Admiral Mullen: Some Sense on Afghanistan
This morning, in an amazing feat of post-Bachleorette party strength (It takes a lot of stamina to celebrate your friends important life moments, doesn't it?), I read this article in the Post.
And boy was I glad I did.
In it, Admiral Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, pointed out what FCNL has been contending all along - more guns and war will not help Afghanistan thrive:
"Combat operations are not the answer here," Mullen told a group of about three dozen U.S. troops after his meeting with the governor last week. "The answer is development so that people have a way to sustain themselves."
This is great stuff. But the article also points out that people with specific skills like engineering and infrastructure development don't want to work in Afghanistan right now. (Be honest, would you?) Perhaps we should start thinking about how we can remedy this problem. Why is it that only the military can seem to get people in the region? Is it because we think of the mess we created in Afghanistan as solely a military problem?
Perhaps we should begin to think about our commitment and responsibility to Afghanistan outside of the military box. Don't civilian Americans who have skills that could help the foundering nation owe just as much as members of the military do? The mistakes in Afghanistan were made on behalf of all of us. And they will continue to be made if don't rethink the situation.
If we agree that war isn't the answer in Afghanistan, we have to offer an alternate solution.
And boy was I glad I did.
In it, Admiral Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, pointed out what FCNL has been contending all along - more guns and war will not help Afghanistan thrive:
"Combat operations are not the answer here," Mullen told a group of about three dozen U.S. troops after his meeting with the governor last week. "The answer is development so that people have a way to sustain themselves."
This is great stuff. But the article also points out that people with specific skills like engineering and infrastructure development don't want to work in Afghanistan right now. (Be honest, would you?) Perhaps we should start thinking about how we can remedy this problem. Why is it that only the military can seem to get people in the region? Is it because we think of the mess we created in Afghanistan as solely a military problem?
Perhaps we should begin to think about our commitment and responsibility to Afghanistan outside of the military box. Don't civilian Americans who have skills that could help the foundering nation owe just as much as members of the military do? The mistakes in Afghanistan were made on behalf of all of us. And they will continue to be made if don't rethink the situation.
If we agree that war isn't the answer in Afghanistan, we have to offer an alternate solution.
Email the Author | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Labels: Afghanistan
posted by Caroline at
8:52 AM
1 Comments:
Great post Caroline. One thing to note - part of the reason why it's difficult to get civilians to go to Afghanistan is that it's one of the three most dangerous environments for aid workers in the world. Somalia and Sudan are the only two worst places for aid workers.
Interesting statistic: In Afghanistan, the casualty rates for USAID employees, including local hires, is one in 10, where the casualties for the military are one in 57.
In short - it's an extremely difficult environment for civilian aid workers to operate.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home