However, as I’ve mentioned in a previous posting related to ISAF/OEF, there will not be enough troops from countries willing to place their troops in dangerous areas and with the ROE to take the fight to the enemy (I am speaking mainly of the UK, Canada, the Netherlands, Denmark, and of course the US) as long as the US keeps its main strategic effort in Iraq. Until Iraq is resolved, Afghanistan will remain a secondary (and under-resourced) mission.

Not being privy to the inner thought processes of the strategic decision-makers, I can only imagine that they perceive Iraq as being more important in terms of how it postures the US in related regional issues: the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Iran-Hezbollah relationship, the Syria-Lebanon issue, and the US conflict with Iran. These are certainly important problems. However, by not applying the necessary tools and force in Afghanistan, we may be allowing the Taliban and al-Qaeda to regroup and rebuild. Though the Taliban is not as big of a problem in terms of their scope and ambition (i.e., they want to return to power in Afghanistan), certainly allowing al-Qaeda to get back on its feet should be of concern to the US and its allies.

Though many of the Bush administration’s Democrat opponents have said all along that the administration screwed up by going into Iraq before finishing the job in Afghanistan, what’s done is done and they need to find a way to wrap up in Iraq in order to shift the resources back to ISAF and OEF. Pres. Bush ought to spend the final months in office in a major push to engage both Iran and the Gulf powers (esp. Saudi Arabia) in coming to a consensus on bringing greater stability to Iraq. It’s in everyone in the region’s interests to have a stable (if not necessarily democratic and pro-US) Iraqi state, and that’s what they should all be working for.

By snubbing the NATO allies early on in the Afghanistan fight (i.e. “we don’t need your help that much”; “thanks for invoking Article V, but we’re doing fine without you”), it has become an even harder sell to get politically reluctant European states to shoulder a greater burden there. It shouldn’t come as a big surprise that the US will have to commit the bulk of the forces in Afghanistan if it wants to get the job done. NATO simply provides political legitimacy for what we want to do there.