Fred and Kim Kagan spent their Thanksgiving writing a Washington Post op-ed in favor of... wait for it... a big surge in Afghanistan with no preconditions! It's a real post-Thanksgiving treat.
Amazingly, the Kagans managed to write an entire op-ed about Afghanistan without once mentioning the Taliban. They also claim that "if the Afghan government were fully legitimate, there would be no insurgency," which shows that they know absolutely nothing about what motivates the Afghan insurgency.
This isn't a serious attempt at argument; it's pro-surge propaganda, plain and simple (much like the Kagans' earlier Afghanistan op-eds). Like Leah Farrell, I can't bring myself to write a serious response.
I will make one substantive point, though. The Kagans start their op-ed with a brief history of the surge in Iraq. But they make no mention of the Sahwa -- the Sunni Awakening militias, numbering some 98,000 men, which were an integral part of the U.S. surge strategy.
This is a substantial omission. In the Kagans' revisionist history, the only driver of increased stability and security in Iraq was the surge, the six extra U.S. brigades dispatched to the country in 2007. That's shoddy scholarship. You can debate whether the Sahwa were the most important factor in improving security in Iraq, or merely one of the most important, but you can't seriously discuss the surge without crediting their role.
But pro-Afghanistan surge commentators almost never mention their role -- probably because is no Afghan equivalent (tribal militias notwithstanding).
For updates throughout the day, follow us on 
Twitter, 
Facebook or 
RSS!
Categories: Afghanistan, Regional News, War and Terrorism, War in Afghanistan, War in Iraq
2 Comments
You could at least demand that any place publishing the Kagans note the error in leaving our the Iraqi tribal role. Public figures should be held to their public lies.
Good job for calling them out and I appreciate the links
On the other hand, you need to ask yourself why they didn't mention America's collaboration with the same "thugs" (called by Bush & Chaney and their ilk) who killed Americans and who were instrumental in Saddam's regime?
The answer is simple: It would have exposed American policy for what it is: We do not care whom we deal with as long we serve our interests. My friend the does not sell well!!! The does not sound like a good propaganda.
You and I know they are just a mouth piece. A truly substantive debate never happened in America; there is no space for what you wrote in America's media
Post a Comment