THE HILL
 

Gates: Bush lacked Afghan strategy

By Jordan Fabian and Aaron Blake - 09/27/09 10:06 AM ET

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates on Sunday said that the United States has faced difficulties in the Afghanistan conflict because the Bush administration did not have the same kind of "comprehensive strategy" that President Barack Obama does for the nation.

Gates served as Defense Secretary in the Bush administration, under which American forces first arrived in Afghanistan in 2001. Gates replaced Donald Rumsfeld in January 2007.

"I will tell you, I think that the strategy the president put forward in late March, is the first real strategy we have had for Afghanistan since the early 1980s," he told CNN. "And that strategy was more about [the] Soviet Union that it was about Afghanistan."

On "This Week" with George Stephanopoulos, Gates said "having the wrong strategy will put even more soldiers at risk" when pressed on whether failing to send more troops will endanger current forces. 

Gates acknowledged, however, that the "surge" worked in Iraq.

"I think success in Afghanistan looks a lot like success in Iraq," Gates said, noting that Iraqi troops are increasingly taking the lead to protect their own territory, go after insurgents and protect their own people.

The Obama administration is currently undergoing a strategic review of the American mission in the war-torn nation. Casualties mounted in July and August, which led Gen. Stanley McChrystal to call for additional forces. The administration has maintained that it must develop a new overall strategy for the nation before considering the U.S. and NATO commander's request.

On CNN, Gates briefly offered his thoughts on the Bush-era fight against Taliban in al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, saying "we were fighting a holding action...We were too stretched to do more."

Though the White House is under pressure to send more troops from top military officials and high-ranking Republican lawmakers, Gates asserted that President Barack Obama would make his own decision based on the new strategy and the results of the country's controversial elections.

"I think the president always has a choice; he's the commander-in-chief," he said. 

Gates said that the White House needed to take time to determine the right course of action, saying that the Bush administration took three months in late 2007 to launch the now-successful surge in Iraq. Gates added that if more troops are to be sent that they would not arrive until January at the earliest. 

On "Fox News Sunday," Senate Select Intelligence Committee member Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) agreed that the president should take his time to suss out alternatives that would avoid "nation-building" in Afghanistan for the next decade.

"I think the president is correct to take his time, to really examine what the alternatives are at this time," Feinstein said. "True, the Afghanistan strategy so far has not gone well. True, about one-third of Afghanis are now living under some form of Taliban control. That is untenable. True, there is some form of nexus between al-Qaeda and the Taliban. True, that represents a threat to the homeland of the United States and therefore creates a mission for the United States."

Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committee member Jim Webb (D-Va.) said on "Meet the Press" that the administration was "smartly" assessing the options and the regional complications.

But on "Fox News Sunday," Senate Select Intelligence Committee member Kit Bond (R-Mo.) warned against taking too much time.

"I am afraid that for some reason, [Obama] has the answer of the question he asked Gen. McChrystal," Bond said. "It is here, it is clear, it is in great detail, it outlines a full range of things – why we need troops, we need troops now. And he says if we fail to provide that assistance now, it will be too late."

On "Meet the Press," Senate Minority Whip Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) said not following McChrystal's suggestions would be "a recipe for disaster."

On "Face the Nation," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said the McChrystal report needed to be looked at "in context" of an addition of troops in the spring that's just now reaching the end of the deployment cycle and a civilian strategy that's included "beefing up" the embassy in Kabul.

But Sen. Lindsey Graham, a member of the Armed Services Committee who has traveled to Afghanistan many times, said that the ground situation had deteriorated to the point where the civilian operations can't safely get around.

"The 68,000 soldiers there right now cannot turn Afghanistan around without some help," Graham said.

Gates also warned Sunday that success in Afghanistan was essential, arguing that U.S. defeat could embolden insurgents there like it did when they drove out the Soviet Union in the 1980s.

"Failure in Afghanistan would be a huge setback for the United States. The Taliban and al-Qaeda, as far as they're concerned, defeated one superpower. For them to be defeating a second would have catastrophic effects in terms of energizing the extremist movement, al-Qaeda recruitment, operations, fundraising and so on."

On "Meet the Press," former President Bill Clinton said McChrystal's plan was "maybe" the right one -- "and that’s why the president hasn’t answered yet."

