Progressives Complicate Obama’s Afghanistan Plans

By
Monday, October 12, 2009 at 6:00 am
Paktika Province, Afghanistan (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Micah E. Clare)

Paktika Province, Afghanistan (U.S. Army photo by Spc. Micah E. Clare)

As President Obama and his advisers debate strategy for the Afghanistan war and its related crisis in Pakistan, a factor that so far has not intruded on their discussions is emerging: the antiwar movement is showing signs of strength.

In Congress and around the country, a segment of the progressive movement that helped elect Obama is coalescing around a critique of the eight-year war. That cohort, of unknown size as yet, is skeptical of an open-ended commitment; willing to provide Obama with friendly criticism; unwilling to accede to a second escalation of U.S. troops under the new administration; and searching for an exit strategy. Powerful progressive groups and members of Congress that quietly accepted Obama’s infusion of 21,000 new troops for Afghanistan this spring, however uncomfortably, are finding their footing to oppose the current one, even if they are not yet demanding fixed dates for troop withdrawals. It is unclear what effect they will ultimately have on the debate, but, buoyed by polls demonstrating the war’s unpopularity, they complicate Obama’s decisionmaking.

Illustration by: Matt Mahurin

Illustration by: Matt Mahurin

Progressives are “asking ourselves what we’ve not accomplished in last eight years that we could possibly accomplish over the next eighty,” said Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), a favorite of liberals and an opponent of the Afghanistan war, “and more and more, the answer is: nothing.”

That hope is frustrated by the present debate. For the past two weeks, cabinet-level officials and military commanders have met with the president at the White House to consider whether to continue with an expansive military-led effort in Afghanistan aimed at weakening al-Qaeda’s insurgent allies through bolstering the Afghan government or whether to focus the mission around harassing al-Qaeda directly in its tribal Pakistan safehaven. While officials have stated to reporters that all assumptions are subject to examination, Defense Secretary Robert Gates, in a joint appearance with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday, said withdrawing troops from Afghanistan is not under consideration. That means the baseline resource commitment under discussion is 68,000 U.S. troops, the highest troop deployment America has ever sent to the beleaguered central-Asian country.

Grayson is hardly the only Afghanistan skeptic in Congress, even varieties of congressional skepticism are still inchoate within the Democratic caucus. After a meeting at the White House on Tuesday, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) rolled her eyes when her Senate counterpart, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), pledged support for Obama’s ultimate decision. “Whether we agree with it, [and] vote for it, remains to be seen,” she said. Two days later, Rep. David Obey (D-Wisc.), the chief House appropriator, called a counterinsurgency strategy “futile” and expressed doubt that the U.S. could reverse Taliban advances at acceptable cost.

In the Senate, Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.) has called for a “flexible timetable” for withdrawal. While the influential Armed Services Committee chairman, Carl Levin (D-Mich.), remains a supporter of the war, he has balked at a call for a second troop increase this year, preferring to accelerate the training of Afghan security forces instead. John Kerry (D-Mass.), the chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, also remains a cautious supporter of the war, although he has backed away from what he once called a “global counterinsurgency” by holding a series of recent hearings in which he raised probing questions about the prospects for successful counterinsurgency in Afghanistan.

Late last month, the antiwar movement received an infusion of support from a pillar of the new progressive online infrastructure: MoveOn.org, the progressive netroots organization with over 5 million members, and a staunch ally of Obama’s. Despite staying largely out of the spring debate on escalation, MoveOn, which ardently opposed the Iraq war, began emailing supporters to urge the president to adopt a “clear exit strategy” for Afghanistan, and on Sept. 29, sent out a request to its members to host country-wide screenings for filmmaker Robert Greenwald’s antiwar documentary “Rethink Afghanistan.”

Ilyse Hogue, MoveOn’s director of political advocacy and communications, explained that the organization’s membership, so far, wanted “to understand what the plan is” in Afghanistan. “Escalation with no exit strategy is all too familiar to them” from the Iraq debate, Hogue said, as are policy prescriptions “ramrodded from hawks outside and inside” an administration. The overall decline in public support for the Afghanistan war is reflective of MoveOn’s supporters, Hogue added. Recent polls have found that only 47 percent of the country thinks the war is worth fighting, and up to 70 percent of Democrats oppose it.

Escalation in Afghanistan comes as an anomaly to many Democrats. Obama on Friday received an unexpected Nobel Peace Prize, yet he campaigned for the presidency on a platform of recommitting to the Afghanistan war and increased troop levels by almost half within weeks of taking office. “One of the reasons [progressives] supported his campaign is because they believe in his multilateral approach to foreign policy issues,” Hogue said, including an increased reliance on diplomacy and a “clear plan on the ground” for the war.

Accordingly, the Obama administration’s Afghanistan critics are reluctant ones. Hogue said the progressive pressure on him was “to support Obama” by ensuring that the drift over the war doesn’t overtake his broader agenda and so he can explain to the country “how he’s going to achieve goals, what we’ll achieve, and how we’re going to get out.” MoveOn’s supporters, like many Democrats, are not yet at the point of demanding a concrete date for withdrawal, preferring at this point to insist Obama articulate a plausible plan for Afghanistan that includes an exit strategy.

