A damaged U.S. vehicle (left) is seen after a suicide attack on a U.S. military convoy in Nangahar province, east of Kabul, on Friday, Oct. 10, 2008. (AP)
Afghanistan is deteriorating, and Western forces are losing the battle to bring stability there. That’s the view widely shared among diplomats and analysts, and one privately held by many top military commanders.
Civilian casualties and coalition deaths in Afghanistan are now at record highs, government corruption is rampant, and the top U.S. military leader, Admiral Michael Mullen, predicts a worsening situation to come. Now the White House says it will overhaul its strategy there.
This hour, On Point: The crisis in Afghanistan and the way out of it.
You can join the conversation. Should the U.S. send more troops? Adjust the strategy? Or, perhaps, get out? We’d especially like to hear from veterans — civilian and military — who served there. Tell us what you think.
-Guy Raz, guest host
Guests:
Joining us from Kabul, Afghanistan, is Anand Gopal, correspondent for The Christian Science Monitor. He has recently reported on how Afghan civilian casualties undermine support for the U.S.
From Washington, we’re joined by Peter Spiegel, Pentagon correspondent for The Los Angeles Times.
Joining us from Stockbridge, Massachusetts, is Robert Kaplan, national correpondent for The Atlantic Monthly and author of “Hog Pilots, Blue Water Grunts,” just out in paperback. His recent op-ed in The New York Times, “A Manhunt or a Vital War?,” argued that in Afghanistan “the fate of Eurasia hangs in the balance.”
And from Paris, France, we’re joined by Jeremy Shapiro, a fellow at the Brookings Institution and director of research for its Center on the United States and Europe. He authors the Brookings “Afghanistan Index.”
Tags: Afghanistan, foreign policy, politics
Do not use my name! I am in Afghanistan now listening on-line and I think the our government needs to really define what “winning” is in Afghanistan. Is this the boxing ring that we are going to fight everyone who wants to fight with Americans or are we here to get these people to have a self supportive country? Do these people want a country that we are trying to give them?
Posted by Ed, on October 13th, 2008 at 10:31 am EDTPlease give me the name of the female ambassador who spoke at about 9:45am about women in power equallingless corruption. I only heard her comments but never caught her name. I am intrigued by the notion which matchesd my experience working with female judges from Afghanistan
Posted by Charon True, on October 13th, 2008 at 10:49 am EDTI would encourage people to read Three Cups of Tea by Greg Mortonson. He has started schools for girls - all at the request of the villages - in Afghanistan and Pakistan. He takes no government money and is truly apolitical. It tells you what can be accomplished in this area and how the Taliban can be defeated one educated woman at a time.
Posted by Marta Johnston, on October 13th, 2008 at 11:51 am EDTOne thing is missing in most conversation on Afghanistan is the fact that the Talibans are afghans too.Let’s invite them to the negotiating table along with all the tribes for a national reconciliation…Unless we have other motives for being there than to rebuild that country and defeat Al Quaeda. There are just too many people making ton of money out of those endless wars;and they are neither Afghans nor the common Iraquis.
Posted by Bobako, on October 13th, 2008 at 12:51 pm EDTWho is that General McKiernan guy? I thought it was General McClellan … gosh darnit, doggone it, you betcha!
Posted by Mark Stephenson, on October 13th, 2008 at 4:48 pm EDTListened to another “coopted” reporter. His explanation of difficulty in Afghanistan included comparative ease in Iraq because the geography is less mountainous. Sounds like a military rationalization to me. Why doesn’t all of the expensive equipment not win the wars? Drones controlled from the west coast of the US bombing civilians in Afghanistan. Please lets bring everybody and everything we bought to outfit them home!
Posted by Renee Kofi-Bruce, on October 13th, 2008 at 10:20 pm EDTI agree with Bobako. Some Afghan people, probably mostly in rural areas, support the Taliban because they are very conservative, the Taliban ended the civil war,etc., among other reasons. They all don’t necessarily support Al Q’aeda.
Of course the ruling Taliban party was oppressive especially to women - but that may not be the reason some rural tribal peoples support them. The situation on the ground and people’s motives are more varied and complex than that.
One cannot say that Taliban were hiding among civilians, and that how villages came to be bombed - sometimes they ARE the villagers in their own homes. Just as it is finally being admitted that some Vietnamese fought the Americans simply because they wanted the Westerners out of their country (and probably had little understanding of Marxism) so some Aghanis are fighting Western invaders for motives of their own.
When I saw on Frontline, a crowd of tribal warriors in Afghanistan or Pakistan brandishing rifles and yelling “Down with Amerca” - I thought “do these rural people even know what America really is?” They do know that the uniformed foreigners in their country and in planes flying over head are Americans - but what else do they know about America? I think “not much”.
Posted by BJ, on October 13th, 2008 at 11:05 pm EDTWe welcome comments from all of our listeners.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
These comments are moderated by On Point and WBUR, but you are solely responsible for the content of your comments. On Point and WBUR cannot verify the accuracy of comments posted here.
This site supports Gravatars.