The War Policy in Afghanistan - Research Paper Example

?American Government: Policy in Afghanistan September 11, 2001 represents a in history that none of our contemporaries will forget. This day is the day when American society, if not the Western world, changed completely and was forced to face the threat of terrorism. After September 11, 2001, the U.S. government learned that Osama Bin Laden was tied to the horrifying terrorist attacks on America. This resulted in the subsequent War on Afghanistan. The aim was to bring Bin Laden out of hiding, democratize the region, and make America safe against the threat of terror. The U.S. subsequent involvement in Afghanistan may go down as one of the most controversial policy decisions in American history (Ginsberg, Lowi, and Weir). Indeed, there are a number of complex questions involved when determining the moral and political justifications behind the policy in Afghanistan. This essay functions to considers the United States policy in Afghanistan in relation to factors and issues affecting the topic, the current status of the topic, and future concerns of the policy. One of the main justifications of the United States involvement in Afghanistan is the belief that Al Qaeda’s attack on the United States violated the "just war" theory. The just war theory explains that only government led groups can lead an attack, but they must do so for a just cause. It’s been said that Al Qaeda broke the just war theory because they attacked civilians with no cause. Furthermore, the attack on the Pentagon, one could argue, was a government driven attack. The subsequent war represents the American response to the threat. There is no doubt that the American response had its economic and strategic interests, but the essential reason for the America’s actions following September 11 many believe is for the defense of freedom (Bennis). Supporters of the war in Afghanistan believe in the progress that can be made in defending freedom and democracy anywhere in the world. Indeed, freedom became after September 11 an all-purpose explanation for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. The wars conducted by the United States were justified as a response to the terrorist attacks which aimed the basic liberties of the American society. Freedom was soon perceived as an American good that must be promoted everywhere and the United States was seen as having the moral duty of promoting democracy throughout the world. While it is yet to be seen if the attempted change in the political system of Afghanistan represents progress, supporters of the war believe that democracy in the Middle East will eventually lead to progress. Even as the war policy in Afghanistan was initially justified as a means of national security, the United States’ longevity and continued presence many argue has proved to be problematic. While the war policy might have started along well-justified measures, it’s argued that it now carries a toll on the American population (Rashid). Within this spectrum of understanding there are a number of points policy opponents have raised. One important reason that individuals must consider is peoples’ safety here at home. While the War on Terrorism has been sold as fighting the terrorist abroad so they must not be fought at home, this seems a somewhat specious concept. Military recruiting is down. Young people do not want to join the Armed Forces when it is quite clear they could die in Afghanistan. This shortage results in fewer qualified members of the armed forces, and leaves fewer in America to protect against terrorism and attack. There have already been reported over 2,600 coalition force member deaths. That includes 2,463 Americans. Almost 18,000 military personnel have been wounded during the war, and thousands of Iraqis and insurgents have also died during the fighting (BBC 2009). This human cost may be the most difficult consequence of the war to bear. Innocent people did die on September 11th and nobody deserves the pain and agony of the terrorist’s terrible actions, but now it’s argued that the country has done the same. The war is hurting innocent people while the warlords are running out of Afghanistan and establishing organizations in other countries. Indeed, as early as 2002 Time (Kohat, pg. 23) reported that, “Officials estimate that, altogether, more than 3,500 al-Qaeda operatives and their Pakistani comrades are hunkered down in the tribal belt along the Afghan border and in the sprawling cities of Karachi and Peshawar, sheltered by homegrown extremists.” In these regards, the continued efforts of the United States military (and the substantial tax dollars that support it) have gone to fight a losing battle. Other opponents to the Afghanistan policy decisions deride the structural possibility of achieving policy aims. For instance, it’s argued that the more ground the United States is able to make in defeating terrorist organizations in Afghanistan, the more they are simply moving to the surrounding regions. Indeed, many argue that it’s highly likely that even if a modicum of success or victory was achieved in Afghanistan that our nation’s national security wouldn’t benefit, as the terrorists organizations would merely establish their operations