![]() |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Return to Ideas
Return to Letter 09 05 Obama's
Afghanistan Speech (or
rather how to get out before 2012 rather than accomplish victory) Obama's
speech at West Point about Afghanistan.
December 01, 2009 Good evening. To the United States Corps of Cadets, to
the men and women of our armed services, and to my fellow Americans, I
want to
speak to you tonight about our effort in Afghanistan, the nature of our
commitment there, the scope of our interests, and the strategy that my
administration will pursue to bring this war to a successful
conclusions. It's an extraordinary honor for me to do so here at West
Point, where so many men and women have prepared to stand up for our
security
and to represent what is finest about our country. We did not ask for this fight. On September 11, 2001, 19
men hijacked four airplanes and used them to murder nearly 3,000
people. They
struck at our military and economic nerve centers. They took the lives
of
innocent men, women, and children without regard to their faith or race
or
station. Were it not for the heroic actions of passengers on board
one of those flights, they could have also struck at one of the great
symbols
of our democracy in Washington and killed many more. Just days after 9/11, Congress authorized the use of
force against Al Qaeda and those who harbored them, an authorization
that
continues to this day. The vote in the Senate was 98-0; the vote in the
House
was 420-1. For the first time in its history, the North Atlantic
Treaty Organization invoked Article 5, the commitment that says an
attack on
one member nation is an attack on all. And the United Nations Security
Council
endorsed the use of all necessary steps to respond to the 9/11 attacks.
America, our allies, and the world were acting as one to destroy Al
Qaeda's
terrorist network and to protect our common security. Under the banner of this domestic unity and international
legitimacy -- and only after the Taliban refused to turn over Osama bin
Laden
-- we sent our troops into Afghanistan. Within a matter of months, Al Qaeda was scattered and
many of its operatives were killed. The Taliban was driven from power
and
pushed back on its heels. A place that had known decades of fear now
had reason
to hope. At a conference convened by the U.N., a provisional
government was established under President Hamid Karzai. And an
International
Security Assistance Force was established to help bring a lasting peace
to a
war-torn country. Then, in early 2003, the decision was made to wage a
second war in Iraq. The wrenching debate over the Iraq war is
well-known and
need not be repeated here. It's enough to say that, for the next six
years, the
Iraq war drew the dominant share of our troops, our resources, our
diplomacy,
and our national attention, and that the decision to go into Iraq
caused
substantial rifts between America and much of the world. Today, after extraordinary costs, we are bringing the
Iraq war to a responsible end. We will remove our combat brigades from
Iraq by
the end of next summer and all of our troops by the end of 2011. That
we are
doing so is a testament to the character of the men and women in
uniform. Thanks to their courage, grit and perseverance, we have
given Iraqis a chance to shape their future, and we are successfully
leaving
Iraq to its people. But while we have achieved hard-earned milestones in
Iraq, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated. After escaping
across the
border into Pakistan in 2001 and 2002, Al Qaiea's leadership
established a safe
haven there. Although a legitimate government was elected by the Afghan
people,
it's been hampered by corruption, the drug trade, an under-developed
economy,
and insufficient security forces. Over the last several years, the Taliban has maintained
common cause with Al Qaeda, as they both seek an overthrow of the
Afghan
government. Gradually, the Taliban has begun to control additional
swaths of
territory in Afghanistan, while engaging in increasingly brazen and
devastating
acts of terrorism against the Pakistani people. Now, throughout this period, our troop levels in
Afghanistan remained a fraction of what they were in Iraq. When I took
office,
we had just over 32,000 Americans serving in Afghanistan compared to
160,000 in
Iraq at the peak of the war. Commanders in Afghanistan repeatedly asked for support to
deal with the reemergence of the Taliban, but these reinforcements did
not
arrive. And that's why, shortly after taking office, I approved a
longstanding
request for more troops. After consultations with our allies, I then announced a
strategy recognizing the fundamental connection between our war effort
in
Afghanistan and the extremist safe havens in Pakistan. I set a goal
that was
narrowly defined as disrupting, dismantling, and defeating Al Qaeda and
its
extremist allies, and pledged to better coordinate our military and
civilian
efforts. Since then, we've made progress on some important
objectives. High-ranking Al Qaeda and Taliban leaders have been killed,
and
we've stepped up the pressure on Al Qaeda worldwide. Yet huge challenges remain: Afghanistan is not lost, but
for several years, it has moved backwards. There's no imminent threat
of the
government being overthrown, but the Taliban has gained momentum. Al
Qaeda has
not reemerged in Afghanistan in the same numbers as before 9/11, but
they
retain their safe havens along the border. And our forces lack the full
support
they need to effectively train and partner with Afghan security forces
and
better secure the population. Our new commander in Afghanistan, General McChrystal, has
reported that the security situation is more serious than he
anticipated. In
short, the status quo is not sustainable. As cadets, you volunteered for service during this time
of danger. Some of you have fought in Afghanistan. Some of you will
deploy
there. As your commander-in-chief, I owe you a mission that is clearly
defined
and worthy of your service. And that's why, after the Afghan voting was completed, I
insisted on a thorough review of our strategy. Now, let me be clear: There has never been an option
before me that called for troop deployments before 2010, so there has
been no
delay or denial of resources necessary for the conduct of the war
during this
review period. Instead, the review has allowed me to ask the hard
questions and
to explore all the different options, along with my national security
team, our
military, and civilian leadership in Afghanistan, and our key partners. And given the stakes involved, I owed the American people
and our troops no less. After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home.
