ANALYSIS | The undeclared war in Afghanistan -- aka "Operation Enduring Freedom" -- officially began on Oct. 7, 2001. Prompted by the 9/11 terrorist attacks on the United States, the military incursion has led to political upheaval, revelations and unanticipated impact at home.
Foreign policy under the microscope
The American people were content to entrust matters for foreign policy to administration officials. "We're offering help and friendship to the Afghan people. It is their Taliban rulers, and the terrorists they harbor, who have much to fear," the Guardian quoted President George W. Bush on that fateful Oct. 7. With the opening salvo ready to be released, the battle lines appeared clear-cut.
Fast forward to June 21, 2004, and the scathing criticism lobbed onto the current and former administrations by Republican House Member Dana Rohrbacher. Drawing heavily from personal and anecdotal experiences, Rohrbacher revealed that "by the end of the 1980s the presence of a potentially dangerous whack element in Afghanistan was well known." He attributed the September 11 attacks to "insane policies" that enabled the radicalization of Islamic splinter movements. Rohrbacher's revelations were not new, but they represented one of the first times that an elected official openly spoke out about the foreign policy failures of the Clinton and Bush administrations.
The electorate will remember that just in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, President Bush enjoyed a 90 percent approval rating; Gallup shows that June 2004 was a tipping point during which approval and opposition were in a dead heat with 49 percent on each side. From there, the administration suffered a steady decline of its support.
Foreign policy matters are still complex and difficult to understand, even for insiders. Even so, the American voter is not longer content to trust elected officials with the use of foreign aid dollars and the formation of quick alliances. We want information, rationalization and -- at least some of us -- see hard data.
Military prowess is no longer the canned answer
America emerged victoriously from the Cold War. While Europe was holdings its collective breath, the United States and former Soviet Union played a deadly game of chicken, but Reagan refused to blink. We won. Concurrently, we felt that there was nothing the American military -- or threat of its deployment -- could not accomplish.
The decade-long Afghan war serves as a sobering reminder that military prowess is not the answer to all foreign policy stalemates. Comparisons to the long-lasting Vietnam War are inevitable, but ABC World News put it most succinctly when stating that both conflicts are "distant, profoundly complex, and ill-understood."
In his Jan. 20, 1961, inaugural address, President John F. Kennedy "let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty." Although the fervor served to electrify the American people -- much like President Bush's rhetoric would accomplish some decades later -- it did not address the importance of measuring military action by the success (or failure) of ending conflicts quickly and succinctly.
Michael O'Malley questioned whether America's unwillingness to withdraw from Vietnam was due -- in part -- to a "fear of losing face, of international humiliation." At this time, there is no clear exit strategy from Afghanistan. Voters, whose sons and daughters are now soldiers being deployed to the war-torn country, remember that these youngsters entered middle school when 9/11 happened. Plenty of parents who eye their children's upcoming high school graduations come to the realization that military action is perhaps not the answer. Voting behavior favoring anti-war candidates, such as President Obama, underscore this changing sentiment.
The human cost of war is revealed
Although always part of electioneering rhetoric and stump speeches, the promises of peace and prosperity resonate with an electorate that has access to international news on a 24-7 basis. Der Spiegel outlined in 2005 that the Bush Administration went to great lengths to censor photos of flag-draped coffins returning. This media blackout policy actually started during the tenure of President George H. W. Bush and "then-Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney." Author Gloria Shur Bilchik credits the Obama Administration with reversing the long-standing policy in 2009.
The question now remains whether the depictions of flag-draped coffins will serve to urge for an end to Operation Enduring Freedom, or if they will be (ab)used for electioneering purposes.
There are no comments yet