5 Years Later: Who Lost Afghanistan?

Unfortunately, thanks to a bizarre unwillingness by the Bush Administration to go after the 9/11 murderers with everything we had, the supposedly "strong" Republicans demonstrated weakness and hesitation, going in too slowly (we should have started bombing the Taliban and Al Qaeda on 9/12) and with too little force.  They also relied far too heavily to do the fighting on fickle Afghan militias who could be bought by the highest bidder and didn't particularly care about Osama bin Laden.  Finally, the Bush Administration and Republican Congress quickly took their eye off the main ball - Al Qaeda - and started diverting troops, funding, and intelligence assets to Iraq, a country which had absolutely NOTHING to do with 9/11 and whose leader was, in fact, a bitter ENEMY of Osama bin Laden.  Not surprisingly - but sadly - the result of all this bungling was the escape of Osama bin Laden from Tora Bora, as well as the failure to destroy the Taliban (and its current resurgence across Afghanistan). 

Today, as we near the 5-year anniversaries of 9/11 and our attack on Afghanistan, where are in our efforts in that country?  Sadly, according to the vast majority of reports that I've read, we are losing.  For instance, the lead headline in today's New York Times reads "Opium Harvest at Record Level in Afghanistan."  According to the Antonio Maria Costa, executive director of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (bolding added for emphasis):

...the increase in cultivation was significantly fueled by the resurgence of Taliban rebels in the south, the country+óGé¼Gäós prime opium growing region. As the insurgents have stepped up attacks, they have also encouraged and profited from the drug trade, promising protection to growers if they expanded their opium operations.

Again, let's look at why this is happening.  According to Mr. Costa:

The increase in cultivation was mainly a result of the strength of the insurgency in southern Afghanistan, which has left whole districts outside of government control, and the continuing impunity of everyone involved, from the farmers and traffickers to corrupt police and government officials

As if all this isn't bad enough, the New York Times reports the following:

Nearly five years after American military forces helped topple a Taliban government that provided sanctuary and training camps to Osama bin Laden, there is no victory in the war for Afghanistan, due in significant measure to the Bush administration's reckless haste to move on to Iraq and shortsighted stinting on economic reconstruction.

The Taliban, operating from cross- border sanctuaries in Pakistan, has exploited Washington's strategic blunders and Karzai's disappointing performance to rebuild its political and military strength, particularly in the southern region where it first began its drive to power more than a decade ago. Daily battles now rage across five southern provinces. Civilian and military casualties are rising sharply, including those among the NATO forces that have recently moved into these areas.

In other words, nearly 5 years after the horrific 9/11 attacks that were directed from Afghanistan, the Bush Administration and Republican Congress are losing that country to the same people - the Taliban - who controlled it pre-9/11.  And, according to Bush's own Pentagon, we are also in serious danger of losing the country that distracted us from Afghanistan in the first place - Iraq.  Just yesterday, in fact, "A coalition of 300 Iraqi tribal leaders on Saturday demanded the release of Saddam Hussein so he could reclaim the presidency and also called for armed resistance against U.S.-led coalition forces."  Wonderful.

Finally, nearly 5 years after 9/11, we have not captured Osama bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri, we have not destroyed Al Qaeda, and we have not won the "war on terror."  Heckuva job, huh?  Mission accomplished?  Uh, no.

Now, let's go back for a monent to the World War II analogy that the Bush Administration is so fond of employing - when they think it suits their argument.  At this point, 5 years after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (December 7, 1941), World War II had been over for more than a year, with Germany and Japan both having surrendered unconditionally.  On December 31, 1946, in fact, President Harry S. Truman officially declared an end of hostilities in World War II.  Sort of like "Mission Accomplished," except that time it really WAS accomplished - against infinitely more powerful enemies (Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan), I would point out. 

This time around, unfortunately, we don't have Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and Winston Churchill to lead us.  Instead, we are stuck with the incompetent, clueless George W. Bush, Dick Cheney and Tony Blair.  Is anyone surprised that the results are a lot worse this time around?  I mean, anyone except for the George Dubya Bushes and George Felix Allens of the world?  Thank God for Jim Webb, who understands what's going on here and knows what to do about it.  In just a few months, Senator Webb can turn his brilliant mind and "fresh eyes" to turning things around in Afghanistan, Iraq, and the "war on terror" in general.  Not a moment too soon.

Lowell Feld is Netroots Coordinator for the Jim Webb for US Senate Campaign.  The ideas expressed here belong to Lowell Feld alone, and do not necessarily represent those of Jim Webb, his advisors, staff, or supporters.

Comments