It is truethat the lightly classified memoranda and cables in the WikiLeaks trove containvery few facts unknown to anybody who has followed the course of the war. Weknow that the Afghan conflict is complex and difficult, with a corruptgovernment in Kabul; a war-fighting policy that seems to alienate civilianswhile endangering our troops; and a Pakistani ally whose behavior and motivesoften seem questionable. And we should know that the Barack Obamaadministration inherited this troubled and perhaps impossible situation fromPresident George W. Bush, whose decision to invade Iraq within a year afterstriking back at the Taliban may have been catastrophic.
But howeverresponsible Bush is for the creation of this quandary, it is now Obama'sproblem to solve. The usefulness of the WikiLeaks papers will lie in the debatethey should inspire among political leaders and a public that neither supportsthe war nor demands withdrawalwith essential facts that ought to be understoodby everyone.
Pakistan'sLink to the Taliban Confirmed
First, thedocuments display the inglorious chaos of counterinsurgency warfare, especiallythe assassination program targeting militant Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders.While that program has achieved some valuable "kills," the specificaccounts of civilian deaths, including small children, are deeply disturbing.
Althoughmilitary leaders candidly remind us that civilian casualties are inevitable,the question raised here is whether the entire program is counterproductive. Oris it true, as advocates would claim, that using the drones and rocketsactually reduces the collateral damage caused by more traditional methods ofmaking war?
Second, itis critical to understand the price of this war in spent resources as well aslost lives. While the Bush administration squandered trillions of dollars inIraq, without any perceptible benefit to American security, the price of ourinvolvement in Afghanistan was slowly accruing, as well. Neglect of the wareffort there over the past nine years has undoubtedly raised that price. Howwill the Obama administrationand the war's supporters in the Republican Party,as welldefine the war's objectives so that its enormous human and fiscal costwill be justified?
Finally, themost important diplomatic aspect of the WikiLeaks documents is theirconfirmation of a story that has been published many timesnamely, the Americansuspicion that Pakistani military intelligence is connected with centralelements of the Taliban. The Pakistanis routinely deny this accusation, as theyhave long done, and the White House says this is old news that has beensuperseded by improved relations.
But nobodybelieves that Pakistan's secret services have cut off the relationships withAfghan Islamist leaders that began during the war with the Soviet Union. Nordoes anyone expect that they will, given the geopolitical realities ofPakistan's ongoing conflict with India.
The ultimateissue raised by the relationship between Islamabad and the insurgency, as wellas the parallel relationship between the insurgency and the Kabul government,is a simple question. If the Pakistanis can advance their interests bymaintaining communications with the Taliban, and if the Afghans believe thatthey can do likewise, then why is the United States alone unable to open suchtalks?
A centralprinciple of counterinsurgency warfare is that most conflicts are settled bynegotiation and reconciliation rather than victoryand the WikiLeaks paperssuggest that this complex and vexing war must be ended that way, too.
© 2010 Creators.com
