Having read two of Andrew J. Bacevich’s books now (The New American Militarism and The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism) I know that he is always worth reading, even when you don’t agree with his conclusions (although I mostly do).
Today, he has an op-ed in the Washington Post, laying out his ideas for a new approach toward Afghanistan. Here are the first three paragraphs:
America’s long war, which began on Oct. 7, 2001, when U.S. bombs and missiles started falling on Afghanistan, has become the longest in this country’s history. The eighth anniversary of the conflict beckons, with no end in sight.
The counterinsurgency campaign proposed in Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal’s strategic assessment will prolong the war for an additional five or 10 years. The war’s most ardent proponents insist that President Obama has no choice: It’s either fight on or invite another 9/11.
Fortunately, there is an alternative to a global counterinsurgency campaign. Instead of fighting an endless hot war in a vain effort to eliminate the jihadist threat, the United States should wage a cold war to keep the threat at bay. Such a strategy worked before. It can work again.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by TMV. TMV said: Andrew J. Bacevich: Turn the Hot War Into a Cold War: Having read two of Andrew J. Bacevich’s books now (.. http://bit.ly/34qfyg [...]
Here is the money quote from Mr. Bacevich's op-ed:
How can you use military power all the time when belief in God is so all-encompassing? You can't bomb the belief of God (and in the terrorists case, a warped view of God) out of the Islamic world. So I agree with Mr. Bacevich's cold war philosophy of “decapitate, contain and compete”.
So what do we do when the Taliban retake the country? Because that is exactly what will happen after we remove our military. We will go right back to a pre-911 situation where the Taliban will control most of Afghanistan and the bordering areas in Pakistan. We cannot switch to a cold war philosophy until we can create security in that country.
I need to read the full opinion, but the other problem with a “Cold War” approach is the Cold War requires two organized, probably national, entities where it is to neither's benefit to engage in full war. But the “other side” in this is not so organized and cannot be deterred in such a way.
I think the “cold war” approach may apply better to Iran than Afghanistan in the short term, but even with no “surge” or increase in troops, Al Qaeda appears to be imploding, and has been in decline for years.
Steve Benen comments on Political Animal,
[...] America’s long war, which began on Oct. 7, 2001, when U.S. bombs and missiles started falling on Afghanistan, has become the longest in this country’s history.Read more at http://themoderatevoice.com/47750/andrew-j-bacevich-turn-the-hot-war-into-a-cold-war/ [...]