President Barack Obama took perhaps the greatest political risk of his presidency in late 2009: He announced that 30,000 more U.S. troops would head into Afghanistan. A lot of his supporters, who thought they elected an anti-war president, were outraged.
Obama set three goals for the surge: Deny al-Qaida a base of influence, reverse the Taliban’s momentum, and strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan’s security forces and government.
The president gambled that an injection of troops would succeed quickly enough to allow him to fulfill a promise to start bringing troops home in the summer of 2011.
It’s now the summer of 2011, and Obama is expected to announce Wednesday night the start of a troop withdrawal.
Is it time? It’s time. Obama’s three goals have not been fulfilled. Military and political gains in Afghanistan are more fragile and fitful than most war-weary Americans would like. But military commanders do report solid progress in the war, much of it attributable to the surge.
Obama can justify the start of a withdrawal of troops — if he squares with the American people and acknowledges that events in the coming months could force a reconsideration of the size and speed of the withdrawal. The initial withdrawal is expected to be about 10,000 troops by year’s end. Keep in mind, even if Obama withdraws the entire surge force by the end of 2012 or early 2013, nearly 70,000 U.S. forces (and presumably tens of thousands of NATO troops) will remain in Afghanistan.
Some Republican and Democratic leaders argue that the death of Osama bin Laden justifies a faster withdrawal of American troops. Mission, ah, accomplished. But bin Laden’s death will have minimal effect on Afghanistan’s long-term security. For the Afghan government to survive and to deny al-Qaida a comfy home there, the Taliban need to be further marginalized, militarily and politically.
That looks to be happening, albeit slowly. Afghan President Hamid Karzai says the U.S. and its allies are negotiating with the Taliban. The Afghan government’s program to bring Taliban fighters over to its side with promises of stipends and jobs is pushing ahead, sluggishly. Much more needs to be done to neutralize the Taliban before allied troops can exit the country.
It gives us pause that America’s top commander in Afghanistan, Gen. David Petraeus, argued for a smaller initial drawdown than the president is likely to order. But Obama appears to be giving himself plenty of room to respond to changing conditions on the ground, to meet the needs of American commanders.
Ten years in, the military effort in Afghanistan is increasingly unpopular on both sides of the U.S. political aisle. Republican Sens. Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky were among 27 senators who recently sent a letter to Obama, calling for him to begin a “sizable and sustained” troop withdrawal beginning in July. The National Journal reports that 26 House Republicans supported a Democratic amendment last month that would have pushed a faster withdrawal. Some GOP candidates for presidents have said much the same.
As Obama gets closer to his re-election campaign, he will face more pressure for a faster withdrawal. He will make a big mistake if he takes the bait — if, say, he announces a fixed timetable. He needs to give himself and U.S. commanders time to gauge the effect of this first pullout.
U.S. military leaders reportedly want to retain a good share of the surge forces on the ground for the next two fighting seasons. They want to make sure that when American soldiers come home, they won’t need to return.
That’s sensible. But it doesn’t prevent Obama from beginning to trim back his troop surge.
