Latest News - Tuesday, December 8, 2009 8:13 - 2 Comments

Robert Creamer: Barack Obama, Progressives and Afghanistan

Robert Creamer: Barack Obama, Progressives and Afghanistan

Robert Creamer, a longtime political organizer and strategist and author the recent book " Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win . "He said, 'How many Progressives, I disagreed with President Obama's decision, the number of American troops moved into Afghanistan to increase. But Progressives must not lose sight of the fact that although we do not agree with this decision may, in particular President Obama shares a progressive vision of American foreign policy – including Afghanistan – which is fundamentally different from that of his predecessor's neo-Con.

At its core, worked out President Obama's speech Tuesday night his plan to end the American military presence in Afghanistan. His chosen path can not would be completed, the presence as quickly as many Progressives prefer it, but he was very clear that America is not the implementation of an open occupation of Afghanistan, and he sat down to start a firm date for American withdrawal.

Barack Obama understands that the Western occupation of a Muslim country ultimately nourishes extremism, rather than defeat them. And he understands – as he said in his speech – that our relations with Afghanistan should be ultimately as a partner, not as a patron. Barack Obama against preventive war and unilateralism, that George Bush earned the enmity of people everywhere.

Let us remember that if Barack Obama had been president eight years ago, our involvement in Afghanistan, he would completely managed differently from George Bush has – and he would never have invaded Iraq.

While some Progressives may not fully recognize the fundamental difference between Barack Obama's approach to the world and the value of Bush and Cheney, there is no question that the Neo-Con audience clearly understands it. Dick Cheney's attacks on the president are not just party politics. His criticism of Obama's withdrawal deadline is emblematic of a fundamental difference of opinion in view of the world.

The President rejected the original proposal for a McChrystal gradually building up the U.S. forces in the next 18 months, which was a large American presence in a number of years ahead. He also rejected a long-term nation-building mission in Afghanistan, are focused heavily on the central government. Instead, he decided to bulk up the American set the armed forces over the next six months, a 18-month timeline to begin the disengagement of our military, and provide for sharp incentives to the Afghan government to put its house in order – and develop its security forces – immediately.

I personally do not agree that the increasing presence of American military in Afghanistan is to promote the stability or help us contain al-Qaida. Like many Progressives, I am increasingly convinced that our military presence there fuels the conflict through the generation of nationalist opposition to Western presence – and in fact destabilized the country.

But I think the President's decision to short-term troop increase, a tactical disagreement – not differences about goals and strategic vision will be. The proof of the pudding is of course in the diet. I personally believe that until the end of his first term of President Obama completely withdrawn U.S. forces from Iraq and that most combat troops from Afghanistan will have gone, how to be good.

And I can say with confidence that this president did not start another military adventure or a new start interventionist initiative because he did not believe that is the way to a secure, prosperous and peaceful world created.

We will have a completely different world in 2012 with Barack Obama as president than we would have under the leadership of George Bush or John McCain.

We must also remember that the Bush administration's eight years of mismanagement of the fight in Afghanistan – and the diversion of resources to the war in Iraq – President Obama has no real good opportunities there.

America had to mobilize a time period after the fall of the Taliban, the world, the economic, political support, a real change in Afghanistan and then withdraw our military presence as quickly as possible could. Unfortunately did not happen and now our nine-year military presence has caused more and more Afghans to think of us as occupiers expelled, and not as partners in building their country. This problem is particularly acute in rural Afghanistan, which never really considered to be under the control of central government – and where the tradition of fighting foreign occupation goes back millennia.

But we will not claim that our military withdrawal from Afghanistan to be easy. Quite apart from its impact on Pakistan's tribal areas and let al-Qaeda, remember that the former Taliban government brutally suppressed the majority of the population – and particularly women. Today in Afghanistan, one quarter of women still wear burkas with small screens to allow only a partial view of the world. If the Taliban return to power, all the women were once required to wear the burka – and no one would have to receive training.

How do we solve militarily, we have a commitment that we do best behind a government that can protect women from oppression, and gives hope for the long-term economic development.

As an ardent opponent of the war in Iraq – and that the Vietnam war – I am the passion of the Progressive Party, sending more troops to Afghanistan to oppose understand. But whatever the disappointment in the President's decision, it must not be on the enormous stake in Progressive overcome Barack Obama's success.

I read yesterday an article by a prominent Progressive, stickers that said it was now time for him to scrape off the Obama bumper. Wrong.

The Obama Presidency an unparalleled historical window for progressive change. Our ability, success relies heavily on Barack Obama's success as president. Equally important is his and our success depends to organize the mobilization of the progressive party in America for change. If we do not organize to win, the other is to organize successfully, to stop us.

No one said change would be easy. Health reform, the re-regulation of the financial sector, reform of immigration, the creation of a clean energy economy – all need the political defeat of the powerful, entrenched political and economic interests. For who thought Barack Obama could make a trick and change, think again. Progressives are engaged in a lengthy, several years of political and economic struggle. But the big difference is that with Barack Obama as president and a Democratic Congress, we are on the offensive and not in a defensive Crouch.

We could not agree with every decision. We might disagree fundamentally with something. But we can not lose sight of the fact that we assumes part of a historical movement for progressive change, the success that Barack Obama will be as successful.