Are we fighting in Afghanistan?

After President Obama issued his orders to increase the U.S. troop presence in Afghanistan by an additional 30,000 troops, can we expect victory in Afghanistan? As Steve Schippert notes, the president has yet to express the U.S. ambitions as "victory" or "success", but rather stating that he seeks to "finish the job." As the speech mentioned a U.S. goal of beginning a withdrawal by 2011, this is hardly the type of language the Afghan people needed to hear as they endure the fragile security in their homes, towns, and provinces.



When we entered Afghanistan, we not only took on the task of removing the Taliban and Al-Qaida elements from the havens they once had, but made a pledge to the Afghan people. We're supposed to be the good guys, the ones fighting the good fight and confronting those who claim the lives of innocents. Our primary mission in Afghanistan should be to secure all provinces, not cede them over to Taliban control (as is reportedly being negotiated in the previous entry).


Afghanistan is winnable, but we need to work with the people who want to see change. The people on the ground who cast the votes and experience the threats of the Taliban everyday, not the false leadership of a Karzai administration. These are the people who have settled for the Taliban simply because they do not have the capabilities or resources to resist the Taliban's influence. They have turned to them as an alternative, not as an answer. Nobody - not a Karzai, not the U.S., nor NATO - has the ability to unite all the different groups present in the country under a government that actually functioned, much less the present administration.


This war is something that President Obama understands well, a grassroots war. Just as his presidential campaign went through many hardships, it was the fight that people had in small towns across states that propelled his election over a year ago. This can be applied to Afghanistan. Major Jim Gant, of the Special Forces that have fought in the country, has seen and interacted with the tribes that could very well win this war. He writes:

"Afghan tribes always have and always will resist any type of foreign intervention in their affairs. This includes a central government located in Kabul, which to them is a million miles away from their problems, a million miles away from their security."

In his report, One Tribe at a Time, Gant explains quite simply how we can fight the war in Afghanistan and still end up losing. Our mission is far more difficult than that of the Taliban, which he says is simply to not lose. The task of the U.S. and NATO is a difficult one, but by trying to unite the country behind a government similar to ours is a rather radical goal that Gant explains is not possible without the support of the tribes. While living among Malik Noorafzhal's tribe in Afghanistan, Gant witnessed the foremost responsibilities of any Afghan lie within their tribe.


Historically, Afghanistan has never found answers in a national government. Even with the most advanced military, our [the U.S.] soldiers can not achieve victory through technology alone. It was the spirit of the tribes that helped fight off the Soviets after all. Gant observes, after experiencing battle in both Iraq and Afghanistan, that "Afghanistan is by far the more difficult and brutal operational environment. The enemy there has never been defeated."


Quite simply the task at hand is hard. However, the U.S. needs to throw all its interest into training not only the members of the Afghan Army and National Police Force and focus on cooperating with the tribes. A military answer by itself is not possible, it will be the integration of our soldiers into the tribal networks that will propel the U.S.'s goals in the country and provide the security that the Afghanistan needs to become a functioning country.