MANY SUGGESTIONS FOR OBAMA
not just Afghanistan, but also Iran.
Of all the suggestions of the United States reverting to any other forms of strategies in fighting the Taliban and its allied guest Al Qaeda, the Senator John Kerry's advise to get tribal leaders' cooperation and the support of the Afghans, instead of boosting up troop levels, and the recent resignation of Matthew Hoh, a senior civilian official in Afghanistan, over U.S. policy to be altered, among others; none has any feature that has been amiss in the overall strategies that have been applied since the Bush administration, in regard to the war which started in that country, soon after the 9/11 attacks on Washington, D.C., and New York City.
Those features, as the outsourcing of social plans to involve tribal leaders and their people; and working to gain their support by encouraging them to have a legitimate government and a strong modern military that would be operational under Afghan officers and servicemen, have always been part of U.S. policies there.
Therefore there is nothing new in the suggestions that many of these people are now putting out for the Obama government to utilize.
The suggestions had mentioned the risk of the deployment of troops, and the expense to be incurred by the U.S., as the former Marine (Hoh) had said; that, "It will take decades and billions of dollars to achieve success in Afghanistan." and the Senator's statement that, "McChrystal's plan is too ambitious."; however, those (suggestions) could not be stressed more convincingly enough by previous State Department and other government officials that have visited or stationed in that part of the world before; as well as from the reports of many military generals that have been engaged in the war there.
Such programs, regarding the building of political, social and governmental institutions, have been ongoing for all those years that the previous administration was engaged in all kinds of activities there; or since the war to curb the Taliban influence to create an Islamic regime and impose Sharia Law on the population; as well as the search for Usama Bin Ladin, the individual, who had planned and funded the 9/11 attacks. All that have been inclusive in U.S. policies for Afghanistan.
In other words, since the war started, America has pursued a unique aim, geared to contain the country, politically and otherwise (economically and socially), and to obtain the security for that region by disallowing a Taliban takeover.
It (America) has also had its own national security to consider; and that if there was a stable government in Afghanistan, the better it would be for peace there, and for that of its neighbors, like Pakistan and India, who were America's allies.
Therefore, nothing new could be derived from those suggestions, mentioned elsewhere by Sen. Kerry and Mr. Hoh; and there should be nothing said to undermine U.S. future plans, of which Gen. Stanley McChrystal's mission was part, for success to be achieved in Afghanistan. Unless the idea was to suggest a complete pullout of all U.S and allied troops; and even that would not solve any problems.
The intransigence of Iran is so thick, one can cut it with a knife; as its attitude leaves much to be desired, now that the rogue regime is reneging on its promise to send a majority of its enriched uranium stockpile out of that country to be transformed into fuel for its nuclear reactors.
It was buying ready-made fuel, meaning that the exporting of almost 80% of its enriched uranium to Russia would not come about. "This came as IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei said Monday that Iran must respond to IAEA queries about its nuclear program, and be "forthcoming" in its response to an IAEA fuel proposal.", media news reports were saying.
President Obama must turn his attention to that issue as well, and to seriously remind Iran of the consequences of its refusal to do what it (Iran) has agreed upon, during the recent meetings in Vienna, Prague. Its action or inaction would affect the peace in that region and that of the world.
Take heed, Iran.