Afghanistan: The "safe haven" myth (by Stephen Walt)

[Prometheus Bound]

The "safe haven" myth
Tue, 08/18/2009

At an appearance before the Veterans of Foreign Wars yesterday, President Obama defended U.S. involvement in Afghanistan, calling it a "war of necessity." He claimed that "our new strategy has a clear mission and defined goals -- to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda and its extremist allies," and he declared that “If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting. This is fundamental to the defense of our people.”

This is a significant statement. In effect, the president was acknowledging that the only strategic rationale for an increased commitment in Afghanistan is the fear that if the Taliban isn't defeated in Afghanistan, they will eventually allow al Qaeda to re-establish itself there, which would then enable it to mount increasingly threatening attacks on the United States.

This is the kind of assertion that often leads foreign policy insiders to nod their heads in agreement, but it shouldn't be accepted uncritically. Here are a few reasons why the "safe haven" argument ought to be viewed with some skepticism.

First, this argument tends to lump the various groups we are contending with together ........

Second, while it is true that Mullah Omar gave Osama bin Laden a sanctuary both before and after 9/11, it is by no means clear that they would give him free rein to attack the United States again.....

Third, it is hardly obvious that Afghan territory provides an ideal "safe haven" for mounting attacks on the United States. The 9/11 plot was organized out of Hamburg,......

Stephen M. Walt is the Robert and Renée Belfer Professor of International Relations at Harvard University.
more: http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/08/18/the_safe_haven_myth

[aquart]

1. We have no business being there. Except to make Russia laugh.

[bemildred]

2. What really annoys me is the implicit assumption that our government is impotent to defend us

on it's own turf, as on 9/11/2001, but omnicompetent to defend us in Afghanistan or Iraq half the world away. Now it is true that the moronic stuff they make you do at the airport gives credence to the first part, but there is still no reason at all to think that the government is doing anything useful to defend us by playing whack-a-mole in far away places.

[PeaceDreamer]

3. Obama is a War Monger

Hard to believe, but true.

[whyverne]

4. And I thought Obama was just feeding a line of crap to the

warmongers. Now I'm wondering if he actually believes his own crap.

As if the all the Taliban knew what Osama bin Laden was planning. "They were all in on it." Yeah right.

It's like saying every American Indian was in on Custer's defeat. The Lenape, the Navajo, the Mohican; they're all the same.

It's like herding cats over there, except some of the cats have weapons and don't like being herded.