These are the resources that we need to seize the initiative, while
building
the Afghan capacity that can allow for a responsible transition of our
forces
out of Afghanistan. I do not make this decision lightly. I opposed the war in
Iraq precisely because I believe that we must exercise restraint in the
use of
military force and always consider the long-term consequences of our
actions. We have been at war now for eight years, at enormous cost
in lives and resources. Years of debate over Iraq and terrorism have
left our
unity on national security issues in tatters and created a highly
polarized and
partisan backdrop for this effort. And having just experienced the
worst
economic crisis since the Great Depression, the American people are
understandably focused on rebuilding our economy and putting people to
work
here at home. Most of all, I know that this decision asks even more of
you, a military that, along with your families, has already borne the
heaviest
of all burdens. As president, I have signed a letter of condolence to the
family of each American who gives their life in these wars. I have read
the
letters from the parents and spouses of those who deployed. I've
visited our
courageous wounded warriors at Walter Reed. I've traveled to Dover to
meet the
flag-draped caskets of 18 Americans returning home to their final
resting
place. I see firsthand the terrible wages of war. If I did not
think that the security of the United States and the safety of the
American
people were at stake in Afghanistan, I would gladly order every single
one of
our troops home tomorrow. So, no, I do not make this decision lightly. I make this
decision because I am convinced that our security is at stake in
Afghanistan
and Pakistan. This is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by
Al Qaeda.
It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that
new
attacks are being plotted as I speak. This is no idle danger, no hypothetical threat. In the
last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our
borders who
were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to
commit new
acts of terror. And this danger will only grow if the region slides
backwards
and Al Qaeda can operate with impunity. We must keep the pressure on Al Qaeda. And to do that, we
must increase the stability and capacity of our partners in the region. Of course, this burden is not ours alone to bear. This is
not just America's war. Since 9/11, Al Qaeda's safe havens have been
the source
of attacks against London and Amman and Bali. The people and
governments of
both Afghanistan and Pakistan are endangered. And the stakes are even
higher
within a nuclear-armed Pakistan, because we know that Al Qaeda and
other
extremists seek nuclear weapons, and we have every reason to believe
that they
would use them. These facts compel us to act along with our friends and
allies. Our overarching goal remains the same: to disrupt, dismantle
and defeat
Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan and to prevent its capacity to
threaten
America and our allies in the future. To meet that goal, we will pursue the following
objectives within Afghanistan. We must deny Al Qaida a safe haven. We
must
reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the
government. And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan's
security
forces and government, so that they can take lead responsibility for
Afghanistan's future. We will meet these objectives in three ways. First, we
will pursue a military strategy that will break the Taliban's momentum
and
increase Afghanistan's capacity over the next 18 months. Because this is an international effort, I've asked that
our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies. Some have
already
provided additional troops, and we're confident that there will be
further
contributions in the days and weeks ahead. Our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in
Afghanistan. And now we must come together to end this war
successfully. For
what's at stake is not simply a test of NATO's credibility; what's at
stake is
the security of our allies and the common security of the world. We'll continue to advise and assist Afghanistan's
security forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But
it will
be clear to the Afghan government -- and, more importantly, to the
Afghan
people -- that they will ultimately be responsible for their own
country. We'll support Afghan ministries, governors, and local
leaders that combat corruption and deliver for the people. We expect
those who
are ineffective or corrupt to be held accountable. And we will also
focus our
assistance in areas such as agriculture that can make an immediate
impact in
the lives of the Afghan people. Now, the people of Afghanistan have endured violence for
decades. They've been confronted with occupation by the Soviet Union,
and then
by foreign Al Qaida fighters who used Afghan land for their own
purposes. So tonight, I want the Afghan people to understand:
America seeks an end to this era of war and suffering. We have no
interest in
occupying your country. We will support efforts by the Afghan
government to
open the door to those Taliban who abandon violence and respect the
human
rights of their fellow citizens. And we will seek a partnership with
Afghanistan grounded in mutual respect, to isolate those who destroy,
to
strengthen those who build, to hasten the day when our troops will
leave, and
to forge a lasting friendship in which America is your partner and
never your
patron. Third, we will act with the full recognition that our
success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with
Pakistan.
