Liberals, don't cut and run

Liberals stand with Afghanistan
Politico
08/18/2010
By Joshua Gross

For liberals, Afghanistan was always the “good war.” Until, quite suddenly, it wasn’t.

While the Bush administration was bogged down in Iraq, liberals inside and outside of Congress argued that Afghanistan was being underresourced and ignored. Until, quite suddenly, it was a quagmire, the mission unwinnable, the land ungovernable.

A total of 102 Democrats opposed the recent $37 billion supplemental war funding bill, which followed in the wake of 92,000 classified documents released by WikiLeaks. Members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus are growing bolder in their opposition to the war, with Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.) writing in The Hill: “This war is not worth the huge investment, in blood and treasure, which the American people have been asked to make for nearly a decade.”

Liberals should re-examine the conventional wisdom on Afghanistan and provide President Barack Obama the support that he needs to finish the job. As our nation approaches the ninth anniversary of America’s longest war, there are several compelling reasons to stand with Afghanistan.

America Has an Ethical Obligation to Afghanistan

America’s relationship with Afghanistan began long before Sept. 11. After the Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan in 1979, the U.S. poured guns and money into the hands of the country’s most dangerous and fanatical leaders. When the U.S. withdrew its support of the mujahedeen, these warlords turned on one another and tore the country apart.

In 2002, President George W. Bush promised Afghans a Marshall Plan, but his administration tried to stabilize Afghanistan on the cheap. When the Taliban were still on the ropes early in the mission, Afghans were provided only $57 per person in foreign assistance, compared with $679 in Bosnia and $206 in Iraq. Even more disastrous, we neglected to provide the requisite number of ground troops, forcing U.S. and NATO commanders to rely on airstrikes; the resulting civilian casualties further distanced the population from the Afghan government.

Afghanistan Is Not Ungovernable

Contrary to popular opinion, Afghanistan is not ungovernable. Afghanistan was relatively peaceful and stable from the late 19th century until the early 1970s. During this time, Afghanistan’s weak central government provided its citizens with a degree of law and order by making deals with local elites. As American planners scale back their ambitions, they are rediscovering this forgotten chapter of Afghan history, which provides a model for decentralized political development.

While Afghanistan has been steadily declining since 2006, the catastrophic decline described by the mainstream media since President Obama’s West Point speech has been somewhat hyperbolic. Every year, the number of Afghans who perceive gains in security, economic opportunity and reconstruction increases slightly, according to polling done by the Asia Foundation. Localized economic development campaigns that have been Afghan led, such as the National Solidarity Program, have been extremely successful.

Liberals Have Long Advocated a Civilian Surge

Since 2001, liberals have decried the heavy military footprint in Afghanistan, arguing that the civilian-military balance must be recalibrated. Since the Obama administration’s strategic review, the U.S. has been slowly reining in the military, while injecting diplomats and aid workers into positions of responsibility.


For the first time, civilians are working alongside military commanders in provincial reconstruction teams, sharing the burden of engaging tribal leaders and bolstering the Afghan government’s ability to provide goods and services to its people. Gen. David Petraeus, who recently took over ISAF command from Gen. Stanley McChrystal, is committed to prioritizing the protection of civilians over hunting down the Taliban.

From Washington, it may look like “too little, too late,” but on the ground in Afghanistan, diplomats and aid workers believe they can turn around a failing intervention. President Obama inherited a neglected war. Now, his administration is beginning to realistically define success and providing long-needed manpower and resources.

Afghanistan Is Bigger Than Karzai

Corruption is endemic in Afghanistan. President Hamid Karzai’s angelic aura wore off long ago. But Afghanistan is home to 26 million people. Only a handful of them have their hands in the public purse (or on the opium stalk). We must not lose sight of the effect that America’s stabilizing influence has on the Afghan people, even if the government’s perfidy is inexcusable. Over time, American diplomatic leverage can push through the reforms necessary to loosen Karzai’s hold over hundreds of local-level government appointments and institute stronger checks and balances in Kabul.

We Are Protecting the Rights of Women

Liberalism, when reduced to its essence, promotes liberty and equality with the goal of expanding opportunities for individuals. Afghan women like Bamiyan Gov. Habiba Sarabi, human rights activist Wazhma Frogh, Parliamentarian Shinkai Karokhail and Mozhdah Jamalzadah, known as “Afghanistan’s Oprah,” are advancing women’s liberty and equality little by little, day by day. This is why negotiating with the Taliban is not a silver bullet and why any political reconciliation must be predicated on respect for the Afghan constitution, which enshrines the rights of women and minorities.

American blood is not being shed in Afghanistan simply to preserve the rights of women, but liberals should not cynically dismiss this noble goal. The image of Afghan girls going to newly built schools should continue to fill Americans with pride; we are making a difference.

Don’t take my word for it. Ask an Afghan yourself. Seek out conversations with Afghan-Americans — whose opinions the mainstream media largely ignore — and ask them what they think about the U.S. presence in Afghanistan. You most likely will get an earful. Of course, many Afghans inside and outside of Afghanistan continue to be demoralized by corruption, civilian casualties and insecurity, as well as Karzai’s fraudulent election and erratic behavior. But most will admit that the continued presence of the U.S. is far better than the alternative.

Advocates for progressive reform across the greater Middle East will closely watch our withdrawal from Afghanistan. Our leaders must resist premature calls for a troop drawdown and ensure that Afghanistan does not backslide into fanaticism and anarchy. We protect the homeland and advance liberal values by honoring our commitment to the Afghan people.

Joshua Gross served as the media relations director of the Embassy of Afghanistan in Washington from 2006 to 2008. He is a recent graduate of the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.