Writing for yesterday’s Independent, on Remembrance Sunday, Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg proposed a three-step approach to finding a solution to Afghanistan and Iraq:
First, Britain should support a troop surge in Afghanistan, one made possible by the urgent withdrawal of our troops from Iraq. Now that Obama has advocated such a switch, isn’t it time we took action? We do not need to wait until the US troops are leaving the Gulf in 2010; we can leave Iraq as soon as is safe and practicable. Yet Afghanistan cannot be won on the battlefield, as I saw for myself a few months ago.
The second new element must be engagement and negotiation. The Taliban is a diffuse, disparate band of tribal leaders, conservatives and ideologues. It can and must be split. There are some diehard fundamentalists who cannot be negotiated with. But there are many, leaders and foot-soldiers alike, who can, and must, be approached.
Finally, we need a regional agreement, similar to the Dayton Peace Agreement, involving all countries in the region, especially Iran. Here, Obama’s willingness to open talks with old enemies could be the fresh, decisive change that makes this possible. A regional peace conference should be backed by external guarantors who are prepared, as in Dayton, to underpin the agreement. That should include the US, Russia and China. It is simply impossible to pull together a failing state if its neighbours are trying to pull it apart.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
One in the eye for the Tory Bayeux Tapestry as Labour hits back
What do Britain's death-penalty cheerleaders have to say about Christa Pike?
A Week in Politics #8
Reform continue to block journalists from doing their job
Joey Vimsante
Jenny Barnes
paul barker
David Evans
6 Comments
I’m surprised not to see any comment on this.
Do people really think we should be sending more of our troops to Afghanistan?
I do not think there is a military solution to Afghanistan. It is over 6 years that our troops have occupied that country, and the fact that we are asked to put more troops in rather than less is surely a sign that the occupation is not working.
I accept that in both Iraq and Afghanistan we are dammed either way because neither country is going to end up as a liberal democracy whatever we do. However these operations are hugely expensive and if we really want to make a positive difference in the world that money is better off spent elsewhere. It is amazing that up until now whenever it is a question of paying for military operations, money is no object, but when it comes to food or development aid, money becomes very tight.
The Liberal Democrats have accepted that our troops have to withdraw from Iraq. The same arguments apply to Afghanistan.
I think it’s pretty much spot on.
Part of the reason that Afghanistan went so badly wrong is that the ill-timed, ill-planned, ill-justified and misimplemented invasion of iraq hamstrung what was going on in Afganistan.
Unlike Iraq, Afghanistan was in a nasty Civil War, which gives some justification to military intervention (a long running stalemate would have been even more damaging to the nations infrastructure, regional governance and economies, not to mention the huge loss of life), and finishing the job, getting regional support, and basically doing what Clegg adn Obama are now talking about should have been the priority instead leaving a token presence to fight guerilla tactics in a region that doesn’t support them and has permeable borders.
As for Iran, absolutely we should talk to them.
The Iranian regime is obnoxious, but we are not the ones who decide who runs that country.
It is interesting to note that the Bush administration has sabre rattled for years about Iran and yet dithered and done nothing. It is really just as well. Lets hope the Obama administration is more reasonable.
Well, as regards talking to Iran I agree. I think as people have pointed out here there is a somewhat logical contradiction in what Nick is saying; on the one hand he wants more troops in Afghanistan and on the other he wants more troops implying the solution lies in military means.
We have been talking to Iran for years as part of the EU-3 (UK, France, Germany). It has got us less than nowhere.
Talking to Iran is pointless because you only gt to talk to the President, and on the really big points the decisions are taken by the Supreme Leader who is a law unto himself.