The last of the 33,000 surge troops who were sent to Afghanistan in 2009 came back to the United States on Friday. Many U.S. troops are expected to leave by 2014. The objective to suppress the Taliban and train Afghani troops is not fully complete.

The surge does not seem to have improved the United States’ overall security.

The original goal of the surge was to help stabilize Afghanistan and train more Afghani troops. President Barack Obama told the public in a speech in 2009, “I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan,” he said. “We know that al-Qaida and other extremists seek nuclear weapons, and we have every reason to believe that they would use them.”

As a result of the surge, the United States gained territories in the country. Al-Qaeda has largely been suppressed and has been for several years, according to government reports. At the same time, there has been an increase in “green-on-blue” attacks, where Afghani troops kill International Security Assistance Force troops.

Leon Panetta, U.S. defense secretary, said, “The surge accomplished its objectives of reversing Taliban momentum on the battlefield and dramatically increased the size and capability of the Afghan National Security Forces.”

The United States should be concerned about maintaining its own security.

While Obama justified the troop surge by claiming our security was threatened, this has not proven to be the case. Many Americans, including Sen. John McCain, are wondering why the United States is still involved in the region. “I think all options ought to be considered, including whether we have to just withdraw early, rather than have a continued bloodletting that won’t succeed,” McCain said.

The United States needs to consider leaving as soon as possible, rather than staying in a conflict that is costing lives and money. A total of $568 billion has been spent on the war in Afghanistan, according to the National Priorities Project.

The United States has a long history of wanting to “win” wars. Some U.S. leaders may argue the country won the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. It’s difficult to claim the United States won when we count the lives lost and the money spent. Escalating the war with 33,000 troops hardly appears necessary.

In the speech justifying the surge, Obama said, “They argue that it cannot be stabilized, and we’re better off cutting our losses and rapidly withdrawing. I believe this argument depends on a false reading of history.”

Our security cannot be proven to be demonstrably better by the United States’ continued presence in Afghanistan. Obama and others believe the United States is preventing our enemies from getting nuclear weapons. That argument is yet to be substantiated with evidence.

The United States can no longer afford to keep a military presence in countries unless our safety is actually threatened. Billions of dollars spent on improving Afghanistan could be spent improving our own country. The pursuit of our security appears complete.

Afghanistan is ranked among one of the most corrupt governments in the world. In 2011, Transparency International rated it 180 out of 182 countries. The United States may want to fix the corruption to try and make Afghanistan an ally, but we’ve reached the end of what we can afford.

Harmen Rockler is a senior newspaper journalism and political science major. His column appears weekly. He can be reached at horockle@syr.edu or followed on Twitter at @LeftofBoston.

 

Published on September 24, 2012 at 1:00 am