrow. But bringing the boys home does not mean the end of the threat that took them there in the first place. So while the cry of "Troops out" has its attraction the real duty is to rethink strategy and tactics. Meanwhile as the books spill out saying democracy is irrelevant let us send a small salute to the men and women of Afghanistan who voted this week. The time to betray them is not yet at hand.
Expect these cries however to get stronger as Afghanistan drains blood, money, and political support from Europe and North America. The easy cry of withdrawal, aka surrender, is the trope of the defeatist who care nothing for democracy, human rights or the need to send a "No Pasaran" signal to those who hate democracy.
It would be nice to believe that leaving Afghanistan to rot in its own internal feuds, corruptions and incompetences would solve the problem. The quixotic imperialism-cum-nationalism of the wannabe Tory MP, Rory Stewart, that Kabul is not worth the bones of an English Grenadier Guard of course has resonance.
Britain did not fly home to tearful funerals its men killed in the Falklands or Ulster. British prime ministers and leaders of the opposition did not in the past spend Question Time expressing condolences to fallen soldiers. British generals serving and retired did not become TV pundits fighting their Whitehall wars for more funding for their service and operations.
Can Britain quit and become a new Sweden or Switzerland? Is neutrality in the face of anti-democratic jihadi Islamism an option? Will the terrorist cells and the assault on women from Islamist extremists in Europe stop if Afghanistan is handed back to the warlords and the Taliban?
President Obama does not think so. Having been elected as the anti-Iraq war candidate he finds, like President Johnson, he has his own war. What is missing is a political strategy. The generals are making their case and deciding tactics. Are these working?
It is clear that Britain's foot-dragging on creating a more integrated European defence profile has left America to do the heavy lifting. The Conservatives bemoan the lack of resources but their policy of public spending cuts will hit the army hard.
But might the Germans, French and Spanish be right in occupying ground and promoting development rather than bring-it-on combats with the Taliban? What diplomatic strategy do Nato member countries have to persuade India to ease pressure on Pakistan? Which is more important – conflict with Iran or working with the odious regime in Tehran, much as we allied with Stalin in the second world war, to contain Taliban and Sunni Islamist extremism?
We could leave Afghanistan tomorrow. But bringing the boys home does not mean the end of the threat that took them there in the first place. So while the cry of "Troops out" has its attraction the real duty is to rethink strategy and tactics. Meanwhile as the books spill out saying democracy is irrelevant let us send a small salute to the men and women of Afghanistan who voted this week. The time to betray them is not yet at hand.