Similarly, Greenwald said he was encouraged by Obama’s Afghanistan strategy review, particularly as it, reportedly, begins to distinguish between al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies while setting the goals for the war. “Why would you occupy a country for 100 [al-Qaeda] evildoers? It just doesn’t make sense to me if security is primarily the issue for our country” in Afghanistan, the filmmaker said shortly after premiering his film in Washington D.C. last week. While Greenwald said he would like the review to be “tougher, smarter and broader,” he said he hoped it would address the “implicit assumption” that “sending more troops will help our country.”

Greenwald, who has worked with MoveOn on previous anti-Iraq war and Fox News-hounding projects during the Bush years, said it was “great to have the most effective, efficient, smartest and biggest online group working with us and using the film.” His documentary — much of which was shot in Afghanistan — had reached about 600 screenings in people’s homes and from student groups and unions in its first three weeks of full release, after being available in installments for months on his website and primarily not yet available in theaters.


The next steps, Greenwald said, would be to target screenings to progressive members of congress’ districts and “invite congressmen and -women and staffers to come to the screening.” At the screenings, he hopes to present members or their staffs with concrete figures about how the costs of the war, an estimated $228 billion over eight years, has impacted specific districts in terms of measurements like lost jobs.

It will not be easy to predict how the emerging antiwar movement impacts the president’s decisions, particularly as much of the overlapping progressive infrastructure views the healthcare reform fight as its primary effort — and there the Obama administration is a crucial ally. While MoveOn can “walk and chew gum at the same time,” Hogue said “I’m not going to lie to you, we’re in the middle of a huge health care fight” and MoveOn had placed “enormous resources into that.”

Yet Grayson and another beloved progressive member of Congress, Rep. Donna Edwards (D-Md.), attended Greenwald’s Washington premiere last Tuesday and spoke at a panel afterwards. “The war itself is destructive, not constructive,” Grayson said at the panel.

In an interview just after Obama’s Nobel Prize was announced, Grayson combined support for Obama with opposition to the war Obama may decide to escalate. “Logically,” he said, “if you win the Nobel Peace Prize then you’re a man of peace. I think ultimately the commander-in-chief will make up his mind to end the war and bring our troops home. I hope it happens sooner rather later but I think it’s inevitable. I don’t think we’ll be in Afghanistan in the year 2089.”

Follow Spencer Ackerman on Twitter


Comments

25 Comments

Our News • Blog Archive • Brief Relief, but No Cure For Carmakers … « The Buzz
Pingback posted October 12, 2009 @ 9:21 am

[...] Obama Decsions Complicated by Progressive Opposition to … [...]


Obama Decsions Complicated by Progressive Opposition to …
Pingback posted October 12, 2009 @ 10:51 am

[...] the whole story here: Spencer Ackerman aggregated by [...]


majusmcret
Comment posted October 12, 2009 @ 11:25 am

The Administration is mulling over sending more troops to Afghanistan to protect Afghans when we do NOT have enough Guards at our own borders to protect Americans. We are NOW being invaded by THOUSANDS of terrorists, criminals, and drug traffickers coming across those borders weekly. The travesty of the Administration's failure to address that threat is equaled by the American media's failure to keep America aware of that threat. For a window on this growing vulnerability to your security and well-being, visit the “shrapnel rich” domain of The Butter-Cutter at: http://www.thebutter-cutter.com/Protecting_Amer…


Obama Decisions Complicated by Progressive Opposition to …
Pingback posted October 12, 2009 @ 1:17 pm

[...] the whole story here: Spencer Ackerman aggregated by [...]


Tweets that mention Obama Decisions Complicated by Progressive Opposition to Afghanistan Escalation « The Washington Independent -- Topsy.com
Pingback posted October 12, 2009 @ 1:59 pm

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Eleanor Carlson and DrBlindBat. DrBlindBat said: Obama Decisions Complicated by Progressive Opposition to … http://bit.ly/3Y24jm [...]


ilovebeeswarzone
Comment posted October 12, 2009 @ 1:27 pm

the President has a big job as to define the real strategy because there is always the law of Unexpected,that we have to keep in mind specialy on a major decision like war,i thrust his team Biden,Hilary,to come up with their inputs,so he can get all our owns out of there swiftly.thank you


triathlon
Comment posted October 13, 2009 @ 12:30 am

GAY AGENDA VS [AF-PAK] POLICY

Just a very quick comment, the policy of now having an openly gay military policy has completed ended any real [AF-PAK] policy that this administration or set of countries entering the theater of operations could now or in the future come up with. The idea of forcing equal opportunity for women, down the throats of [IFF] Islamic Freedom Fighters Ultra-Islamic beliefs, at the end of a Gay Marines Bayonet is not even a starter.

With the stroke of the pen the Media Messiah Imperial President will end any chance of ever winning any war on the Islamic Crescent, it will be a never ending nightmare. This should have been put off until after hostilities, but this was tackless, putting military operations in ever increasing jeopardy.

