Obama and Afghanistan

NATO statistics show that attacks by Taliban and al Qaeda forces in Afghanistan are on the increase.

Roadside bombs in Afghanistan have become the single biggest killer of civilians, coalition and Afghan troops, according to U.S. and coalition military documents obtained by CNN.

The documents, based on NATO statistics, show more than a 30 percent increase in such attacks on Afghan roads around the country from January to December 2008.

The statistics of overall attacks around the country show a more dire picture. Last year, attacks by Taliban and al Qaeda forces around the country increased 31 percent...

...Since January 2008, U.S. and NATO troop deaths have risen 26 percent, according to the statistics. Afghan security forces deaths are up 64 percent in the same period.

Back in January, as Obama was taking office, a spokesman for the Taliban asked Obama to simply leave Afghanistan and allow Afghans to decide their own fate.

"We have no problem with Obama," a spokesman for the extremist Islamist movement [said] after the inauguration of the new US president. However, "he must learn lessons from [former US president George W. Bush] and before that the Soviets," Yousuf Ahmadi said by telephone.

Is Obama leaving? Hell no. Tuesday, Obama approved a significant troop increase for Afghanistan.

As CNN notes:

The ancient Persians called it "the land of the unruly." Historians call it "the graveyard of empires." President Obama calls Afghanistan something else: The "central front" in the battle against terrorism.

Afghanistan has defied armies led by military leaders including Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan. Now Obama's new administration will attempt to accomplish what few leaders have been able to do: stabilize Afghanistan....

...Milton Bearden, a former CIA station chief who worked in Afghanistan, once called the country a "graveyard of empires" in a Foreign Affairs magazine essay. He says its tribesmen almost killed Alexander the Great when he invaded and bloodied Genghis Khan's armies so much that the Mongol leader gained control "only after reaching painful accommodations with the Afghans."

Now looking to the far off past might just be poetic license to make for a better CNN story, but the truth is that even military experts think that there is no clear military solution for Afghanistan.

"Controlling the Afghan people is a losing proposition," says Stephen Tanner, author of "Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the Fall of the Taliban." "No one has ever been able to control the country."

Even the operational commander of all coalition forces in Afghanistan from 2004 to 2005 (Eric T. Olson) believes that there is no clear strategy and a surge is doomed to fail.

The beefed-up effort has been fueled by the belief that the successful surge in Iraq can be replicated in Afghanistan.

It can't.

I speak from experience: For a year, I was the operational commander for all coalition forces in Afghanistan. Later, I was the deputy director of the Iraq Reconstruction Management Office. The conditions that favored success in Iraq are conspicuously lacking in Afghanistan....

...Some US military officials have warned that what worked in Iraq probably won't work in Afghanistan. Yet Washington's strategy still seems based more on hope than judgment.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that Mr. Olson knows what he is talking about. A surge isn't going to solve the problem and will most likely exacerbate the situation.

So what to do?

Stephen Tanner, the aforementioned author of "Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the Fall of the Taliban", believes we should negotiate with the Taliban.

"The Taliban are no longer all hardcore fanatics," Tanner says. "There are a lot of moderate elements. You have to bring the Taliban into the Afghan government, not to take it over but to at least participate."

Is that the solution? I don't know. But I will agree with the military experts that a surge will not bring forth anything good. Quite the contrary.

Frankly, I think we should just leave Afghanistan to find their own path. Let them rule themselves. Not because the Taliban asked us to, but because it is the right thing to do. We have no business empire building. That behavior ultimately killed Rome, then the British Empire, and we will be next.

With the economy in turmoil, America can't continue on the path of shelling out money to support military occupation of other countries. We need to free that money up to turn the U.S. around.