WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama is likely to scale back U.S. ambitions for troubled Afghanistan, redefining victory in a war that his closest military and foreign affairs advisers say cannot be won on the battlefield.
Even before a planned doubling of U.S. forces in Afghanistan later this year, the new administration is lowering its sights and expectations. Although there is general agreement that the United States will be in Afghanistan for years to come, the new focus is on how to show even small security gains and development progress quickly.
"That's clearly the message I'm getting, 'What are the near-term goals going to be?'" Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said when asked about Obama's agenda for Afghanistan.
Mullen and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, who has recently suggested the Bush administration overreached in Afghanistan, are scheduled to testify today before the Senate and House Armed Services committees.
Vice President Joe Biden said the world hasn't done enough to provide economic, political and military resources to Afghanistan, and that the United States and its allies lack a coherent strategy. The result is a country backsliding into Taliban control, he said.
Obama is expected to meet with the Joint Chiefs this week, with both Afghanistan and Iraq on the agenda. The wars are closely linked because some of the troops Obama wants to send to Afghanistan are in Iraq.
A few things are becoming clear, and none more stark than the notion of what winning in desperately poor, decentralized and deeply traditional Afghanistan would look like.
It is likely to be less about democracy and more about old-fashioned charity and development work. It will be measured by local gains that give Afghans a reason to reject the efficiencies and protection offered by the Taliban insurgency.newsday.com
Anyone want to explain what the point of this article was? One incomprehensible quote from Mullens?
