The continuing debacle that is the decision-making process on next steps in Afghanistan is very instructive. To review, when the President was running for office he claimed that Afghanistan is a "war of necessity" and it was more important than our efforts in Iraq; which he said had distracted us from Afghanistan.
Now there is definitely an argument to made in support of this idea. However, the President's actions since taking office lead one to think perhaps this was just a campaign talking point and not a well thought out geo-political strategy.
First, in March, President Obama fires the commander McKiernan and installs General McChrystal in his place. McChrystal is his hand-picked general who has a Special Forces background and is the leader responsible for killing Zarqawi amongst other notable enemy. His appointment was announced along with the sending of some additional troops and what the President called a comprehensive new strategy to win the war.
McChrystal's mission was not only to lead the fight against the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but also to conduct a total review of the state of our mission and to provided recommendations for improvement for going forward and accomplishing the stated mission.
When McChrystal does exactly that - he submits a pessimistic review and says that he needs 40,000 additional troops in order to give us even a chance at succeeding. He want additional forces to secure the population of Afghanistan and through that avenue build up the Afghans themselves while also getting them to cooperate more with us rather than siding with the Taliban. This is classic counter-insurgency doctrine. We eventually did this very successfully in the Al Anbar province in Iraq.
What has followed since he has submitted his request? Months of Presidential dithering. Months of National Security Council meetings. Months of very public leaks concerning very private - sometimes classified - matters.
What has followed is an embarrassment. It is the very picture of how NOT to lead.
It seems to me that the President and many of his civilian advisors are continuing to drag their feet on this decision because they don't believe they have very many good options.
On one side - put more troops in a place that has proven ungovernable for generations, with a corrupt Karzai in place, a pathetic Afghan military and police force, and more American casualties.
On the other side - retreat from a tough fight, allow the Taliban to regain control over the country, allow Al Qaeda a sanctuary again, look like fools to the rest of the world, and weaken your own standing at home.
So, when faced with these general issues that work against each other, the President is desperately searching for a middle ground, or maybe even a way out of this self-constructed trap. (Remember he is the one that placed the added significance on this fight.)
The problem is the decision making process has dragged on for far too long, it has become far too public, and it looks pretty clear that our leader has no idea what he wants to do nor what he should do.
The main problem is deeper though - the nature of true leadership is not in always finding the right solution to every problem, it is in the act of personally LEADING people from problem through decision, then action all the way through to the final outcome whether good or bad.
There may be no right or wrong answer, or there may be no one right way to do things. Hell, there may be no good options at all. But at some point you have to decide and then once having decided you must sell that decision to your people, your troops. And then personally lead them through the action while accepting the consequences of the action, no matter what.
By waiting, and going back and forth over the issues repeatedly in public, it looks like you either a) don't know what you're doing or b) don't believe in what you're doing. Either way, you are failing in your duties as a leader.
I know this from personal experience, that at the end of the day you have to act confident in front of your mean, use sound judgment to make quick decisions and then show your men that your believe in the course of action you have chosen and help them to achieve the stated goal.
Remember, in this case men and women are fighting and dying as we speak, as we continue to debate what the right call is, what the right strategy should be. As leaders, we owe it to our men to weigh the evidence carefully but quickly, make a judgment, choose a course of action and then work to see that that choice, that mission is accomplished to the best of our ability. To do otherwise, is to do a disservice to our troops and to our country.
The best analogy I've seen so far on this is the idea of a burning building. The Fire Chief stands outside of the building and quickly assesses the situation, then decides how he and his fellow fireman are going to attack the fire.
The fire chief does not sit there for days trying to figure out what is the best possible decision to put the fire out. He doesn't do this because he knows that while he deliberates, the house is burning down with everyone in it.
Well, right now our Afghanistan House is burning down. It is time to decide, Mr. President. It is time to lead.
No comments:
Post a Comment