NATIONAL SECURITY Raising The Stakes In Afghanistan Speaking last night at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, President Obama announced the new U.S. strategy for the war in Afghanistan. "As Commander-in-Chief, I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan," the President said, bringing the total U.S. commitment to 100,000. "After 18 months," he continued, "our troops will begin to come home." Obama used part of his speech to remind Americans why we had gone into Afghanistan in the first place. "On Sept. 11, 2001, 19 men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000 people...as we know, these men belonged to al-Qaida," who were then based in Afghanistan and given shelter by the country's Taliban government. After initial success in Afghanistan in 2001, the U.S.-led international effort seriously deteriorated, with al Qaeda having found shelter in neighboring Pakistan, and their Taliban allies using the illegal narcotics trade to fund an increasingly effective insurgency back in Afghanistan. While the President acknowledged that "there is no imminent threat of the government being overthrown," he said "the Taliban has gained momentum. ... The status quo is not sustainable."
WHY WE'RE STILL THERE: After quickly toppling Afghanistan's Taliban government in 2001, President Bush promised significant reconstruction aid to the country, but the aid never materialized at the promised levels. A recent Senate Foreign Relations Committee report faulted the Bush administration for failing to capture or kill al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden when he was cornered at Tora Bora, near the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, in December 2001. U.S. military resources and attention soon turned to the planned invasion of Iraq, which Bush administration officials like Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld felt would serve as a more effective demonstration of American military power. In September, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Adm. Mike Mullen told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the U.S. had "very badly under-resourced Afghanistan for the better part of five years." An international aid worker told the New York Times that "the tragedy" is that "the $70 billion that would have given you enough police and army to stabilize [Afghanistan] all went to Iraq."
GREATER COMMITMENTS ALL AROUND: Though many have compared the Afghanistan escalation to the Iraq surge, there is an important difference: The troop surge that took place in Iraq in 2007 was a "one-time deployment of additional troops," after which those troops return home and troop levels decrease. What Obama announced last night is a sustained escalation, in which troops will be replaced after they complete their tours in order to maintain troop numbers at the new, higher level. The President also stressed that he had "asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies," noting that "some have already provided additional troops, and we are confident that there will be further contributions in the days and weeks ahead." According to Center for American Progress national security analyst Caroline Wadhams, securing a greater international commitment to Afghanistan is important. "We should not be asked to bear the burden alone especially in the midst of our own economic crisis," Wadhams said, adding, "Security interests in Afghanistan don't just affect us but threaten the globe." Speaking of the Afghan government of Hamid Karzai, Obama said that it must work to battle corruption and take advantage of the greater security provided by the new U.S. strategy. "This effort must be based on performance," Obama said. "The days of providing a blank check are over."
A HORIZON FOR WITHDRAWAL: Obama said that he would like to turn over security responsibility to the Afghans themselves and begin bringing U.S. forces home by the middle of 2011. According to administration officials, Obama is calculating "that the explicit promise of a drawdown will impress upon the Afghan government that his commitment is not open-ended." Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) quickly sent out a press release attacking the President's timeline. "A withdrawal date only emboldens Al-Qaeda and the Taliban, while dispiriting our Afghan partner," he declared. Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said that setting a drawdown date "is a mistake, and it sends a mixed message to both our friends and our enemies regarding our long-term commitment to success." But CAP national security experts argue that such a timeline is necessary. CAP senior fellow Lawrence Korb said "You can make it flexible but you need to have goals. ... If we do not do that, we're going to be seen like the British and the Soviets as occupiers." In his speech, the President took care to distinguish the U.S. effort in Afghanistan from past interventions there. "[U]nlike the great powers of old, we have not sought world domination," the President said. "Our union was founded in resistance to oppression. We do not seek to occupy other nations."
IMMIGRATION -- ANTI-IMMIGRANT GROUP ATTACKS DOBBS' NEW IMMIGRATION STANCE, MOURNS LOSS OF ITS 'CHAMPION': The anti-immigrant group Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC) was crushed to hear former CNN host Lou Dobbs say that he supports a path to legalization for undocumented immigrants in an interview on Telemundo last month after all the years he dedicated to railing on "amnesty." On Monday, Dobbs brought ALIPAC president William Gheen on his radio show and insisted that his position in the Telemundo interview was not a flip-flop, but instead a re-articulation of the same views he has always expressed, saying, "You do know that I have never called for the deportation of illegal immigrants in this country." The truth is, in 2007 Dobbs proclaimed, "When this president [Bush] and open-borders, illegal-alien-amnesty advocates say, 'You can't deport them,' my answer is, 'You wanna bet?' Because this is the United States." Additionally, Politifact found no evidence of Dobbs ever saying "point blank" that he opposes a path to legalization, though he "certainly gave the impression that he didn't care much for it." Gheen has announced that ALIPAC members are in favor of publicly dropping their support for the "new" Lou Dobbs and disabling websites they have created such as www.LouDobbsforPresident.org.
| 
In announcing his 18-month escalation strategy for Afghanistan, President Obama underscored his view that "Islamist extremism in the region remains an enduring threat to the security of Americans." Obama revealed, "In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) offered a cautious response to President Obama's speech last night, saying in a statement that "Congress will now have an opportunity to fully examine this strategy." Offering no explicit praise for Obama's proposal, Pelosi noted that Obama "inherited a deteriorating situation in Afghanistan because the Bush Administration did not have a plan to get the job done." In a written statement, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown urged "all our allies to unite behind President Obama's strategy." "Britain will continue to play its full part in persuading other countries to offer troops to the Afghanistan campaign," said Brown. "A vital next stage is the London conference on Afghanistan on 28 January, to which all 43 coalition nations will be invited." Democrats are "divided" on how to fund the new Afghanistan strategy, which will cost at least $30 billion more. "Key leaders rejected a proposal from liberal members to impose a 'war tax,'" but "they offered no plan of their own." Phil Jones, the director of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit (CRU), has decided to temporarily step down following a scandal over climate change research revealed in illegally hacked emails. "What is most important is that CRU continues its world leading research with as little interruption and diversion as possible," Jones said in a statement. Rep. John Tanner (D-TN) announced yesterday evening that he will retire at the end of his term, making him the second Blue Dog Democrat to announce retirement in two weeks. Tanner said in a statement that he was considering retiring two years ago but decided to remain so he could continue to be the chairman of the U.S. delegation to the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said yesterday that Iran will be looking to decrease its cooperation with the IAEA after the U.N. nuclear watchdog issued a resolution critical of Iran last week. He also criticized Russia for supporting the resolution. "Russia made a mistake," Ahmadinejad said. Israel "criticized a proposed statement by the European Union recognizing East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state." While Europe has consistently recognized Palestinian claims on Jerusalem, European officials said "a direct call for a division of the city would take that policy a step further." The D.C. Council voted 11-2 to approve marriage equality yesterday. There will be a second vote next month, "at which point it will be sent to D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty for his signature." In New York, the state Senate is poised to vote -- possibly today -- on same-sex marriage legislation. And finally: Happy holidays, from Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-CA), who yesterday released this year's version of her infamous holiday card. |
| |
"CBO: [Health care] overhaul likely won't bring private premiums down."
-- Fox News chyron, 12/01/09
VERSUS
"The Congressional Budget Office said Monday that the Senate health bill could significantly reduce costs for many people who buy health insurance on their own."
-- The New York Times, 11/30/09
| |
No comments:
Post a Comment
Keep a civil tongue.