Sep 01, 2009
Senator Russ Feingold was way ahead of the Senate curve in insisting on
a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, and last week he got it right
again in calling for a flexible timetable to bring US troops out of Afghanistan.
In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Feingold writes that "we must recognize that our troop presence contributes to resentment in some quarters and
hinders our ability to achieve our broader national security goals." He
voices particular concern about the war destabilizing Pakistan--"a
witch's brew of threats to our national security that we cannot afford
to further destabilize." He also points out that this "nation-building
experiment...may distract us from combating al Qaeda and its
affiliates, not just in Pakistan, but in Yemen, the Horn of Africa and
other terrorist sanctuaries."
Feingold lays out a compelling case for an alternative course--"a
civilian-led strategy discouraging any support for the Taliban by
Pakistani security forces, and offer[ing] assistance to improve
Afghanistan's economy while fighting corruption in its government. This
should be coupled with targeted military operations and a diplomatic
strategy that incorporates all the countries in the region."
Senator Feingold is expressing what many progressives now believe.
Overall, 51 percent
of Americans say the war is not worth fighting, including 7 in 10
Democrats. Yet too many top Democrats have become part of a poorly
reasoned bipartisan consensus that threatens to entrap the US in
another costly occupation. In contrast, progressives who want to see
President Obama succeed see Afghanistan as a threat to his presidency--
especially to his domestic agenda, as resources, lives and political
capital are lost in the "graveyard of Empires". (Much like LBJ's
presidency was tarnished and defined by the Vietnam War.)
This is perhaps a watershed moment for progressives. Nearly 100
Representatives in the House are calling for an exit strategy,
and now we have an ally in the Senate to rally around in demanding a
sane timetable--one that is a much needed contrast to Af-Pak Special
Representative Richard Holbrooke's inane description of success in
Afghanistan as, "We'll know it when we see it."
In October, antiwar groups
will demonstrate, educate, and lobby to raise awareness about
alternatives to the current course in Afghanistan. In the meantime, you
can support Senator Feingold's call for a timetable here.
And check out The Nation for our special issue this Fall and
TheNation.com for further opportunities for action in the coming months.
Join Us: News for people demanding a better world
Common Dreams is powered by optimists who believe in the power of informed and engaged citizens to ignite and enact change to make the world a better place. We're hundreds of thousands strong, but every single supporter makes the difference. Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future. As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will. Join with us today! |
© 2023 The Nation
Katrina Vanden Heuvel
Katrina vanden Heuvel is an American editor and publisher. She is the editor, publisher, and part-owner of the magazine The Nation. She has been the magazine's editor since 1995.
Senator Russ Feingold was way ahead of the Senate curve in insisting on
a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, and last week he got it right
again in calling for a flexible timetable to bring US troops out of Afghanistan.
In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Feingold writes that "we must recognize that our troop presence contributes to resentment in some quarters and
hinders our ability to achieve our broader national security goals." He
voices particular concern about the war destabilizing Pakistan--"a
witch's brew of threats to our national security that we cannot afford
to further destabilize." He also points out that this "nation-building
experiment...may distract us from combating al Qaeda and its
affiliates, not just in Pakistan, but in Yemen, the Horn of Africa and
other terrorist sanctuaries."
Feingold lays out a compelling case for an alternative course--"a
civilian-led strategy discouraging any support for the Taliban by
Pakistani security forces, and offer[ing] assistance to improve
Afghanistan's economy while fighting corruption in its government. This
should be coupled with targeted military operations and a diplomatic
strategy that incorporates all the countries in the region."
Senator Feingold is expressing what many progressives now believe.
Overall, 51 percent
of Americans say the war is not worth fighting, including 7 in 10
Democrats. Yet too many top Democrats have become part of a poorly
reasoned bipartisan consensus that threatens to entrap the US in
another costly occupation. In contrast, progressives who want to see
President Obama succeed see Afghanistan as a threat to his presidency--
especially to his domestic agenda, as resources, lives and political
capital are lost in the "graveyard of Empires". (Much like LBJ's
presidency was tarnished and defined by the Vietnam War.)
This is perhaps a watershed moment for progressives. Nearly 100
Representatives in the House are calling for an exit strategy,
and now we have an ally in the Senate to rally around in demanding a
sane timetable--one that is a much needed contrast to Af-Pak Special
Representative Richard Holbrooke's inane description of success in
Afghanistan as, "We'll know it when we see it."
In October, antiwar groups
will demonstrate, educate, and lobby to raise awareness about
alternatives to the current course in Afghanistan. In the meantime, you
can support Senator Feingold's call for a timetable here.
And check out The Nation for our special issue this Fall and
TheNation.com for further opportunities for action in the coming months.
Katrina Vanden Heuvel
Katrina vanden Heuvel is an American editor and publisher. She is the editor, publisher, and part-owner of the magazine The Nation. She has been the magazine's editor since 1995.
Senator Russ Feingold was way ahead of the Senate curve in insisting on
a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, and last week he got it right
again in calling for a flexible timetable to bring US troops out of Afghanistan.
In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Feingold writes that "we must recognize that our troop presence contributes to resentment in some quarters and
hinders our ability to achieve our broader national security goals." He
voices particular concern about the war destabilizing Pakistan--"a
witch's brew of threats to our national security that we cannot afford
to further destabilize." He also points out that this "nation-building
experiment...may distract us from combating al Qaeda and its
affiliates, not just in Pakistan, but in Yemen, the Horn of Africa and
other terrorist sanctuaries."
Feingold lays out a compelling case for an alternative course--"a
civilian-led strategy discouraging any support for the Taliban by
Pakistani security forces, and offer[ing] assistance to improve
Afghanistan's economy while fighting corruption in its government. This
should be coupled with targeted military operations and a diplomatic
strategy that incorporates all the countries in the region."
Senator Feingold is expressing what many progressives now believe.
Overall, 51 percent
of Americans say the war is not worth fighting, including 7 in 10
Democrats. Yet too many top Democrats have become part of a poorly
reasoned bipartisan consensus that threatens to entrap the US in
another costly occupation. In contrast, progressives who want to see
President Obama succeed see Afghanistan as a threat to his presidency--
especially to his domestic agenda, as resources, lives and political
capital are lost in the "graveyard of Empires". (Much like LBJ's
presidency was tarnished and defined by the Vietnam War.)
This is perhaps a watershed moment for progressives. Nearly 100
Representatives in the House are calling for an exit strategy,
and now we have an ally in the Senate to rally around in demanding a
sane timetable--one that is a much needed contrast to Af-Pak Special
Representative Richard Holbrooke's inane description of success in
Afghanistan as, "We'll know it when we see it."
In October, antiwar groups
will demonstrate, educate, and lobby to raise awareness about
alternatives to the current course in Afghanistan. In the meantime, you
can support Senator Feingold's call for a timetable here.
And check out The Nation for our special issue this Fall and
TheNation.com for further opportunities for action in the coming months.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.