THIS WEEKEND, President George W. Bush made a televised announcement to the nation that he would request an additional $87 billion from Congress to fund further military action in Afghanistan and Iraq. According to the president, the wars in these two countries have changed the world to a point where there is now "no going back" ("Bush to Ask Billions More for Iraq," CNN.com, Sept. 8).
President Bush also stated that he would work to get more nations into the peacekeeping and reconstruction force that is now primarily constituted of American troops. The president should refocus his efforts from requisitioning this large sum from Congress, to strengthening diplomatic efforts to form a broader coalition and engage troops from other countries to help hold peace over these two troubled nations.
President Bush was absolutely correct in his analysis of these countries not being able to go back to what they once were. Both Afghanistan and Iraq were ruled by leaders who wreaked havoc on their citizens and also supported programs or organizations that were aimed at harming the citizens of other nations. In both these countries, these former leaders have been deposed, but forces still loyal to them cling to the notion that they might somehow be restored to power. Because of this, violence and disorder abound in both these lands, harming the lives of ordinary citizens and making reconstruction extremely difficult.
If the United States were to pull out of either of these nations at this point, chaos would reign supreme until other charismatic but possibly cruel and dangerous leaders emerged and claimed power over the territories. In this scenario, the hardship and sacrifice that American soldiers and the citizens of these wrecked nations have endured would have been in vain, and the United States as well as other countries in the world would once again be the likely targets of terrorist organizations or dictators inhabiting these regions. The United States must stay in these nations until they have been rid of their violent elements, and they have been rebuilt with a viable peace restored.
However, there is no reason why it should be only American forces that hold the role of peacekeeping force. Although many countries were opposed to these two wars waged mostly by the United States, sending troops to help keep the peace does not construe a retroactive approval of the war. The rebuilding of a destroyed nation is a task that benefits ordinary citizens, and it is a humanitarian effort that should be undertaken by many more countries.
The United States must also make a greater effort to enlist the aid of its allies. Last week, France and Germany openly rejected the terms of a military alliance proposed by the United States. In addition, other nations such as Russia have been considering sending troops. Many countries have been dissuaded from joining the coalition apparently from American reluctance to give up a measure of authority and leadership over the territories that they now control ("Will Anybody Help the U.S. in Iraq?" Time.com, Sept. 4).
The United States must work harder on diplomatic initiatives to encourage other nations to join in peacekeeping and reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan. Although the United States may not want to relinquish the control that it purchased through mostly its own blood, sweat and tears, the rebuilding of these countries is proving to be a task that is too big for only one or two countries to engage in. The American military is being spread thin with troops stationed in these two nations, as well as in Liberia, and in their standard garrisons in several other nations as well as inside the United States. The ongoing war effort is also putting a great deal of strain on the American economy and on a government that has already incurred a large deficit, which may soon get much larger.
Although President Bush may well receive all, or a large portion of, the billions of dollars he requested, the United States should not engage in this peacekeeping effort without working as hard as it possibly can diplomatically to enlist the aid of more allies.
(Alex Rosemblat's column appears Wednesdays in The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at arosemblat@cavalierdaily.com.)
Read More
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | YesterdayInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
SHRAUGER: McIntire’s three-year model limits opportunities for first-year students
By Alex Shrauger | 4 days agoBy pigeonholing students into commerce so early, the University violates its own mission of providing a holistic education that produces students capable of succeeding in a variety of fields.
