The Economist on Afghanistan–Reinforcing failure?

If Mr Obama does shift his stance in Afghanistan, history may record that the clinching factor was last month’s fraud-riddled presidential election there. The White House appears to have found this especially rattling when set alongside General McChrystal’s report. For the general’s chief conclusion is that success in Afghanistan does not depend on killing more Taliban fighters. It depends on winning the confidence of Afghans who have been alienated by widespread corruption under President Hamid Karzai and have little reason to support their own government. “A foreign army alone cannot beat an insurgency,” is the general’s conclusion. However certain Mr Obama is that this is the right war, he cannot be sanguine about sending ever more soldiers to prop up an incompetent government that has lost its legitimacy. Mr Obama’s main ambition in life is to transform America at home. The last thing he needs is a Vietnam.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Economics, Politics, Defense, National Security, Military, Foreign Relations, Office of the President, Politics in General, President Barack Obama, War in Afghanistan