in a different region of the Middle East (Jones). While Afghanistan seems on the way to democracy, it also seems on the way to civil war, and many wonder if the strife in the Middle East will ever end – war or not. It seems that the Muslims have so many different factions that they can never agree, and the U.S. involvement is exacerbating these differences. Indeed, the greatest obstacle that stands in the way of the American’s policy intention to promote democracy in Muslim countries is the gap in ideological beliefs. Cultural differences proved to be hard to overcome. American definition of freedom resides in the support for political democracy, for free markets, for limited government, and for individual freedom. Islam has different views on the cultural definition of freedom and Muslim societies historically choose a different type of political system. The belief that the United States is right and the rest is wrong, that America loves freedom while those that do not support democracy hate it is the reason for the inefficiency of the military operations in Afghanistan. America has used freedom and democracy as being universally desirable and US being their protector, disregarding the fact that perhaps other nations might have a different view of what freedom is. Jane Mayer identifies that the “invocation of freedom as an American rallying cry” (Mayer 34). Americans imagine themselves as being guardians of freedom in an oppressive world has roots in the American Revolution and the Civil War (Mayer). It is a historical perspective of Americans of themselves, so there is little surprise that the United States identified itself after the attacks of September 11 as the guardian of freedom and democracy everywhere in the world. While this belief has noble roots, it is argued that this is an ethnocentric view of the world and is one of the central reasons the American policy in the Middle East has been ineffective. With the recent assassination of Osama Bin Laden, American policy in Afghanistan has reached a significant crossroads. Indeed, a recent report in the Los Angeles times indicated that, “President Obama plans to announce a troop reduction in Afghanistan that Pentagon and other administration officials say is expected to bring home about 10,000 personnel by the end of the year” (Cloud). In these regards, it appears that with the death of Osama Bin Laden the current political climate has shifted away from the fierce mission that has allowed war hawks to continue their pursuit of American policy in Afghanistan. Current and future decisions will have to consider the nature of continuing pursuit of the establishment of an Afghan democracy or to re-shift this grand focus to goals that are more attainable. To some extent it’s evident that the Obama administration has gotten away from earlier Bush approaches to Afghanistan, as the war on terror moniker has been disregarded for more realistic understandings of the conflict. Another future concern that the Obama administration will need to consider is the upcoming presidential election. The issue of American policy in Afghanistan has become a major issue considered by Republican opponents who have increasingly shown support for troop removal. Ultimately, the Obama administration will need to consider following the course of the previous few years, or capitulate to outside pressure and reshape American policy in Afghanistan. In conclusion, this essay has considered the United States policy in Afghanistan. In these regards, background information has been considered as Americans found themselves after the attacks of September 11 deeply hurt and needing revenge against the ones that hurt their nation. The essay considered a variety issues related to the policy in Afghanistan. Among these include arguments that the capture of the terrorists that planned the attacks on 9/11 was inefficient and so has the attempts been to democratize Afghanistan. In addition the current and potential future policy considerations are examined. Ultimately it’s argued that in continuing to ignore the growing deleterious consequences of this policy the United States is ultimately harming itself and its long-term prosperity. References Bennis, Phyllis. (2009) "Changing the Discourse: First Step Toward Changing the Policy". http://www.fpif.org/articles/changing_the_discourse_first_step_toward_changing _the_policy Cloud, David. (2011) Obama expected to announce major Afghan drawdown. LA Times. http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-afghan-withdrawal- 20110621,0,6964197.story "Forces in Afghan assault", BBC World News, June 23, 2009 Ginsberg, Lowi, and Weir. (2008) We the People: An Introduction to American Politics. New York: Norton & Company. Jones, S. (2010). In the graveyard of empires: America's war in Afghanistan. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. Kohat, T. (2002, July 22). ‘Al-qaeda's new hideouts’ . Time, 23. Mayer, Jane. (2008) The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How The War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals. Anchor Press. Rashid, Ahmed. (2009) Descent into Chaos: The U.S. and the Disaster in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Central Asia. New York: Penguin. Read More