How can the NATO mission in Afghanistan succeed when the mission itself changes from one commander to the next?
There was a Canadian commander who wanted to fight. Then there was a Dutch commander who wanted to rebuild. More recently the job fell to a British commander who toyed with negotiation. Now we've got an American commander, another fighter.
Surely the mission and circumstances in Afghanistan ought to define the approach, not the personalities of a revolving-door succession of commanders.
The new guy, General Dan McNeill is an old hand, one of a dwindling number who served in Vietnam.
Until now the popular refrain, heard from top generals and even Canada's defence minister, has been that the Afghanistan conflict can't be won militarily. That's not the way McNeill sees it. The Washington Post reports that McNeill, during his previous tour in Afghanistan, "...called for bold military action to bring peace."
"McNeill, one of 11 U.S. four-star generals, commanded U.S. troops here in 2002. His takeover speech on Sunday focused on building up the Afghan army and police, a strategy that has not worked here nor in Iraq, but offered no other vision."
No comments:
Post a Comment