Surge: Does the Iraq/Afghanistan Analogy Hold?

Those promoting a major increase in troops for Afghanistan invariably point to the success of the Iraqi surge even though there is no clear consensus on how, and even if, the Iraq troop increase succeeded. 

But, assuming it has succeeded, are the two situations comparable?

Tim Fernholz, a fellow at The American Prospect, argues that they are not.

Writing in TAP yesterday, Fernholz says:

The surge in Iraq had so many variables that it is hard to attribute success only to the deployment of 20,000 additional soldiers. The military adopted counterinsurgency tactics across the theater, and McChrystal's then-command launched innovative counterterrorism squads to hunt down insurgent leaders. Others point to the decision of Muqtada al-Sadr, a critical militia leader, to stand down his forces, or the Anbar Awakening and resultant Sons of Iraq program, when Sunni tribes joined U.S. forces -- for pay -- to fight insurgents.

Few, if any of these dynamics will transfer to the new war. There is little indication, yet, that any of the various insurgent groups are amenable to dealing with the U.S. or Hamid Karzai's government; Afghanistan's largely rural landscape makes counterinsurgency a challenge, and even the highest troop deployment requested by McChrystal won't be enough to pursue counterinsurgency across the country.

[...]

[N]o amount of additional military force will work without commensurate efforts on the civilian and development side, but thus far it's not at all apparent that those efforts are forthcoming. Sending more troops without appropriate civilian resources, or at the expense of those resources, will likely be a futile effort.

No wonder President Obama is taking his time about making his momentous decision about Afghanistan.  Former Vice President Cheney says Obama is "dithering" -- something no one could ever accuse the Bush-Cheney administration of doing when it came to dispatching US troops.  

But Obama is not dithering.  He is, however, doing what we wish Bush had done in Iraq -- and LBJ had done in Vietnam -- he is struggling to make an informed decision about what can be realistically accomplished in Afghanistan and whether it is worth the cost.

We will know Obama's decision soon enough.  Whatever it is, we will also know that he arrived at it after due and serious consideration.  He is behaving as a Commander-in-Chief should, as if each of the men and women he would send to war are his own.  In fact, they are.