The War in Afghanistan Is No Longer Tenable in Congress

The War in Afghanistan Is No Longer Tenable in Congress

The War in Afghanistan Is No Longer Tenable in Congress

Republicans refused to allow a vote on an accelerated withdrawal from Afghanistan, because they knew it would pass. 

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email

Count this as the most under-covered story of the week: late Thursday, Republicans in the House of Representatives forbade a vote on a resolution that would end the war in Afghanistan next year—because they knew it would pass. This means that, though we don’t have the roll call vote to prove it, Obama’s current strategy for Afghanistan is no longer sustainable in Congress.

You might recall that last year, Representative Jim McGovern offered an amendment to the defense authorization bill that called for President Obama to offer an “accelerated” withdrawal plan to Congress—which lost by only eleven votes, 215-204. All but eight Democrats supported it, along with twenty-six Republicans, including key members of the House Armed Services Committee.

Yesterday, McGovern was back with another amendment that would require the end of combat operations by the end of 2013—a year ahead of the president’s schedule—and redeployment by the end of 2014. It would require Congressional authorization for any deployment of troops to Afghanistan after 2014. McGovern’s bill was bipartisan and co-sponsored by Representatives Ron Paul, Walter Jones and Adam Smith, and had the full support of the Democratic leadership in the House.

But Republicans on the Rules Committee didn’t allow it to come for a vote—and two GOP sources told CNN the reason was that “Republicans were concerned the amendment could pass.” They expected a significant bloc of Republicans to support it, and that “they couldn’t rely on the White House to lobby Democrats against it.”

Instead, Republicans only allowed debate on a resolution by Representative Barbara Lee, which would have effectively ended the war immediately by only authorizing further money for withdrawal efforts. That has no real chance of passing the House.

McGovern, speaking on the House floor, was incensed. “What is the Republican leadership afraid of? Are they afraid a bipartisan majority of this House will vote to follow the will of the American people and change our Afghanistan policy?” he asked.

The vote would have been a massive embarrassment for the White House, coming as NATO leaders are gathering in Chicago this weekend to discuss the war strategy. Republicans rarely miss a chance to embarrass the president, but party leaders—including Mitt Romney—have long supported the war and have at times criticized Obama for drawing down even on his longer timetable.

But this should still be a huge story, particularly for reporters covering the summit in Chicago this weekend. Backed by constituents that are sour on the decade-long war in Afghanistan, Congress no longer has the votes to support the president’s plan.  

Disobey authoritarians, support The Nation

Over the past year you’ve read Nation writers like Elie Mystal, Kaveh Akbar, John Nichols, Joan Walsh, Bryce Covert, Dave Zirin, Jeet Heer, Michael T. Klare, Katha Pollitt, Amy Littlefield, Gregg Gonsalves, and Sasha Abramsky take on the Trump family’s corruption, set the record straight about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s catastrophic Make America Healthy Again movement, survey the fallout and human cost of the DOGE wrecking ball, anticipate the Supreme Court’s dangerous antidemocratic rulings, and amplify successful tactics of resistance on the streets and in Congress.

We publish these stories because when members of our communities are being abducted, household debt is climbing, and AI data centers are causing water and electricity shortages, we have a duty as journalists to do all we can to inform the public.

In 2026, our aim is to do more than ever before—but we need your support to make that happen. 

Through December 31, a generous donor will match all donations up to $75,000. That means that your contribution will be doubled, dollar for dollar. If we hit the full match, we’ll be starting 2026 with $150,000 to invest in the stories that impact real people’s lives—the kinds of stories that billionaire-owned, corporate-backed outlets aren’t covering. 

With your support, our team will publish major stories that the president and his allies won’t want you to read. We’ll cover the emerging military-tech industrial complex and matters of war, peace, and surveillance, as well as the affordability crisis, hunger, housing, healthcare, the environment, attacks on reproductive rights, and much more. At the same time, we’ll imagine alternatives to Trumpian rule and uplift efforts to create a better world, here and now. 

While your gift has twice the impact, I’m asking you to support The Nation with a donation today. You’ll empower the journalists, editors, and fact-checkers best equipped to hold this authoritarian administration to account. 

I hope you won’t miss this moment—donate to The Nation today.

Onward,

Katrina vanden Heuvel 

Editor and publisher, The Nation

Ad Policy
x