Thursday, November 26, 2009

Opinion

Peter Roff

Obama's Dithering Dims Americans' View on Afghanistan and the War on Terror

November 03, 2009 01:52 PM ET | Peter Roff | Permanent Link | Print

By Peter Roff, Thomas Jefferson Street blog

President Obama's deliberations over U.S policy toward Afghanistan are not helping the American electorate maintain confidence in his leadership. A new Rasmussen Reports national survey indicates that only 34 percent of American voters say the United States and its allies are winning the war on terror, a decline of nine points since October and 21 percent since January, when Obama was inaugurated.

Rasmussen also found that 29 percent of those surveyed "believe terrorists are winning that war" while 31 percent say it is a draw. "As recently as April," Rasmussen said, "28 percent said the terrorists were on top, but numbers consistently at that level haven't been seen since late 2007. The belief by 31 percent that neither side is winning is the highest such finding in at least three years."

Voters are also pessimistic about what the future holds, with 57 percent believing the situation in Afghanistan will get worse over the next six months, while only 13 percent say things will improve. The end of the uncertainty over whether Afghan President Hamid Karzai will remain in office may help things but, again, the U.S. performance in the aftermath of last month's fraud-tainted presidential election has not been helpful.

Despite the fact that Karzai was the clear leader in a 36-candidate field and limited evidence Karzai's candidacy profited from the fraud, the United States reportedly pressured the Afghan president into participating in a runoff election with the second largest vote-getter, former Afghan Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah.

After Karzai agreed to participate in the runoff, however, Abdullah started making demands, including the establishment of a coalition government in which he would play a prominent role and a reported four-month delay in runoff election. Once the negotiations between the Abdullah and Karzai factions—which the United States attempted to broker—collapsed, Abdullah withdrew from the runoff, making Karzai the de facto winner.

The Obama administration, which had been critical of Karzai—who had the strong backing of former President George W. Bush in the years following the beginning of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan—accepted the outcome, but with resignation. Senior presidential adviser David Axelrod said on CBS's Face the Nation that polls showed Abdullah would have lost the runoff anyway, "so we are going to deal with the government that is there"—not exactly a ringing endorsement of the outcome.

During the 2008 presidential campaign, Obama called Afghanistan the most important front in the war on terror, a phrase the administration now considers inoperative. His dithering in the development of a new policy for dealing with the Taliban is, the numbers suggest, undermining confidence in the U.S. mission there. These are scary numbers and they do not suggest the American people are willing to follow the president's lead on Afghanistan, no matter when he decides what to do.

Tags: Barack Obama | Rasmussen Report | War in Afghanistan (2001-)

Tools: Share | | Comments (24) | Print

Reader Comments

History remakes itself again

Alexander the Great tried, Ghenghis Khan tried, the British tried,

the Russians tried, what makes the US any better at the crossroads

of empires ??? IEDS, poor terrain for Humvees, tricky updrafts for helicopters,

a persistent cash crop opium and hundreds of tribes which have allegiance

to their local trival chieftains, do they really care about the Bill of Rights

o Constitution ????

Typical Michael of CA....

Typical senseless liberal fool as Mr. Bill has invited you to list all those specifics that Bush did wrong?

Hey big man we're all ears waiting for your incompetence!

Morons are all in CA!!

Humm

Michael of CA

What don't you mention specific bad things Bush did wrong. I'd love to hear them...

Might even respond

Add your thoughts

Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

advertisement

U.S. News Weekly

Subscribe Now

Order the new U.S. News Weekly digital magazine at a special low introductory price!

Peter Roff is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. A former senior political writer for United Press International, he is currently a senior fellow at the Institute for Liberty and at Let Freedom Ring, a non-partisan public policy organization. His writing has also appeared on Fox News' Fox Forum.

advertisement

NEWSLETTER

Sign up today for the latest headlines from U.S. News & World Report delivered to you free.

RSS FEEDS

Personalize your U.S. News with our feeds of blogs and breaking news headlines.

U.S. NEWS MOBILE

U.S. News daily briefings are also available on your mobile device.

People who read this also read ...

Thomas Jefferson St.

GOP Can Be Thankful for Strong Polls

But they cannot get complacent.

5 Reasons for a Democratic Thanksgiving

Michael Steele and healthcare reform top the list.

Women Have Say on Health Reform

If it's the year of the women, why are there so few of them?

Turkey Tax

Uncle Sam is joining in on your Thanksgiving dinner.

Ideological Labels Just Don't Fit

Hard-liners don't understand that some of us don't toe an ideological line.

A Decade in Biased Review

How well does the video sum up the last decade?

GOPers Push European-Style Litmus Tests

Some RNC members want strict party platforms. Why do they hate America?

Cartoon Gallery

Editorial Cartoon

Political Cartoons

Check out our most recent cartoons.

Public Opinion

Should the GOP Have a Litmus Test?

Should the RNC exclude politicians who don't match the party's platform?

advertisement

Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our Terms and Conditions of Use and Privacy Policy.
Make USNews.com your home page.