Debate Club

Should the U.S. Withdraw from Afghanistan Sooner? >

Early Exit Is a Recipe for Disaster

Obama's politically motivated deadlines for troop drawdown have undermined the effectiveness of the surge

March 16, 2012

About Ahmad Majidyar:

Ahmad K. Majidyar studies political and security affairs in South Asia and the Middle East, with a special focus on Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran. He also travels frequently to military bases across the United States to instruct senior U.S. Army and Marine officers about culture, religion, and domestic politics in Afghanistan, and about terrorist groups operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan. Before joining AEI in 2008, Majidyar worked as a media analyst with BBC Monitoring in Kabul, and served as an aid worker with the United Nations agency for refugees in Peshawar, Pakistan.

The weekend shooting of 16 Afghan civilians by a deranged American soldier has dealt major setbacks to the mission in Afghanistan. The Taliban Thursday suspended the nascent peace talks in Qatar and Afghan President Hamid Karzai demanded the U.S. and NATO forces leave rural areas and confine themselves to major military bases. The latest upsurge of violence after the Koran burning also appears to have strengthened war opponents in Washington who call for accelerating the drawdown of troops from the country.

With eight months to the November election, promises of an early exit from Afghanistan may play well with war-weary voters. But it's a recipe for disaster in Afghanistan.

Citing the recent violence, the war opponents present two arguments for an early exit: 1) the anti-American protests show Afghans want foreign troops to leave; and 2) the troop-intensive counterinsurgency efforts have largely failed.

[See pictures of winter in Afghanistan.]

Both these claims, however, are inaccurate.

First, despite recent protests, a majority of Afghans support the presence of foreign troops in their country and do not want the return of the Taliban. The protests were limited to 10 out of Afghanistan's 34 provinces, and only a few thousand of the country's 30 million population participated. Moreover, while isolated incidents in which Afghan soldiers have turned their guns on coalition partners often make headlines, as many as 320,000 Afghan soldiers and policemen are fighting side by side with U.S. and NATO forces to defend their country against the Taliban and foreign terrorists. Afghan policemen suffered more casualties in protecting U.S. and NATO bases during the recent protests.

Second, real counterinsurgency efforts in Afghanistan only began in early 2010, and have made remarkable progress since then. The surge of 33,000 troops helped arrest the Taliban's momentum and expelled the Taliban from their safe havens in the strategic provinces of Kandahar and Helmand. It also helped train, strengthen, and equip the Afghan security forces. The 320,000 Afghan soldiers and policemen are currently responsible for security of 50 percent of the population and are expected to shoulder all security responsibilities by the end of 2014. A hasty withdrawal would undermine these gains.

[U.S., Afghan Lawmakers Clash Over Alleged Gunman's Trial.]

President Obama's politically motivated deadlines for troop drawdown have already undermined the effectiveness of the surge. It emboldened the Taliban, strained ties with the Kabul government, and encouraged Pakistan and Iran to step up support for their proxies to maximize influence once foreign troops leave the country. Further accelerating the withdrawal plan will undo the achievements of the past decade and will allow the Taliban and al Qaeda to re-establish their safe havens in parts of Afghanistan from which they could plot attacks on U.S. soil and against our allies in the region.

Tags:
War in Afghanistan (2001-),
Afghanistan
Other Arguments
#2

Yes — The drawdown of U.S. troops should not be our only goal in Afghanistan

CAROLINE WADHAMS, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress

#3
#4

Yes — Neither staying the course nor doubling down on our investment offers a realistic path to success

JEFF SMITH, Kraemer Strategy Fellow and Director of the South Asia Program at the American Foreign Policy Council

#5
#6

No — Departure from Afghanistan ought to be orderly and clearly defined

SHUJA NAWAZ, Director of the South Asia Center at the Atlantic Council

About Debate Club

A meeting of the sharpest minds on the day's most important topics, Debate Club brings in the best arguments and lets readers decide which is the most persuasive. Read the arguments, then vote. And be sure to check back often to see who has gotten the most support—and also to see what's being discussed now in the Debate Club.

Have ideas about what the Club should be debating? E-mail it to dclub@usnews.com.

You can also join the debate on Facebook or follow Debate Club on Twitter.

Advertisement
Cartoons
Thomas Jefferson Street Blog
Oklahoma Tornado Reminds Us of the Value of Teachers

The Oklahoma tornado reminds us of all the roles teachers take on.

IRS, AP and James Rosen Scandals Strike at the First Amendment

The Obama scandals paint a picture of an administration at odds with the First Amendment.

Anthony Weiner Is Too Liberal to Be New York City Mayor

New York City doesn't need another Democratic mayor.

Organizations Masquerading as Tax-Exempt is the Real IRS Scandal

The real scandal at the IRS is electioneering groups getting tax-exempt status.

E.W. Jackson Proves the Tea Party Learned Nothing

By nominating E.W. Jackson, Virginia Republicans hope extremism will save them.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Are Not Obama Scandals

The word "scandal" doesn't appropriately describe anything going on in Washington these days.

Democrats Should Be Worried About Polls After Obama Scandals

Democrats should be more worried about President Obama's approval ratings.

Tea Party IRS Rally Should Wait Until After Moore Tornado Recovery

Tea party rallies against the IRS should wait until the tornado victims are taken care of.

Advertisement