Mediaboss Marketing

Andrew J. Bacevich Published 2:42 p.m. ET Feb. 26, 2017 | Updated 19 hours ago

U.S. troops inspect the site of a suicide attack in Kabul, Afghanistan, in 2014.(Photo: Massoud Hossaini, AP)

Will sending a few thousand additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan spell the difference between victory and defeat in what has become the longest war in all of U.S. history?Not likely.

To understand why, recall what the United States has been doing in that beleaguered country since the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. At the cost of more than $1 trillion, 3,500 coalition troops killed and thousands more wounded, the United States and its allies have spent more than 15 years trying to create in Kabul a government commanding the allegiance of the Afghan people and security forces capable of maintaining internal security.

That effort has not succeeded. Today, the Taliban not only persists but controls more territory than at any time since 2001. U.S. efforts to foster create a viable Afghan economy have achieved meager results.

Although Afghanistan has received more American aid than the United States expended to rebuild Western Europe after World War II via the Marshall Plan, the country today has achieved distinction in only two categories: corruption, where it ranks among the worlds worst, and heroin production, which has reached an all-time high.

Pretending that a few thousand troops will turn things around in Afghanistan is like expecting a few hundred additional cops to eliminate gang violence in a city like Chicago. Its an argument that ignores root causes. Rather than a serious policy proposal, its a Band-Aid.

In Afghanistan, what's the plan?: Our view

The root causes of Afghan dysfunction are vast and deep. They predate the ongoing war itself. If the security and well-being of the United States do require it to fix the problems afflicting Afghanistan, then doing so is likely to require a few hundred thousand troops. To finish the job, those troops will have to stay a few decades. Along the way, they will burn through trillions of additional taxpayer dollars.

If U.S. policymakers shrink from making any such commitment as well they might perhaps its time to ask a more fundamental question: Is it not possible that Afghans are better able than we are to solve their own problems?

Andrew J. Bacevich is author of Americas War for the Greater Middle East, which is just out in paperback.

Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/2msHqAZ

Continued here:
Enough already for Afghanistan: Opposing view - USA TODAY