Which general should we believe? In recent days, two generals in command of troops in Afghanistan — one British and the other American — have differed in exactly opposite terms about the course of the war in that beleaguered country and what we should do to put an end to it.
Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith, the senior British commander in Afghanistan, was quoted in a British newspaper as saying that a decisive military victory in Afghanistan is impossible and that the Taliban “may well be part of a long-term solution for the country.”
“We’re not going to win this war. It’s about reducing it to a manageable level of insurgency that’s not a strategic threat and can be managed by the Afghan army. We may well leave with there still being a low but steady ebb of rural isurgency.” Carleton Smith also said a deal with the Taliban might be “on the table.”
He added this provocative comment: “If the Taliban were prepared to sit on the other side of the table and talk about a political settlement, then that’s precisely the sort of progress that concludes insurgencies like this.” He did not compare the situations in Afghanistan and Iraq.
At almost the same time, General David McKiernan, the leading commander of more than 65,000 troops from 40 foreign countries (including 33,000 Americans), told reporters in Kabul just the opposite of what the British commander said. McKiernan told reporters there had been “too many reports in the news media recently asserting that the foreign forces and their Afghan allies were losing the war.” Then, according to the New York Times, he added:
“I absolutely reject that idea. I don’t believe it. It is true that there are many places in this country that don’t have an adequate level of security. But we are not losing in Afghanistan.” General McKiernan apparently was not aware of the reverse comment that had been made by the British commander.
In view of the markedly opposite opinions, one wonders whether the top generals in Afghanistan are talking to each other. Apparently not. At any rate, their clashing opinions concerning the Taliban and the Far Eastern nation leave one to wonder whether the Bush administration and the leaders of those 40 countries represented in the fighting forces in Afghanistan shouldn’t be meeting to determine what our future course should be there.
And isn’t it important to come up with a clear course of future action in view of the fact that our military leaders in Washington, D.C., are already making plans to send many more military units to Afghanistan, including hundreds of those who are scheduled to return home from Iraq in the next few months?
It seems to me that the most important decision to be made should be which commander is right concerning Afghanistan, the Briton or the American. If Carleton-Smith has gauged the situation more realistically than McKiernan has, we should arrange meetings with the Taliban, then withdraw all or most of our forces. Frankly, I believe the Briton is on the right track.