HERCULE TRIATHLON SAVINIEN


jjfitz
Comment posted October 13, 2009 @ 4:22 am

I don't know how to feel about it. I'm a liberal that served 11 years in the miltary and don't want to see these organizations used for social experiments even though they are public organizations. Liberals and Conservatives and non-enrolled (:)) fight and die for country, that is the primary reason we honor them, but that doesn't mean that this should be the first realm to which society tests it's future balances just because a win under the 'public' banner could be won here. Just because victories can legallly be gathered here, does't mean this is where we should. Sometime expedient victories are not victories.

So lets let the military be the military, why should they be forced to work out social issues LONG before we the people are ready for the same ones?


jjfitz
Comment posted October 13, 2009 @ 4:50 am

Chaos was the strategy: The neocons did not miscalculate, they won a huge immoral victory that is complety non-discussed in broad daylight, and that is the reason why this conversation is hidden. We the people of the US, had the occasion to reposition a huge strategic force to the mideast, and so long as Iraq is despoiled with infighting we maintain it. We now have huge semi-permanant bases in the mideast capable of stricking mainland China and every Oilstan between, if this is a loss… nobody ever won before. Iraq is the largest net-strategic gain to the US since the Panama Canal, we already have what we came for.

If you want to scare the shit out of entrenched liberals and conservatives, lets start calling it what it really is.

Do you really think the people that play the 'Grand Chess Game' think 5000 military lives too expensive? I'm sorry, but they're still congratulating themselves on how 'cheap' this really was.

Chaos is good? Say you?


LouEsc
Comment posted October 13, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

What does a hate crimes bill have to do with money for U.S. troops fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq? Dems and any other Republican who dose not stop playing with the lives of our troops need to Exposed and put out of office. Check out the arguments from both sides.

http://www.AmericanPatriotsPrevail.com/Dems_undermine_...

http://www.AmericanPatriotsPrevail.com/Dems_undermine_...


schizophrenie
Comment posted October 14, 2009 @ 9:45 am

We are now being invaded by thousands of terrorists, criminals, and drug traffickers coming across those borders weekly. The travesty of the Administration's failure to address that threat is equalled by the American media's failure to keep America aware of that threat.


mld678
Comment posted October 20, 2009 @ 7:21 pm

America need to move forward – one group continually stands in the way. It’s time for MoveOn to Move Over! The group turned 11 this year, and has repeatedly been the source the drives American politics into the gutter. Stop embarrassing our nation, and move on. http://www.friendsoftheuschamber.com/moveover/


Future of Afghanistan Complicated by Election Outcome | Demockracy
Pingback posted November 15, 2009 @ 11:43 pm

[...] to follow through on efforts to improve the lives of Afghan people. US involvement is also becoming increasingly unpopular at home, and the longer US soldiers and aid workers are in Afghanistan, the more chances there are for [...]


Yes, Michael Moore: Obama Really Does Want to Be the War President | Evans Politics
Pingback posted December 2, 2009 @ 5:59 am

[...] Progressives Complicate Obama’s Afghanistan Plans, Washington Independent, October 12, 2009, by Spencer [...]


reiner
Comment posted January 21, 2010 @ 9:51 am

Very Interest Article Thanks


reiner
Comment posted January 21, 2010 @ 2:51 pm

Very Interest Article Thanks


Cutlem
Comment posted April 2, 2010 @ 10:56 am

Great News! Thank You Very Much.


adidas originals
Comment posted June 2, 2010 @ 6:14 am

Thanks for this interesting post,i like it.


louis vuitton
Comment posted August 5, 2010 @ 2:34 am

With the stroke of the pen the Media Messiah Imperial President will end any chance of ever winning any war on the Islamic Crescent, it will be a never ending nightmare. This should have been put off until after hostilities, but this was tackless, putting military operations in ever increasing jeopardy.


Irregular Warfare and the American Civil War Experience | Defense Spending
Pingback posted August 10, 2010 @ 1:10 pm

[...] for Afghanistan, certain voices outside the Beltway called instead for a draw-down. Some of the arguments raised against escalating or prolonging the war were based on humanitarian concerns. Others focused on the cost-versus-benefit strategic [...]


Discount Louis Vuitton
Comment posted August 23, 2010 @ 2:02 am

putting military operations in ever increasing jeopardy.


tory-burch-flip-flops
Trackback posted January 14, 2011 @ 12:50 am

tory burch sale…

Tory Burch flip flop online sale.For the younger working expat women,look at these tory burch Shoes.these tory burch flip flop are definitely fun,yet the glossy design and round-toe stay these lovely.These tory burch shoes with multiple.New arrivel Tor…


tory-burch-boots
Trackback posted January 21, 2011 @ 5:54 am

discount tory burch shoes…

Tory Burch flip flop online sale.For the younger working expat women,look at these tory burch Shoes.these tory burch flip flop are definitely fun,yet the glossy design and round-toe stay these lovely.These tory burch shoes with multiple.New arrivel Tor…


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.