Det danske Fredsakademi
Kronologi over fredssagen og international politik 6. december 2009 / Time Line December 6, 2009
Version 3.55. December 2009, 7. December 2009
12/06/2009
Thinking Outside the Box: What Barack Obama Could Have
Said
By: Lawrence S.
Wittner
Much of the American public is skeptical about the value of Obama's
plan, announced in his address of December 1, to send another
30,000 U.S. troops to fight an apparently endless war in
Afghanistan, and with good reason. If, after eight years of sending
U.S. and NATO soldiers to wage this war, al Qaeda maintains its
foothold in the region, the Taliban is stronger, Afghanistan is
more unstable, corruption is rife, and anti-Americanism is on the
rise, why should we expect a better outcome when we do more of the
same?
The major problem is that the President's action fails to go beyond
traditional thinking about how to relate to overseas strife.
Indeed, Obama's response to the messy situation the United States
faces in Afghanistan is reminiscent of how an imperial or military
leader would have responded a few thousand years ago. Have we
learned nothing over these intervening years?
Instead of resorting to outdated thinking, what if Obama had drawn
upon modern instruments of international and interpersonal
relations? What if he had adopted a program of change in the way
the United States relates to the world? In that case, he could have
delivered a speech – not at West Point (a symbol of the old
thinking) but at the United Nations (a symbol of the new) –
and said:
* * *
Fellow representatives of the world community.
A bloody war currently rages in the nation of Afghanistan. Although
the United States has contributed to this situation, many nations
have been involved in invading, fostering violence in, and
occupying that country. Furthermore, Afghanistan's own people are
engaged in a vicious civil war. For these reasons, and also because
no single nation has sufficient wisdom, resources, or legitimacy to
deal with this crisis, I have turned to U.N. Security Council and
the U.N. Secretary-General to help me resolve this crisis in a fair
and peaceful manner.
As a result, we have agreed on the following program.
First, in the following three months, the United Nations will
dispatch 100,000 peacekeeping troops to Afghanistan. These
peacekeeping troops will replace all foreign forces in that nation.
As this process moves forward, NATO troops will not engage in
attacks on hostile forces, and will open fire only if attacked.
Similarly, the U.N. peacekeeping forces will not seek out military
engagements, but will simply keep contending Afghan forces
separated and maintain security.
Second, a U.N. Reconciliation Commission will call together the
major political forces in Afghan life, including the Taliban, for
negotiations on a peaceful settlement of their disputes. Following
the establishment of an agreed framework for this settlement, a
free election will take place for an Afghan government of national
unity, with election monitoring done by the United Nations.
While these processes are taking place, the United Nations –
with assistance from U.S. and other intelligence agencies and from
criminal justice specialists – will arrest al Qaeda leaders
and ready them for trial by the International Criminal Court at the
Hague.
In addition, to help repair a war-ravaged nation, the U.S.
government and the governments of other wealthy nations will
provide massive funding for the construction of schools, health
care facilities, and irrigation projects in Afghanistan. This will
help demonstrate their good will toward the Afghan people, will
provide millions of Afghans with gainful employment, and will
improve their lives to the extent that they will be encouraged to
turn from violence, terror, and opium production to peaceful and
productive pursuits.
Furthermore, the U.S. government and the governments of other
wealthy nations will dispatch thousands of teachers, doctors,
nurses, and agronomists to staff these new facilities. These
governments will also provide large numbers of psychologists and
social workers to deal with the war-inflicted trauma suffered by
the Afghan people and to help improve interpersonal relations among
previously feuding groups.
We realize that these measures will not provide an instant remedy
for the tragic situation in Afghanistan. But we do believe that
they will lower the level of violence and address that country's
major problems.
Indeed, if these measures prove successful, they can provide a
model for useful international action in areas of violent conflict
elsewhere in the world.
Surely this is a better way to use our knowledge and resources than
to squander them on endless wars and destruction. So let us work
together creatively and cooperatively to build a better society for
the people of Afghanistan and for all people around the globe.
* * *
But, of course, this was not the kind of speech Obama made. He was
not thinking outside the box.
 |
 |