First U.S. Official Resigns Over Afghan War

[pjmunson]

Long day, long week, probably should not enter the fray but can't help myself. I find some of the comments in this thread to be distasteful at best. I question just how much more of a leg to stand on a (fill in the blank, if the shoe fits, wear it) has than anyone else when putting forward an impassioned assessment of what you see as the strategic reality and what you feel as your moral obligation to point out and to opt out of. People love to throw the complexities of Afghanistan out as a card to discount pretty much anything they don't agree to, and that is getting old. Also, just because this guy is a non-tenured FSO, isn't 50+, may look like people you used to boss around, isn't a "civilian planning expert," etc., doesn't mean that he does not have the intelligence, experience, and insight to point out what he sees as broad strategic inconsistencies. While his letter does touch on some specifics of Afghanistan, it is an operational/strategic level assessment, not a tactical one. Therefore, many of the arguments put forth here to impeach his credentials show that the authors of the comments are actually less qualified to comment on the strategic issues than the author of the very well worded and well thought out letter. If you object to his analysis, rebut his analysis. He may have only been on the ground there for X months, but he, like many others, has been living this dream for nearly a decade. He's had a lot of time to think about it and a lot of ugly examples to contemplate. Again, he's not talking about the specifics of Zabul Province really. He's talking operational to strategic level "what are we doing"? There is a lot of room for disagreement with him, but few of the comments here demonstrate an understanding of what he's saying, much less an effort to counter that at the same level.

Finally, why not take the opportunity to stay on the inside and fix things? A cynic would see the offer to take up a high level position as an attempt to co opt you and your views. Even if he didn't take the offer to be such an attempt, if you don't fundamentally believe in the strategy and policy anymore, then why would you continue to serve it at any level?

In sum, I'm not going to say whether I agree or disagree with him, but I think that, if he truly believes what he wrote, then he is right to have written it and right to have resigned. If he was surrounded by people who were going to cry "PTSD," inexperience, "not tenured," etc. when he voiced his views as opposed to reasoned argument, then I can see why he would not want to stick around, even had he agreed with the grand strategy.