Views » December 15, 2009

Obama’s ‘Ben Tre Logic

By Joel Bleifuss

Has nothing changed since we were preparing to invade Iraq eight years ago?

Yes, we have a new president, one who is smart and speaks in complete sentences. Yet we are about to jump pell-mell into escalating another war. With the surge of 30,000 American soldiers set to begin in January, President Barack Obama’s total Afghan War escalation now stands at 51,000.

And what for? Why pour more troops into Afghanistan, the graveyard of empires? To defeat al Qaeda—in Pakistan? To protect and nurture an Afghan government with little local legitimacy? To protect an Afghan population from foreign fighters through an occupation by foreign soldiers? Apparently, the answer is all of the above.

But, most absurdly, the New York Times lead editorial on December 2 lauded the president for explaining that the the United States needs to send more troops to Afghanistan “so American troops can eventually go home.”

We have heard such reasoning before. It is called “Ben Tre logic,” as in the Vietnamese provincial capital Ben Tre. On Feb. 7, 1968, the Associated Press’ Peter Arnett famously reported that an unnamed Air Force Major informed him, “It became necessary to destroy the town to save it.”

Does any of it make sense?

The invasion of Afghanistan began in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, when critical analysis of foreign policy was stifled. Since 2003, it became rhetorically useful for many critics of the Iraq War to cover their right flank by identifying Afghanistan as the “good war.” Consequently, the merits of the war in Afghanistan have never been freely and fully debated in the press.

Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), the media watch group, examined all of the opinion columns discussing what the United States should do in Afghanistan that appeared in the Washington Post and the New York Times during the first 10 months of 2009. Of the 67 columns that were published in the Washington Post, 61 supported a continued war and six expressed anti-war views. Of the 43 columns published in the New York Times, 36 supported the war and seven opposed it—and five of those opposing it were by Times columnist Bob Herbert.

The real debate that occurred on the op-ed pages of these two newspapers was over whether to escalate or pursue an alternate war strategy. The Times: 14 escalate, 22 different strategy. The Post: 31 escalate, 30 different strategy.

FAIR’s Steve Rendall writes, “The New York Times and the Washington Post continue to wield an unmatched influence in the nation’s capital and in newsrooms across the country. One can only imagine what public opinion would be, and what policy might result, if these papers truly offered a wide-ranging debate on the Afghanistan War.”

In the January issue of In These Times, Roger Morris and George Kenney, two former Foreign Service Officers who resigned on principle from the State Department during two previous U.S. wars (Cambodia and the Balkans, respectively), write about diplomat Matthew Hoh, the former Marine Captain in Iraq who resigned his State Department post in Afghanistan over how that war is being waged.

Where on the op-ed pages of the papers of record are voices like those of Kenney, Morris and Hoh?

At the cost of life and limb, the mainstream press has—as it did with the Iraq war—failed us, again.

• Help In These Times publish more articles like this. Donate today!
• Subscribe today and save 46% off the newsstand price!
• Or win a subscription to In These Times by taking this short survey!

• subscribe to print magazine

• stay in touch with our email newsletter

  Subscribe to our regular weekly e-mail newsletter. It's packed with updates on recent and upcoming stories, events, campaigns and things every progressive should be informed about.

   

• email this article to a friend

  Your Name Your Email Recipient Email

  Personal message Thought you might be interested in this article from In These Times.

   

  Please help us prevent spam by verifying the word you see in the image above

  Send to multiple recipients. Just separate each email address with a comma.

• Reader Comments

  Thank you Mr. Bleifuss for addressing what I believe will be seen by history as the epitaph of a presidency. 

  The apparent MSM consensus approving of this Af-Pak escalation is mind-boggling.  Even more disturbing is hearing the same neo-con “myths,” rightfully discredited when utilized by Republicans, now being repeated by Democrats who simply ought to know better (hence, in my opinion, total moral culpability).

  Two articles detailing the mistaken assumptions and goals of this escalation are:

  http://www.counterpunch.org/leupp11302009.html

  http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/12/08-1

  I cannot imagine a greater cause for alarm right now than this Af-Pak misadventure, and I applaud ITT for having the courage to speak against such escalation at a time, and against whom, it is not popular to do so.  All progressives should do their utmost to emphatically point out the errors of this escalation, whenever and where ever they are repeated, especially since the man ordering all of this is allegedly one of our own.

  Posted by Imran on Dec 15, 2009 at 8:26 PM

  I think that media had done good work in Iraq but war is not solution of any fight….............Enhanced Kre-Alkalyn

  Posted by roddick on Dec 17, 2009 at 7:19 AM

• register a new account »Posting Security

  To participate in our forums, please register for a free account.

  Username Password

    Remember me
  

  Retreive lost password »

Also featured Bigger Than Obama
Why Year One Matters
Leftists, Liberals—and Losers?

Full contents
Previous issues
Subscribe and save!

Also by Joel Bleifuss

• Block ’Em, Sock ’Em
  Across the country progressive groups are mobilizing to support legislative initiatives, but to… morePosted on July 9, 2009
• Buy Back Our Government
  Porn rentals, duck islands and moat-cleaning are among the frivolities British members of… morePosted on June 11, 2009
• A Specter is Haunting Dems
  Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) had every reason to free himself from the wing… morePosted on May 12, 2009
• Bailout Bandits
  In these days of "bank stablization plans" (bailouts for fat cats) and "overseas… morePosted on April 16, 2009
• Building Utopia
  A new documentary profiles the rise and fall of a Depression-era utopian experiment in the Bronx.Posted on April 13, 2009