U.S. Has No Option But To Succeed in Afghanistan
SDSU professor Dipak Gupta discusses the U.S.s new policies toward Afghanistan and Pakistan.
President Barack Obama is making good on one of the cornerstones of his presidential campaign — a renewed focus toward the stabilization of Afghanistan.
World's safety at stake
Some would argue this new focus is long overdue. In fact, some believe the safety of the world depends on it.
“We have no option but to succeed,” said Dipak Gupta, chair of San Diego State University's International Studies and Conflict Resolution program.
“It’s completely anarchic, it’s the wild west, anything goes. So all sorts of nefarious activities begin to take root in that society.”
Comparisons to Vietnam War
Noting the comparisons often made between the U.S.’s involvement in Afghanistan with the Vietnam War, Gupta said there is a major difference between the two.
“The Vietnamese did not attack the United States. Al Quaida did. They did not target the United States. Al Quaida did,” he said.
The U.S. Must Succeed
According to Gupta, for the United States to turn its back on Afghanistan without a stable central government in place with the power to impose the rule of law, the rest of the western world would be threatened.
When the Soviet Union pulled out of Afghanistan in 1989, it emboldened Afghan freedom fighters, who eventually became Al Quaida. To that end, anything short of success, Gupta says, would have a similar effect, sending the message to Islamic fundamentalists around the world that the U.S. and its allies are weak and can be attacked.
“They saw themselves as victorious,” Gupta said.
“They discounted the help they received from the CIA and Pakistan. And they assumed that all of it was due to their own military prowess, their faith and their ideology. If we leave Afghanistan, we will leave the world in a predicament the kind of which we haven’t seen in our recent memory.”