“What the president has done here is not to dis the general," Clinton said. "He’s saying, ‘My responsibility is not just to win military battles, but to see that it leads to something bigger for ourselves and our security and for the people of Afghanistan. I’ve got to decide whether we’ve got a partner there.’ ”

Bridget Johnson contributed to this report

Source:
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/60461-gates-bush-lacked-afghanistan-strategy-obamas-is-first-real-one

Comments (11)

How can one say:… "the Bush administration did not have the same kind of "comprehensive strategy" that President Barack Obama does for the nation." when in reality:"The Obama administration is currently undergoing a strategic review of the American mission in the war-torn nation."BY justa thot on 09/27/2009 at 13:48
I wondering if Mr. Gates ever approached President Bush about Afghanistan. Lately, he seems to take a jab at the former President ever chance he gets.I really don't appreciate this kind of back biting. . .He should have made these remarks to President Bush when he was in office.He didn't add any stature to himself by berating the former President. He is becoming an adulating whimpBY jeremey LeBlanc on 09/27/2009 at 16:00
So, President Bush had three months for the Iraq surge, which the Majority Leader in the Senate said was stupid and we losing the war. President Obama has been in office 9 months now. Gates says he has a "comprehensive strategy" but he is still reviewing. This is now Obama's war as are the deaths of the last couple of months. The person who has not been heard from is "the principle military adviser to the President" by Title 10 of the United States Code, ADMIRAL Mike Mullen. The rest don't count. Time for Obama to stand up and make a decision and quit trying to read the tea leaves.BY Shozbot on 09/27/2009 at 16:42
It's a shame Mr Gates is throwing Pres. Bush under the bus. Although, he has a great teacher.BY Maria on 09/27/2009 at 16:42
obama and gates shoiuld listen to the GEN nad send in 150.00 troops and fight a war not a political correct war fight to win or get the [***] out now obama or gates don't know what the [***] strategy isBY DAVID PRUDEN  on 09/27/2009 at 17:07
Pruden - It would be idiotic to send 150,000 troops. Not only would it be financially devestating for the US, but in light of the recent elections, Afghanistan is now lead by a questionable leader who lacks the support of his people. Our presence there simply props up an illegitamate, corrupt leader, and the US becomes his defacto army. We can't afford to be a nation builder, nor should we be fighting Afghanistan's civil war. We should be there to fight Al Quida, and nothing else.BY tammster on 09/27/2009 at 18:51
What Gates is really telling us is that HE has no plans. Criticism isn't a plan.BY Robert Rosencrans on 09/28/2009 at 10:30
I'm happy 2 have a POTUS that hasn't rushed 2 judgement on this extremely important issue, unlike the previous 1. We can't just go in feet 1st. We need 2 know all logistics prior to sending more troops in2 harms way. 2 bad the previous admin was 2 incompetent 2 recognize this.BY Jackie in Michigan on 09/28/2009 at 11:55
Gates is a bureaucrat who says what's best for him and his longevity in office.Admitting you have no strategy yet is an extremely dumb thing to say when you already have boots on the ground. The Nazis didn't want us in Germany either so local support is a very large red herring.War strategy is very simple - you either kill or get killed. That first option is the strategy you should pursue.BY Allan on 09/28/2009 at 14:25
I think the US still needs to evaluate how much of an integrated strategy we employ in our approach to Afganistan in terms of other types of diplomacy, not just military force. This is not to say the military is unneccesary, it is for now, but it cannot be everything and perhaps, not even the most heavily used approach. Until this population, just like any other, has its basic needs for sufficient resources like decent shelter, adequate food, water, etc., force, even overwhelming force, will not solve our conflict. I think shifting more of our emphasis to making sure they have resources (and properly monitored distribution channels for those resources) to meet their citizens' basic needs will go much further than military force in reaching peace. Then education, proper governance and a civil society can have a chance to grow. After 9/11, I don't think we have the luxury of thinking we are not our brother's keepers. The world is too small to think that poverty and squalor half way across the world does not affect us - it does.BY Sharon on 09/29/2009 at 14:43

Add Comment

Name (required)

E-Mail (will not be published) (required)

Your Comments

You need Flash Player 8 (or higher) and JavaScript enabled to view this content

Get latest news from The Hill direct to your inbox, RSS reader and mobile devices.