President falling into trap of his predecessors
In some ways, it was an easy win for Donald Trump. After a week in which he had managed to praise white nationalists, lose two advisory councils and a chief strategist, all he had to do was read the words prepared for him by his generals outlining his new Afghanistan strategy.
In a measured, sombre tone, he admitted his initial idea had been to cut and run from America’s longest war. But once in power, he said he realised everything looked rather different from behind the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office.
So instead, he outlined a new strategy, one that would not be timedependent and would integrate US diplomatic, economic and military power behind ensuring the Taliban would never take over Afghanistan again, and that the country cannot be used as a platform to attack the US.
There will be more pressure on Pakistan to close its militant havens and US troops will be subject to fewer restrictions on engaging the enemy. And although he did not mention troop levels, details emerged earlier that the Pentagon would send another 4,000 soldiers to train Afghan forces and for counter-terrorism operations.
The reaction was as rapid as it was predictable. Autocue Trump had turned a corner, was the consensus, demonstrating his presidential voice and ability to grapple with weighty issues. A tweak here, a few more troops there. The new South Asia strategy looks much like the old one. Missing was any real diplomatic drive to engage the major regional players of Iran, China and Russia. And calling for India to help build Afghanistan’s economy while telling Pakistan to keep out makes little sense, when the former merely makes the latter more likely. So what have we learned?
Mr Trump’s speech tells us that when it comes to Afghanistan, he is happy to defer to the retired and serving generals in his administration.
That Mr Trump looked and sounded presidential during his prime time address, it is not because he has reinvented himself as a thoughtful statesman. It is because he is falling into the trap of his predecessors in believing that a military solution can deliver peace to Afghanistan without a unified diplomatic push.
Rob Crilly was Pakistan and Afghanistan correspondent for
The Daily Telegraph until 2014