San Francisco Chronicle

America’s longest war

-

America’s longest war isn’t ending anytime soon.

That was the message of President Trump’s speech about his war-expansion plan for Afghanista­n on Monday night. True to form, Trump offered few policy specifics. (Congressio­nal officials have said the administra­tion is adding 4,000 soldiers to the 8,500 U.S. service members serving there.)

Instead, Trump used the occasion as an opportunit­y to underscore his emerging doctrine on world affairs: an emphasis on American security, a de-emphasis on democracy promotion.

“We are not nationbuil­ding again,” Trump said. “We are killing terrorists.”

We certainly have done a great deal of nation-building, and much of it’s been wasted.

Since we invaded Afghanista­n in late 2001, U.S. agencies have spent more than $714 billion on war and reconstruc­tion there. Insurgents have specifical­ly targeted U.S.-funded projects, but a tremendous amount of that money has been siphoned off into disastrous projects, corruption, and graft.

U.S. agencies have wasted billions of dollars on everything from unused schools to a notably unsuccessf­ul attempt to stamp out Afghanista­n’s heroin poppy trade.

Against this backdrop, Trump needed to provide the country with the sense of what victory — or even a dignified retreat — could look like in Afghanista­n. Trump labeled victory as

“Attacking our enemies, obliterati­ng ISIS, crushing Al Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over Afghanista­n and stopping mass terror attacks against America before they emerge.”

That’s a laundry list, not a definition of victory. It’s also not a list that can be in any way contained to Afghanista­n.

The great danger of Trump’s new strategy based on what he called “conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables,” is that without a sense of what an end to the U.S. mission in Afghanista­n looks like, “conditions on the ground” could proceed indefinite­ly.

There’s every reason to believe that further loss of U.S. troops and taxpayer money could proceed indefinite­ly as well.

Congress, which is supposed to declare wars, has been passive on the Afghanista­n mission for years. It needs to resume its duty as watchdog and insist on answers to some simple questions about what our objectives in Afghanista­n should be, and how much U.S. taxpayers are willing to spend to achieve them.

 ??  ?? President’s plan for Afghanista­n has a familiar ring to it.
President’s plan for Afghanista­n has a familiar ring to it.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States