A warmed-over "suck on this" argument
Robin Wright, the Washington Post's longtime diplomatic correspondent, has an op-ed today offering some truly credulous justifications for escalating the war in Afghanistan. Here's the one that troubles me most:
U.S. standing in the Islamic world is also at stake. The historic rule of thumb is that winners have influence; losers don't. Winners get to set standards. Their ideas get more attention. Their leaders gain greater authority.
This seems to be a slightly more eloquent version of the "Muslims only respect force" argument (or, as Tom Friedman memorably put it, the "suck on this" argument). Problem is... we've tried that approach for the last eight years. We've tried to improve our standing through force and coercion. Where did it get us? America's public standing in the Muslim world hit all-time lows.
It turns out Muslims are not so simple-minded and monolithic that they instinctively respect whoever has the bigger stick. What angers them -- if you actually listen to what they're saying -- is America's aggressive foreign policy in the region, and its support for an aggressive Israeli state. Thus, even if the war in Afghanistan comes to a "successful" conclusion, escalation won't strengthen America's position in the Muslim world.
Every time a raid kills innocent civilians -- every time a drone strike in Pakistan incinerates women and children -- every time the U.S. is seen as propping up an unpopular government in Kabul or Islamabad -- our standing will further.
Indeed, as Marc Lynch noted in a perceptive blog post yesterday, escalation in Afghanistan runs the risk of inflaming Muslim public opinion and reinvigorating al-Qaeda.
For updates throughout the day, follow us on 
Twitter, 
Facebook or 
RSS!
Categories: War and Terrorism, War in Afghanistan
Tags: Afghan surge, Marc Lynch, Robin Wright, Thomas Friedman
No Comments
Post a Comment