Security conundrums

[unhappycamper]

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/kt-article-display-1.asp?xfile=data/editorial/2014/January/editorial_January16.xml&section=editorial

Robert Gates is no stranger to the push and pulls of the Obama administration.

Security conundrums
9 January 2014

However, the former Pentagon chief and defence secretary now feels that there is a lack of unanimity in decisions made at the White House and that the president kept issues close to his heart and often distrusted his aides. In his memoirs, Gates says that there is inherent confusion as far as the United States policy on Afghanistan is concerned, and at times he himself suspected Obama’s commitment to the mission in the war-torn country. However, the former secretary goes on to credit the president for a number of decisions, especially to storm the Abbottabad compound to get Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, and to stick to the withdrawal timeframe for Afghanistan. This analysis from a person who was deeply involved in executing decisions made at the Pentagon and the White House confirms the notion that the war-weary Southwestern country is not off the table and there could be a somersault of sorts if and when the retention of troops is brought up for reconsideration.

Gates, through his timely disclosures, has brought to the fore a number of pertinent issues such as what could be the modus operandi of decision-making and who should be trusted and at what length if there is a geostrategic disagreement. It goes without saying that Washington’s Afghanistan policy is far from being perfect, and the administration would keep its fingers crossed once the troops are withdrawn. Political pundits warn of a socio-strategic vacuum that could possibly be filled by radical groups such as Taleban, who do not see eye to eye with the White House. Not different is the case across the Durand Line in Pakistan, where militant outfits call the shots in some regions and are least bothered about the administration in Islamabad.

Ging by Gates remarks, this emerging perspective consolidates the impression that the Obama administration is in a state of confusion and is likely to face renewed upsets once the Afghanistan mission is rolled back. The US withdrawl would amount to leaving an ally in the lurch after staying put in that country for more than a decade and wasting more than $4 trillion. The security revulsion in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the US has been fighting wars for years, underlines fact that extremist elements have managed to survive despite the deadly drones and are calling the shots with complete impunity. This is a deadly equation which President Obama cannot afford to ignore. It’s time to shake off the ostrich syndrome and revisit the post-withdrawal policy — from the Middle East to South Asia.