The Corner

If We Ignore the War, Maybe It Will Go Away . . .

We’ve done a lot of debating about Afghanistan here lately. I’ll have a column up later today about what I think the real problem is: the failure of strategic vision about the wider war. You’ll be shocked to learn that I’m with Michael Ledeen on that one.

Ignoring the wider war, and temporizing on Afghanistan while we have young men and women at risk, may win a commander-in-chief Nobel prizes in Europe — the audience he cares about — but it is endangering the nation that commander-in-chief is responsible for securing.

On that score, two important pieces for your weekend reading. At The Long War Journal, Tom Joscelyn and Bill Roggio have posted a superb, comprehensive analysis called, “Al Qaeda is the tip of the jihadist spear.” Taking a long look at the enemy in Afghanistan, Tom and Bill argue that a counterterrorism approach cannot defeat it:

We do not think that a shift to a predominately counterterrorism campaign utilizing airstrikes and the like is sufficient to beat back the threat to America’s interests. In fact, we argue that such thinking is rooted in a dangerous ignorance of al Qaeda and our terrorist enemies. Al Qaeda was never a self-contained problem that could be defeated by neutralizing select individuals – even though capturing or killing senior al Qaeda members surely does substantially weaken the network. Instead, Osama bin Laden and his cohorts deliberately fashioned their organization to be the tip of a much longer jihadist spear.

For those following our debates here, I’m not sold on the counterterrorism approach either; my quarrel is that we can’t win the wider war — as opposed to tamp down the narrow insurgency in Afghanistan — using General McChrystal’s strategy. But that aside, what Tom and Bill have done that no one else really has before is give us an accurate picture of what we’re actually looking at in Afghanistan. (My point is: Multiply that by Iran, Saudi money, Muslim Brotherhood ideology, plus a number of other venues, and you’ll finally have an accurate picture of the enemy that is gunning for us.)

Tom has a second, mind-reeling post at the Standard, excerpting a CBS report on how Iran is facilitating the Taliban in Afghanistan — surprise! — “but U.S. commanders are not allowed to comment publicly and it’s unclear to them what the U.S. strategy is for dealing with Iran’s increasingly deadly involvement.”

Hey, if we ignore the war, maybe it will go away.

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

The Second(-Class) Amendment

Editor’s Note: The following is the fourth in a series of articles in which Mr. Yoo and Mr. Phillips will lay out a course of constitutional restoration, pointing out areas where the Supreme Court has driven the Constitution off its rails and the ways the current Court can put it back on track. The first entry ... Read More

The Brexit Crisis

After what seem like years of a phony war, British and European Union negotiators finally agreed on the terms of Britain’s departure from the EU earlier this week, and Theresa May announced it in the House of Commons. The deal covers more than 500 pages of legal and bureaucratic prose, and few but the ... Read More

Friends of Elmer

Do you know what scares an American outdoorsman more than a grizzly bear? Twitter. In the late summer and early autumn, the hunting world had its eyes on the courts: The Trump administration had issued new guidance that would permit the hunting of brown bears (popularly known as grizzly bears), including in ... Read More
Politics & Policy

Basta La Vista, Baby

Dear Reader (And especially Martha McSally’s dog), As I often note, I increasingly tend to see the political scene as a scripted reality show in which the writers don’t flesh out the dialogue so much as move characters into weird, wacky, confrontational, or embarrassing positions. It’s a lot like The ... Read More