Afghan War Turnoff

Afghan War Turnoff

Trust the judgment of the American majority, who say this war is no longer worth fighting.


Official results from Afghanistan’s presidential election are not due until September 17, and widespread reports of vote-buying, ballot-rigging and intimidation make it unlikely that the final numbers will accurately reflect the will of the Afghan people. But we do have a sense of the evolving sentiments of the American people with regard to the almost eight-year-old US occupation of a country known as “the graveyard of empires.” Americans, once overwhelmingly supportive of the intervention, are wising up to conditions in Afghanistan, which, as Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen admits, are “serious and deteriorating.” And a majority is increasingly aware that the more blood and treasure we pour down the Afghan drain, the less we’ll have to spend on economic recovery, healthcare reform and building a green economy at home. Those who want to protect Obama’s reform agenda should seek alternatives to a militarized strategy in Afghanistan.

Mullen’s commanders are reportedly readying a request for more US troops. Even without an additional buildup, troop totals are expected to reach 68,000 by the end of this year. President Obama, who now calls Afghanistan “a war of necessity,” seems inclined to wade deeper into the quagmire. He’s doing so just as many US allies–including a growing number of British officials–have begun talking about an exit strategy.

The American people, conscious that this summer has produced the highest death tolls yet for US troops, are disinclined to follow the lead of the generals or their president. Fifty-one percent say the human and economic costs of continued US occupation are too great; according to a new Washington Post/ABC News poll, they oppose dispatching more troops by an almost 2-to-1 margin. The fact that they are turning against this misguided enterprise presents an opening for Congressional critics and activists to check Obama’s wrongheaded strategy. Senator Russ Feingold has spoken out against further escalation and for a withdrawal timeline. Almost 100 House members are co-sponsoring Representative Jim McGovern’s call for an exit strategy.

Robert Greenwald’s “Rethink Afghanistan” project is highlighting the fact that civilians, especially women, are ill served by the occupation and that “there is no ‘victory’ to be won in Afghanistan.” Groups like Peace Action and Progressive Democrats of America are ramping up campaigns against a new troop surge. And the Friends Committee on National Legislation has used a recent RAND study to build a case for using diplomacy (including negotiations with elements of the Taliban), development of civil society, effective policing and the wise use of intelligence to combat terrorist groups operating in Afghanistan and Pakistan. As FCNL’s Joe Volk has written, “Of course, the answer is not to just stop the war fighting and do nothing. The answer is to stop the war fighting, deny the terrorists their cosmic battle and shift into a law enforcement mode through international cooperation, development, and diplomacy.”

That’s a smart strategy. Unfortunately, the administration won’t embrace it without a push from Congress. That’s why the McGovern resolution, which has bipartisan support, is such an important initiative. Getting more House members to sponsor it will take work, but the argument is clear: a growing movement is seeking alternatives to military escalation. Trust the judgment of the American majority, who say this war is no longer worth fighting.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read. It’s just one of many examples of incisive, deeply-reported journalism we publish—journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media. For nearly 160 years, The Nation has spoken truth to power and shone a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug.

In a critical election year as well as a time of media austerity, independent journalism needs your continued support. The best way to do this is with a recurring donation. This month, we are asking readers like you who value truth and democracy to step up and support The Nation with a monthly contribution. We call these monthly donors Sustainers, a small but mighty group of supporters who ensure our team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers have the resources they need to report on breaking news, investigative feature stories that often take weeks or months to report, and much more.

There’s a lot to talk about in the coming months, from the presidential election and Supreme Court battles to the fight for bodily autonomy. We’ll cover all these issues and more, but this is only made possible with support from sustaining donors. Donate today—any amount you can spare each month is appreciated, even just the price of a cup of coffee.

The Nation does not bow to the interests of a corporate owner or advertisers—we answer only to readers like you who make our work possible. Set up a recurring donation today and ensure we can continue to hold the powerful accountable.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy