Afghanistan: Have We Learned Our Lesson?
President Obama has announced a new strategy for the war in Afghanistan, and it involves an increase of 30,000 American soldiers over a six month period in addition to the 70,000 presently deployed. The goal is eventually to have Afghan forces take responsibility for their own security in certain regions. This will be achieved through hastened training of Afghan forces and focusing on security for heavily populated areas. Meanwhile, the US government will work on gaining the support of key religious figures and members of the local government in their efforts to thwart Al-Qaeda and turn the tide of the war.
Washington has stressed that this is not an open-ended strategy. This is all supposed to happen in a three year period to allow for the eventual withdrawal of US troops before the end of 2012. In his speech in the Military Academy at West Point on Tuesday, President Obama rejected claims that his new strategy will result in another prolonged war similar to the one we experienced in Vietnam. This, he believes, “depends on a false reading of history.”
Have we really learned our lesson?
Yes, there are significant differences between the two wars. As President Obama himself stated, the Taliban does not exactly equate with the Viet-Cong. The Viet-Cong were a highly organized and determined enemy who enjoyed a broad foundation of support both domestically and internationally. The Taliban have not yet reached the level of popularity that the Viet-Cong reached within Vietnam. However, it is important to note that their domestic support is increasing every day. A report from the International Council On Security And Development states that the Taliban have a “permanent presence” in 72% of Afghanistan. The production of opium is said to contribute significantly to the actions of the insurgency.
What President Obama also does not mention is that support for the Viet-Cong increased after the United States escalated their involvement in Vietnam. There is already concern that any significant troop build-up in Afghanistan will be greeted with suspicion by the local population, who feel that the security situation worsens every time the presence of foreign troops increases.
Another difference cited by President Obama included the involvement of 43 nations that “recognize the legitimacy of our action.” While by no means as large as the coalition in Afghanistan, the United States did have the support of other countries while in Vietnam. South Vietnam, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Thailand, and Canada all assisted the United States in some form during that war. But, just as in Afghanistan, the United States remained entrenched in fighting on the ground.
As President Obama said, the “American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan.” This is an important difference between the two wars. However, it is also important that we don't forget the details. There are other ways in which we might learn from the lessons of Vietnam. The US-supported South Vietnamese government of Ngo Dinh Diem was massively oppressive and corrupt. The population in South Vietnam regarded his government as an illegitimate puppet regime. After he was overthrown and assassinated by South Vietnamese generals, a reliable government was never established and continued to be a point of chaos and instability for the duration of the war. The local government in Afghanistan, led by Hamid Karzai, is rife with large scale corruption. The recent elections were linked with accusations of voter intimidation and ballot stuffing. If this corruption is not addressed, the consequences will be disastrous for the United States and its allies.
The border issue is another important similarity between the two wars. During the Vietnam War, the Ho Chi Minh Trail entered into both Laos and Cambodia in order to get supplies to Communist forces throughout Vietnam. The border between Afghanistan and Pakistan plays a similar role. There are numerous safe havens for Afghan insurgents in Pakistan. Secretary of State Robert Gates recently declared the Afghan-Pakistan border to be the “epicenter of extremist jihadism.” Albeit on a smaller scale, the covert US air strikes currently being conducted in Pakistan smack of the bombings in Cambodia and Laos during the Vietnam War.
They may be two different wars with two distinct sets of circumstances, but the similarities are undeniable.
There is hope, however. President Obama declared in his speech that “the days of providing a blank check are over.” He also addressed the importance of securing the Afghan-Pakistan border, by stating that in addition to Afghanistan, a “cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan.” His speech indicated that his team has carefully considered the possibility of another Vietnam. Whatever President Obama does, he must be very careful about how his new strategy is executed. There is very little margin of error. It seems that countries have a way of falling victim to the pitfalls of history while at the same time being cognizant of those concerns.
I just hope we learn our lesson this time.
Washington has stressed that this is not an open-ended strategy. This is all supposed to happen in a three year period to allow for the eventual withdrawal of US troops before the end of 2012. In his speech in the Military Academy at West Point on Tuesday, President Obama rejected claims that his new strategy will result in another prolonged war similar to the one we experienced in Vietnam. This, he believes, “depends on a false reading of history.”
Have we really learned our lesson?
Yes, there are significant differences between the two wars. As President Obama himself stated, the Taliban does not exactly equate with the Viet-Cong. The Viet-Cong were a highly organized and determined enemy who enjoyed a broad foundation of support both domestically and internationally. The Taliban have not yet reached the level of popularity that the Viet-Cong reached within Vietnam. However, it is important to note that their domestic support is increasing every day. A report from the International Council On Security And Development states that the Taliban have a “permanent presence” in 72% of Afghanistan. The production of opium is said to contribute significantly to the actions of the insurgency.
What President Obama also does not mention is that support for the Viet-Cong increased after the United States escalated their involvement in Vietnam. There is already concern that any significant troop build-up in Afghanistan will be greeted with suspicion by the local population, who feel that the security situation worsens every time the presence of foreign troops increases.
Another difference cited by President Obama included the involvement of 43 nations that “recognize the legitimacy of our action.” While by no means as large as the coalition in Afghanistan, the United States did have the support of other countries while in Vietnam. South Vietnam, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines, Thailand, and Canada all assisted the United States in some form during that war. But, just as in Afghanistan, the United States remained entrenched in fighting on the ground.
As President Obama said, the “American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan.” This is an important difference between the two wars. However, it is also important that we don't forget the details. There are other ways in which we might learn from the lessons of Vietnam. The US-supported South Vietnamese government of Ngo Dinh Diem was massively oppressive and corrupt. The population in South Vietnam regarded his government as an illegitimate puppet regime. After he was overthrown and assassinated by South Vietnamese generals, a reliable government was never established and continued to be a point of chaos and instability for the duration of the war. The local government in Afghanistan, led by Hamid Karzai, is rife with large scale corruption. The recent elections were linked with accusations of voter intimidation and ballot stuffing. If this corruption is not addressed, the consequences will be disastrous for the United States and its allies.
The border issue is another important similarity between the two wars. During the Vietnam War, the Ho Chi Minh Trail entered into both Laos and Cambodia in order to get supplies to Communist forces throughout Vietnam. The border between Afghanistan and Pakistan plays a similar role. There are numerous safe havens for Afghan insurgents in Pakistan. Secretary of State Robert Gates recently declared the Afghan-Pakistan border to be the “epicenter of extremist jihadism.” Albeit on a smaller scale, the covert US air strikes currently being conducted in Pakistan smack of the bombings in Cambodia and Laos during the Vietnam War.
They may be two different wars with two distinct sets of circumstances, but the similarities are undeniable.
There is hope, however. President Obama declared in his speech that “the days of providing a blank check are over.” He also addressed the importance of securing the Afghan-Pakistan border, by stating that in addition to Afghanistan, a “cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan.” His speech indicated that his team has carefully considered the possibility of another Vietnam. Whatever President Obama does, he must be very careful about how his new strategy is executed. There is very little margin of error. It seems that countries have a way of falling victim to the pitfalls of history while at the same time being cognizant of those concerns.
I just hope we learn our lesson this time.
Comments