We're in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading
through that
country. But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region
of
Pakistan. And that's why we need a strategy that works on both sides of
the
border. In the past, there have been those in Pakistan who've
argued that the struggle against extremism is not their fight and that
Pakistan
is better off doing little or seeking accommodation with those who use
violence. But in recent years, as innocents have been killed from
Karachi to Islamabad, it has become clear that it is the Pakistani
people who
are the most endangered by extremism. Public opinion has turned. The
Pakistani
army has waged an offensive in Swat and South Waziristan, and there is
no doubt
that the United States and Pakistan share a common enemy. In the past, we too often defined our relationship with
Pakistan narrowly. And those days are over. Moving forward, we are committed to a partnership with
Pakistan that is built on a foundation of mutual interest, mutual
respect, and
mutual trust. We will strengthen Pakistan's capacity to target those
groups
that threaten our countries and have made it clear that we cannot
tolerate a
safe haven for terrorists whose location is known and whose intentions
are
clear. These are the three core elements of our strategy: a
military effort to create the conditions for a transition; a civilian
surge
that reinforces positive action; and an effective partnership with
Pakistan. And I recognize there are a range of concerns about our
approach. So let me briefly address a few of the more prominent
arguments that
I've heard and which I take very seriously. Unlike Vietnam, we are joined by a broad coalition of 43
nations that recognizes the legitimacy of our action. Unlike Vietnam,
we are
not facing a broad-based popular insurgency. And most importantly,
unlike
Vietnam, the American people were viciously attacked from Afghanistan
and
remain a target for those same extremists who are plotting along its
border. To abandon this area now and to rely only on efforts
against Al Qaeda from a distance would significantly hamper our ability
to keep
the pressure on Al Qaeda and create an unacceptable risk of additional
attacks
on our homeland and our allies. Second, there are those who acknowledge that we can't
leave Afghanistan in its current state, but suggest that we go forward
with the
troops that we already have, but this would simply maintain a status
quo in
which we muddle through and permit a slow deterioration of conditions
there. It
would ultimately prove more costly and prolong our stay in Afghanistan,
because
we would never be able to generate the conditions needed to train
Afghan
security forces and give them the space to take over. Finally, there are those who oppose identifying a
timeframe for our transition to Afghan responsibility. Indeed, some
call for a
more dramatic and open-ended escalation of our war effort, one that
would
commit us to a nation-building project of up to a decade. I reject this
course
because it sets goals that are beyond what can be achieved at a
reasonable cost
and what we need to achieve to secure our interests. Furthermore, the absence of a timeframe for transition
would deny us any sense of urgency in working with the Afghan
government. It
must be clear that Afghans will have to take responsibility for their
security
and that America has no interest in fighting an endless war in
Afghanistan. As president, I refuse to set goals that go beyond our
responsibility, our means, or our interests. And I must weigh all of
the
challenges that our nation faces. I don't have the luxury of committing
to just
one. Indeed, I'm mindful of the words of President Eisenhower,
who, in discussing our national security, said, "Each proposal must be
weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain
balance
in and among national programs." Over the past several years, we have lost that balance.
We failed to appreciate the connection between our national security
and our
economy. In the wake of an economic crisis, too many of our neighbors
and
friends are out of work and struggle to pay the bills. Too many
Americans are
worried about the future facing our children. Meanwhile, competition within the global economy has
grown more fierce, so we can't simply afford to ignore the price of
these wars. All told, by the time I took office, the cost of the wars
in Iraq and Afghanistan approached a trillion dollars. And going
forward, I am
committed to addressing these costs openly and honestly. Our new
approach in
Afghanistan is likely to cost us roughly $30 billion for the military
this
year, and I'll work closely with Congress to address these costs as we
work to
bring down our deficit. But as we end the war in Iraq and transition to Afghan
responsibility, we must rebuild our strength here at home. Our
prosperity
provides a foundation for our power. It pays for our military; it
underwrites
our diplomacy; it taps the potential of our people and allows
investment in new
industry; and it will allow us to compete in this century as
successfully as we
did in the last. Now, let me be clear. None of this will be easy. The
struggle against violent extremism will not be finished quickly, and it
extends
well beyond Afghanistan and Pakistan. It will be an enduring test of
our free
society and our leadership in the world. And unlike the great power
conflicts
and clear lines of division that defined the 20th century, our effort
will
involve disorderly regions, failed states, diffuse enemies. So as a result, America will have to show our strength in
the way that we end wars and prevent conflict, not just how we wage
wars. We'll
have to be nimble and precise in our use of military power. Where Al
Qaeda and
its allies attempt to establish a foothold -- whether in Somalia or
Yemen or
elsewhere -- they must be confronted by growing pressure and strong
partnerships. We will have to take away the tools of mass destruction.
