Sunday, March 29, 2009

Iraq And Afghanistan a Comparison

TW: Obama is embarking on a new phase in Afghanistan/Pakistan (AfPak is the emerging moniker). Deploying finite American blood and treasure is certainly worthy of much debate and analysis. Hopefully the discussion relative to AfPak will exhibit far more depth and insight than the lead-up to the foolhardy and disastrous war in Iraq. Unfortunately both here and especially in Europe Iraq and Afghanistan have become conflated into one big operation. The differences though far exceed the similarities. A comparison of the two.

Basis for original involvement/invasion:
Iraq- has never been accurately defined excuses have included but are not limited to:
1) Finding and destroying WMD
2) Implied Iraqi association with 9/11 conspirators
3) A desire to impose democratic institutions in the Middle East
4) Securing oil supplies
5) Preventing genocide

Afghanistan
1) The then Afghan government directly and without equivocation aided and abetted the 9/11 conspirators and supported the greater Al-Qaeda organization

Involvement of other nations beyond the U.S.
Iraq-
The "coalition of the willing" was an Orwellian term manufactured to disguise the paltry support for the U.S. policies. Other than the U.K., few nations provided material support the U.S. Those that did were generally doing so for economic or unrelated political reasons (e.g. Poles, Georgians etc.). Only 139 of the 4,579 soldiers lost in Iraq are from nations other than the U.S. or U.K.

Afghanistan-
N.A.T.O and innumerable other nations joined enthusiastically in the Afghanistan campaign. Initial involvement constrained only by American arrogance in integrating other military forces into the early military actions. Furthermore, the U.N. has been involved from day one in the various nation-building exercises within the country. The non-U.S. involvement has not been without controversy, some nations (i.e. Holland, Australia, Canada) have been aggressively participating in the fighting, others (i.e. Germany) have been reluctant to engage in direct combat. Yet 449 of the 1,122 soldiers lost in Afghanistan are non-American.

Both Iraq and Afghanistan are large countries with complex political and cultural attributes. The end states for both situations are challenging to define. But I believe it is imperative for all to recall why we are involved in AfPak. Our reasons for engaging Afghanistan were and are clear where Iraq never was and never will be. Where Iraq was largely unilateral, AfPak is multi-lateral. When purpose is clear,valid and agreed much can be accomplished and much sacrificed. Obama and other world leaders should keep their eyes on the ball.

No comments: