Trump reverses Afghan stance
His ‘path forward’ on longest war for U.S. is one that is well-traveled
In Afghanistan, there are no easy exits. George W. Bush and Barack Obama discovered that Afghanistan was a conflict they couldn’t manage to win but couldn’t afford to lose — the reality behind its unwelcome status of America’s longest war.
Donald Trump, who as a candidate called for pulling out U.S. troops, is learning that same hard lesson as a president.
Trump unveiled his “path forward” in Afghanistan in a nationally televised speech Monday night before a military audience at Fort Myer, across the Potomac River from Washington.
If that sounds familiar, it should: There have been more than a dozen official announcements of a changed course or a fresh approach or a strategic review in the 16 years since Bush ordered the invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11.
“My original instinct was to pull out, and historically, I like following my instincts, but all of my life, I’ve heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office,” Trump declared, describing his decision to continue the U.S. involvement, albeit with conditions. “Our commitment is not unlimited, and our support is not a blank check. The American people expect to see real reforms and real results.”
The speech stood as a test of the commander in chief ’s ability to rally a nation weary of this war behind his strategy to wage it.
It was also a test of the willingness of his core supporters to follow him from the “America First” banner of his campaign, eschewing foreign entanglements in favor of investments at home, to the same complicated compromises of his predecessors.
“What does victory in Afghanistan look like? Washington doesn’t know.” Breitbart headline
The alt-right website Breitbart — led again by Steve Bannon, who was pushed out of the White House on Friday — was unpersuaded. “What does victory in Afghanistan look like?” a headline blared. “Washington doesn’t know.”
In his speech, Trump said he was lifting restrictions imposed by the Obama administration on commanders in the field and increasing pressure on Pakistan to stop providing safe haven to militant groups along its border. He authorized Defense Secretary Jim Mattis to increase troops levels, a step Mattis had delayed implementing until the administration agreed on a new strategy.
Trump outlined that strategy and its rationale Monday night, though he said he wouldn't discuss specific troop levels or deadlines.
The engagement reflects a sharp turn by Trump since the day four years ago when President Obama outlined a security accord his administration had hammered out with the Afghan government.
“Do not allow our very stupid leaders to sign a deal that keeps us in Afghanistan through 2024with all costs by U.S.A.,” Trump tweeted that morning. “MAKE AMERICA GREAT!”
That afternoon, he posted another tweet: “We have wasted an enormous amount of blood and treasure in Afghanistan. Their government has zero appreciation. Let’s get out!”
At rallies and in interviews last year, Trump described the war as a quagmire and argued that the money the United States was spending there — more than $25 billion a year — could better be invested at home.
Even so, the war in Afghanistan was a largely forgotten issue during the campaign.
As Peter Beinert noted in The Atlantic in May, Trump didn’t mention Afghanistan in his convention acceptance speech, dur- ing his three debates with Hillary Clinton, in his major campaign foreign policy address last fall in Youngstown, Ohio, in his inaugural address or in his speech to a joint session of Congress.
Like it or not, though, Afghanistan would be the topic of Trump’s first prime-time, nationally televised address since the speech to Congress in February.
He undoubtedly would have preferred that distinction go to a pitch for one of his signature priorities, such as overhauling the nation’s tax code or building a wall along the Mexican border.
For a trio of presidents, the Afghanistan war has proved impossible to ignore, or to end. Withdrawing forces probably would mean that the pro-American government would fall and the power of the Taliban, al- Qaeda and the Islamic State would spread.
The sanctuary Afghanistan provided for al- Qaeda forces behind 9/11 was the reason Bush and NATO allies invaded the country in the first place, but the conflict was never completely won as Bush turned to the invasion of Iraq. Obama, who called Afghanistan the “good war,” ordered a surge of U.S. forces but set a timeline for their withdrawal.
The peak of about 100,000 American forces in 2010 and 2011 has dropped to about 8,400.
Michael O’Hanlon, a foreign policy analyst at the Brookings Institution and co-author of Toughing it Out in Afghanistan, said in an interview that the troop increase should enable small teams of American advisers to go into the field again with Afghan forces, an important step. He said the realistic goal should be simply to turn the momentum toward increased government control of territory, not winning the sort of victory that would bring all U.S. troops home.
“I believe it’s going to take quite a while,” O’Hanlon said. “I think we’ll have to have several thousand troops there indefinitely — past the Trump presidency.”
If so, from a third president to a fourth.