Skip this site's navigation and go to its main content


Receive Updates From Heritage

Receive Updates From Heritage

The Heritage Foundation
Leadership for America

Our Vision

Building an America where freedom, opportunity, prosperity, and civil society flourish.

About The Heritage Foundation

Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. We believe the principles and ideas of the American Founding are worth conserving and renewing. As policy entrepreneurs, we believe the most effective solutions are consistent with those ideas and principles.


Obama UN Speech Shows Wavering on Afghanistan

Posted September 23rd, 2009 at 2:20pm in American Leadership, Protect America 3 Print This Post Print This Post

President Obama’s remarks on Afghanistan in today’s speech at the United Nations General Assembly reveal that he is beginning to second-guess U.S. strategy in the region. While he stated clearly that his administration would not allow al-Qaeda to find sanctuary in Afghanistan or “any other nation” (i.e. Pakistan), he did not so much as mention the Taliban insurgency that is threatening to engulf Afghanistan and the necessity of preventing such an outcome. His backtracking on Afghanistan also is evident in statements he made on this past Sunday’s morning talk shows in which he openly questioned whether the U.S. is pursuing the right strategy in Afghanistan and whether fighting the Taliban insurgency is necessary to stopping al-Qaeda.

For most Afghan watchers, this question has already been settled, and that’s why the Washington Post in its lead editorial yesterday gently reminded President Obama that he seems to have forgotten his own arguments for pursuing a counterinsurgency campaign in Afghanistan. Obama rightly said on March 27 “…if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban – or allows al Qaeda to go unchallenged – that country will again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can.” So why is he fumbling now?

The simple answer is the political heat may be getting too intense. Polls show for the first time a majority of Americans do not believe the war is worth fighting. Congressional Democratic leaders, including Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin, also are questioning whether the U.S. should send fresh U.S. troops as General McChrystal has called for in his recently-leaked Afghanistan assessment. Secondly, the flawed August 20th election in Afghanistan seems to have shaken President Obama and forced him to re-think U.S. strategy.

But what has not changed are the stakes for U.S. national security interests in Afghanistan and the reality that a failure to stabilize the country will translate into a greater chance for another 9/11-type of terrorist attack on American soil.

President Obama needs to demonstrate leadership on Afghanistan, repeating the truths he has spoken in his past speeches on March 27th and again to the Veterans of Foreign Wars on August 17th. He needs to demonstrate he is willing to properly resource the war in Afghanistan as he promised to do so many times during the presidential campaign last year. And he should realize that while the election outcome has not been ideal, it alone should not force the U.S. to pull up stakes in the country. Both the leading presidential candidates, President Hamid Karzai and Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, represent broad constituencies that vehemently oppose the Taliban. That is the key point. The U.S. can work with whichever candidate is finally named the winner.

Obama’s statements on Afghanistan at the UN today will likely be interpreted by our allies as a sign that he is beginning to waver in his commitment to finishing the job of stabilizing and securing Afghanistan and preventing it from returning to serving as a safe haven for international terrorists. This is highly unfortunate. Without American leadership on Afghanistan, the entire civilized world will remain hostage to international terrorists intent on attacking innocents at the times and places of their own choosing.

Tags: , , , , ,

3 Responses to “Obama UN Speech Shows Wavering on Afghanistan”

  1. Roger D on at said:

    the folowing is a quote
    “”And a lot of people like to call Mr. Obama a “Messiah,” don’t they? Is he a Messiah? A savior? Didn’t the Egyptians say, after Pharaoh made them his slaves, “You have saved our lives; may it please my lord, we will be servants to Pharaoh”?

    Well, I tell you this – I know the Messiah; the Messiah is a friend of mine; and Mr. Obama is no Messiah! No, brothers and sisters, if Mr. Obama is a character from the Bible, then he is Pharaoh.”"

  2. Sammy Sorrell, Author, Albuquerque, NM on at said:

    The Afghanistan issue is one of several national and foreign issues that have become a political football by the Obama Administration. Obama is not a bad person he simply has an Ideology that is bad for the nation and totally out of step with American History at home and abroad. That ideology will continue to cause confusion and conflict for our nation. See our “BarackObama and the future of America” website for more detail. http://www.atps.com/barackobama.htm .

  3. Roger S., Ma. on at said:

    “So why is he fumbling now?” — The even simpler answer is: he isn’t. — What seemed expedient in March seems so no longer. Now something else does. A succession of “range of the moment” policy and talk is what got him where he is now; what has always “worked” for him. He’s expecting this “magic” to continue. Let’s hope that will not have tragic consequences for the rest of us!

Leave a Comment

In order to leave a comment, you must supply information for all of the required fields below (which are indicated by bold text).

Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.