New US Policy on war in Af/Pak

[Entropy]

Here's the white paper (Word Doc). Here's the President's address.

Key policy objectives:

Achieving our core goal is vital to U.S. national security. It requires, first of all, realistic and achievable objectives. These include:

• Disrupting terrorist networks in Afghanistan and especially Pakistan to degrade any ability they have to plan and launch international terrorist attacks.

• Promoting a more capable, accountable, and effective government in Afghanistan that serves the Afghan people and can eventually function, especially regarding internal security, with limited international support.

• Developing increasingly self-reliant Afghan security forces that can lead the counterinsurgency and counterterrorism fight with reduced U.S. assistance.

• Assisting efforts to enhance civilian control and stable constitutional government in Pakistan and a vibrant economy that provides opportunity for the people of Pakistan.

• Involving the international community to actively assist in addressing these objectives for Afghanistan and Pakistan, with an important leadership role for the UN.

I'm reading the white paper now, but so far the objectives above don't look like a huge difference from previous policy.

[TristanAbbey]

Wonder why a .doc and not a .pdf

[jmm99]

somewhat different tone in its interpretations. The proof will lie in the implementations. The implementations will be governed by events most likely independent of Astan and Pstan.

[Entropy]

Here's a copy of the white paper in PDF format.

[John T. Fishel]

in Pres Obama's speech:

The Al Qaeda War

While I heard and saw some of the right words for a population centric strategy, the proof will be in its implementation.

Cheers

JohnT

[jmm99]

from JTF
The Al Qaeda War ....

That isn't a bad name for it - since most everything done since 9/11 can be traced back to that. The salient question is whether iterations should be defined: AQ I, AQ II .... AQn^n.

[Ron Humphrey]

Originally Posted by jmm99

That isn't a bad name for it - since most everything done since 9/11 can be traced back to that. The salient question is whether iterations should be defined: AQ I, AQ II .... AQn^n.

AQ-gone myself