And that's why I've made it a central pillar of my foreign policy to
secure loose
nuclear materials from terrorists, to stop the spread of nuclear
weapons, and
to pursue the goal of a world without them, because every nation must
understand that true security will never come from an endless race for
ever
more destructive weapons. True security will come for those who reject
them. We'll have to use diplomacy, because no one nation can
meet the challenges of an interconnected world acting alone. I've spent
this
year renewing our alliances and forging new partnerships. And we have
forged a
new beginning between America and the Muslim world, one that recognizes
our
mutual interest in breaking a cycle of conflict and that promises a
future in
which those who kill innocents are isolated by those who stand up for
peace and
prosperity and human dignity. And we must make it clear to every man, woman and child
around the world who lives under the dark cloud of tyranny that America
will
speak out on behalf of their human rights and tend for the light of
freedom and
justice and opportunity and respect for the dignity of all peoples.
That is who
we are; that is the source, the moral source of America's authority. Since the days of Franklin Roosevelt and the service and
sacrifice of our grandparents and great-grandparents, our country has
borne a
special burden in global affairs. We have spilled American blood in
many
countries on multiple continents. We have spent our revenue to help
others
rebuild from rubble and develop their own economies. We have joined
with others
to develop an architecture of institutions -- from the United Nations
to NATO
to the World Bank -- that provide for the common security and
prosperity of
human beings. We have not always been thanked for these efforts, and we
have at times made mistakes. But more than any other nation, the United
States
of America has underwritten global security for over six decades, a
time that,
for all its problems, has seen walls come down, and markets open, and
billions
lifted from poverty, unparalleled scientific progress, and advancing
frontiers
of human liberty. For unlike the great powers of old, we have not sought
world domination. Our union was founded in resistance to oppression. We
do not
seek to occupy other nations. We will not claim another nation's
resources or
target other peoples because their faith or ethnicity is different from
ours. What we have fought for, what we continue to fight for is
a better future for our children and grandchildren. And we believe that
their
lives will be better if other peoples' children and grandchildren can
live in
freedom and access opportunity. As a country, we're not as young -- and perhaps not as
innocent -- as we were when Roosevelt was president. Yet we are still
heirs to
a noble struggle for freedom. And now we must summon all of our might
and moral
suasion to meet the challenges of a new age. In the end, our security and leadership does not come
solely from the strength of our arms. It derives from our people, from
the
workers and businesses who will rebuild our economy; from the
entrepreneurs and
researchers who will pioneer new industries; from the teachers that
will
educate our children and the service of those who work in our
communities at
home; from the diplomats and Peace Corps volunteers who spread hope
abroad; and
from the men and women in uniform who are part of an unbroken line of
sacrifice
that has made government of the people, by the people, and for the
people a
reality on this Earth. This vast and diverse citizenry will not always agree on
every issue, nor should we. But I also know that we as a country cannot
sustain
our leadership nor navigate the momentous challenges of our time if we
allow
ourselves to be split asunder by the same rancor and cynicism and
partisanship
that has in recent times poisoned our national discourse. It's easy to forget that, when this war began, we were
united, bound together by the fresh memory of a horrific attack and by
the
determination to defend our homeland and the values we hold dear. I
refuse to
accept the notion that we cannot summon that unity again. I believe... I believe with every fiber of my being that we, as
Americans, can still come together behind a common purpose, for our
values are
not simply words written into parchment. They are a creed that calls us
together and that has carried us through the darkest of storms as one
nation,
as one people. America, we are passing through a time of great trial.
And the message that we send in the midst of these storms must be
clear: that
our cause is just, our resolve unwavering. We will go forward with the
confidence that right makes might and with the commitment to forge an
America
that is safer, a world that is more secure, and a future that
represents not
the deepest of fears but the highest of hopes. Thank you, God bless you, and God bless the United States
of America. |
||||||||