By Scott Smith
U.S. Rep. Joe Donnelly said President Barack Obama’s timeline for troop withdrawal in Afghanistan is subject to review.
U.S. Rep. Dan Burton said he’s worried the president is telegraphing a punch.
The two Indiana lawmakers, not unexpectedly, differed somewhat in their responses to the president’s Tuesday speech, although both support the general idea behind the troop surge.
After the speech, Donnelly, D-Granger, laid into critics of Obama’s plan, which calls for 30,000 additional troops in Afghanistan by next spring, and a mid-2011 timetable to begin withdrawing U.S. troops.
The president is also calling on allies to send an additional 10,000 troops, to help stabilize a region torn by a Taliban-led insurgence.
“From 2001 to 2008, Afghanistan was starved for resources from our military,” Donnelly said. “Many of the same people who are complaining today are the same ones who sat by when our troops didn’t have enough help.”
Burton, however, focused on perhaps the most controversial part of the president’s speech, the timetable for troop withdrawal.
“The one thing that you never do is telegraph your punch,” Burton said. “I can’t imagine why the president is saying in his speech ... that he’s going to start withdrawing our troops in July of 2011. Even if he plans to do that, he shouldn’t say it, because he is telling our enemies exactly what we’re going to do, and it’s just wrong. Every military officer I’ve ever met will tell you the same thing.”
Since the speech, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen, have been grilled by Congress on the plans.
Enlarging on the president’s speech, Gates Thursday said a major evaluation of allied efforts will be made in December 2010, in order to assess what the next steps should be. Gates said any movement in 2011 will be based on “events on the ground” and on how well the war effort has met certain benchmarks.
Gates also said mid-2011 will mark only the beginning of a withdrawal.
“The timeline is flexible enough to allow the president to continue to keep our personnel there,” Donnelly said. “The timeline was put in place to let people know there are metrics; there are goals that need to be met.
“We need to make sure the government of Afghanistan knows our goal is to turn the country back over to them, sooner rather than later,” Donnelly said.
“When the president took office, I think he was faced with almost the worst choice of all. You had a situation where you’re not moving forward and you’re not leaving; you’re stuck in the middle, watching it slowly slip away,” he said.
Donnelly said the administration already has increased the number of troops operating in Afghanistan from 30,000 (upon Obama taking office) to 64,000 at present.
Donnelly said the additional “surge” troops will allow the U.S. and allies to penetrate into regions now largely held by the Taliban, including the Helmand and Kandahar areas.
Friday, a major Marine offensive began in Helmand. In all, about 1,000 Marines as well as Afghan troops are taking part in the operation, called “Cobra’s Anger.”
But the criticism remains that the Taliban is likely to bide its time until after U.S. troops begin to leave.
Donnelly said he doesn’t believe the Taliban will have that luxury.
“If the Taliban wants to sit by for 18 months, and let our servicemen and women make progress, training Afghan soldiers and training Afghan police, that’s fine by me,” Donnelly said.
• Scott Smith is a Kokomo Tribune staff writer. He may be reached at 765-454-8569 or via e-mail at scott.smith@ kokomotribune.com
