Three big flaws in Obama's plan for Afghanistan

Telegraph Blogs (U.K.) ^ | December 2, 2009 | James Corum

[Schnucki]

When President Obama finally announced his Afghanistan strategy at the US Military Academy at West Point he got a few things right – but other things terribly wrong.

On the plus side, Obama is going to provide about 30,000 additional troops to support the effort in Afghanistan. By doing so, he can push NATO to do more in Afghanistan. I have no doubts that General McChrystal will use the troops well. His strategic plan of August 2009 is a sound one.

However, there were three big flaws in the presidential strategy that may prove disastrous in the future. First of all, Obama emphasised a timeline for return of US troops starting in 2011. This might make his hard-Left base happy, but it gives the Taliban every incentive to go underground, wait out the Americans and return when they are gone. A strategy ought to make timelines conditional on various events, such as so many Afghan provinces pacified, a favourable political settlement, the successful expansion of the Afghan security forces and so on. This was not in Obama’s strategy and it indicates that he plans to get out in time, no matter what.

The next flaw is to state publicly that the cost of these wars is a big problem. Unfortunately, Obama has no credibility on the cost issue, as his first act as president was to push through Congress a $750 billion stimulus programme that shovelled vast sums of money towards wasteful projects that made Congressmen happy but did nothing to stimulte the economy. When the president insists that domestic spending that favours his congressional supporters is a top priority and then complains about the cost of the real top priority – defending the nation – then it is clear that he will be inclined to underfund the national defence

[NonValueAdded]

Excellent assessment, LtC Corum.