Thursday, October 29, 2009
U.S. DIPLOMATS RESIGNED IN PROTEST PRIOR TO THE INVASION OF IRAQ. IT CONTINUES TODAY OVER THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN.
By
Joseph Chez
Current U.S. military presence in Iraq is not for the purpose of cleaning up after a whoop-tee-doo party or a mission accomplished. We remain in that country to forestall the inevitable; a civil war that will be the mother of all wars, as Saddam Hussein was known to say. However, many government officials also believe that the same fate waits for Afghanistan. So is anybody listening to the experts in foreign policy, the very same individuals who work with the nuts and bolts of what formulates and sustains our government policies?
Prior to the Invasion of Iraq in 2003 a large number U.S. government officials were sounding the alarm opposing plans by the Bush administration for the invasion of Iraq. In March 19, 2003, Ann Wright, a deputy chief of mission at a foreign U.S. embassy, a career Foreign Service officer and Army Reserve colonel, submitted her official resignation before Secretary of State Colin Powell. In December 2001, the deputy chief had been assigned to reopen the U.S. embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan, and it was there that she learned of the Bush Administration’s preoccupation with Iraq, rather than putting emphasis in the failed nation of Afghanistan – the point of origin for the 9-11 attack on U.S. soil. However, Bush was extremely confident and dogmatic about his pursuit of the war in Iraq. Later that year, May 1, 2003, in spite of world condemnation and internal government official opposition to the U.S. incursion, President Bush declared that the U.S. had fought for “the cause of liberty and the peace of the world.” In further denial, in his mission accomplished speech aboard the USS Lincoln, he unequivocally stated that, “the United States and our allies had prevailed” and that major combat operations in Iraq had ended. Regrettably, President Bush’s mission accomplished is yet to be realized. Nonetheless, the world laments the “smoking gun” argument and the premise that the invasion of Iraq was necessary. Further, with the exception of the political right-wing in the country, a large number of government officials forewarned the Bush Administration of an impending foreign policy blunder.
Thus, Ann Wright was correct in her convictions by pointing out that the country was on the wrong path with its foreign policy in the Middle East. In her dramatic explanation for her resignation, she simply stated that after serving her country for so many years, she could no longer represent the policies of an administration of the United States. In fact, she told Sec. of State Collin Powel, that she believed that the country had lost sympathy from most of the world because of our push for war against Iraq. And yet, she was not the only government officials who resigned in protest and in opposition with government policy. Several high ranking officials had previously resigned for similar reasons, although, their resignations had not been made public. But as Ann Wright broke ranks, many other senior diplomats followed. This was important, as Foreign Service officers never before used public resignation as a means to attempt to influence the government’s foreign policy or as a means of protest.
But going back to the future, after President Obama’s premise that the war in Afghanistan was not a war of choice but a war of necessity, an air of dissent is being felt once again amongst government officials. As casualties mount and a call for more troops is being asked by the Pentagon, many government officials in the State Department, DOD and various other government entities, are beginning to sound the alarm – publicly.
In a more recent situation just released to the public, another U.S. Foreign Service official, Mathew P. Hoh has once again, publicly resigned in protest over the war in Afghanistan. This former Marine Corps Captain and Senior Civilian Representative for the U.S. Government in Zabul Province in Afghanistan submitted his resignation – giving a critical and analytical narrative of the Afghan war - as a failed policy for a country on the edge of chaos. His resignation dated September 10, 2009 truly sent chills through the State Department and all the way to the White House. And with good reason, as these diplomats have immeasurable understanding of foreign policy, and in the case of Afghanistan, they are the analytical workhorses on the field: they are cognizant of the fragile alliances in the region; they understand what has not worked in the eight year military incursion; and they are the first to recognize a failed policy with no end. So, how can the U.S. honorably exit this war?
Foreign Service officer, Matthew P. Hoh put it best: “I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States’ presence in Afghanistan.” “I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end.” “To put simply: I fail to see the value or the worth in continued U.S. casualties in support of the Afghanistan government in what is, truly, a 35 year old civil war.”
Honorable Mathew Hoh was offered several promotions by the high and mighty mucky-mucks, in hopes of averting his resignation, but this Foreign Service officer simply chose honor and love of country over personal gain. He has sounded the alarm once again and it is hoped that President Obama learns from our past mistakes. And this is critical at this point, as President Obama will soon be announcing his decision as to whether he will increase troop levels or if he will bring an end to the ever-expanding conflict. The President must realize that our presence in that part of the world is the spark for conflict and not the seeds for liberty or democracy, as President Bush vehemently believed. Let’s remember that a mission accomplished can truly become a mission impossible.
///
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment