Planned Afghanistan 'surge' - a show of force to strike a political deal with the Taliban?

[bigtree]

Monday, Dec. 29, 2008

New Afghan strategy will compound U.S. problem

By BRAHMA CHELLANEY

Even before U.S. President-elect Barack Obama has been sworn in, the contours of his new strategy on Afghanistan have become known: A "surge" of U.S. forces, not to militarily rout the Taliban but to strike a political deal with the enemy from a position of strength.

Put simply, the United States intends to pursue in Afghanistan what it has done in Iraq, where it used a surge largely as a show of force to buy off Sunni tribal leaders and other local chieftains.

Linking Afghanistan, Pakistan and India together in the same security equation, Obama has made known a dual strategy of outwitting the Taliban while ensuring Indo-Pakistan peace, even if it means the Pakistan-based masterminds of the recent 67-hour Mumbai terrorist attacks are not brought to justice.

This strategy is likely to make things more difficult for Indian security, both by reinforcing U.S. dependence on the Pakistani military (more than three-quarters of all NATO supplies for the war in landlocked Afghanistan are transported through Pakistan) and by seeking to co-opt the Taliban behind the cover of a surge of U.S. forces.


read: http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/eo20081229bc.html

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

1. An alternative would be to get the hell out of their country.

But, admitting (another)defeat is a difficult sell to the USA!! USA!! crowd. Even when obvious.

[bigtree]

2. there's a popular view among the militarists

. . . that the Taliban in Afghanistan will ally with the strongest force - and all they have to do is impress them that the U.S. protected regime is the top dog. Dogs of war will do what dogs do, with the predictable result.

[aquart]

3. Afghanistan belongs to the Taliban?

Whatever. It doesn't belong to us.

However, who we arm matters. If we make a deal with the Taliban, are they the ones we arm? Is there anyone else in the region strong enough to go against them? And, by "go against" I mean all that nasty stuff that has people so upset about Gaza today. Which set of killers will get our pretty bombs?