Issues of the US Defence Strategy - Article Example

?Examination Questions In his 2008 speech, US Commander in Chief Barack Obama mentioned that it was in their ‘vital national interest’ to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. The President was actually referring to the threat that they faced from the violent extremist groups (Al-Qaeda) that were still at large in the country. These violent extremist groups were seen as a threat to the American way of life and national security. While most of the country had asked that the war in Afghanistan be ended and the troops deployed there be recalled, Obama argued that doing so would leave Afghanistan vulnerable to extremist elements and allow groups like the Al Qaeda and Taliban to take control of the country and once again, pose a threat to their national security. This argument is also explained in the 2008 National Defense Strategy (NDS) document. “The most important military component of the struggle against violent extremists is not the fighting we do ourselves, but how well we help prepare our partners to defend and govern themselves” (NDS 2008, P8). This statement, found in the national defense strategy of 2008 helps one understand President Obama’s words better. He does not seek to eliminate the extremist threat from Afghanistan simply through brute force. Rather, he advocates sending additional troops to the country to stabilize the situation there and create an environment where the Afghan security forces can be trained to hold their own against the extremist threat. Once that task is accomplished, the US would not need to be an active participant in the war against Al Qaeda and its associates in the country and could withdraw its troops subsequently assured that no threat to its own national security would be fostered in Afghanistan. 2. The 2008 national defense strategy clearly states that its intent is to counterbalance the DoD’s hitherto approach of concentrating on conventional warfare through a ‘mastery of irregular warfare’. It points to the instances of the enemies of their country, particularly those who are not associated with any state (if only sponsored by some) like the Taliban adopting ‘asymmetric’ methods to counter USA’s advantage in conventional warfare. These asymmetric methods refer to unconventional weapons such as chemical, biological and even nuclear weapons. The 2008 NDS aims to focus on winning wars such as those in Iraq and Afghanisthan through more than just sheer military power. It recognizes the threat posed by their enemies in the more overt forms visible today as well as the less obvious ones such as the manipulation of global opinion through mass communication venues and through exploitation of international commitments and legal avenues. The strategy also advocates bolstering intelligence capabilities to detect and analyze new forms of warfare and come up with strategies and approaches to counter the same. One can take the attitude of the US towards Afghanistan as a fitting example of this new approach. Rather than simply annexing the country and weeding out elements of extremist violence posing a threat to their national security, the US has chosen to help the people of the country gain control of their own lands and successfully defend it from the Al Qaeda and Taliban. By doing so, they not only weaken their foes in the country, but also make the country impervious to their influence, effectively cutting them off from the safe haven and the weapon supplies that they hitherto enjoyed over there. By concentrating on irregular warfare, the NDS looks to ensure a lasting and less expensive (in terms of funds as well as loss to life and property) war for America’s security. 3. The US foreign policy towards Somalia, as mentioned in the 2007 report, aims to eliminate the terrorist threat in the country and bring political stability to it, by helping the people establish a functioning central government. It also aims to address the humanitarian needs of the Somali people. One of the major interests for the United States of America in Somalia lies in the fact that it has been a safe haven to terrorist groups all the way back from the 1990s. Since the US is concerned with removing all possible threat to their homeland from extremists like the Al Qaeda, they find it in their national interest to help the Somalis eliminate these terrorists and those who would harbor them from their country. This would also be in the best interests of Somali people if the terrorist threat to their own country were neutralized. It is also in the interest of the US to eliminate the disorder prevalent in the country from 16 years of constant fighting as this very disorder makes it easy for extremist elements to take root within the country. By helping the people get back up on their feet and achieve a peaceful solution to their problems, the US is also ensuring greater security for other countries crippled by extremist threats. To achieve these objectives, the US has chosen to adopt a three pronged approach viz. to initiate a political dialogue between all the stakeholders in Somalia and the Transitional Federal government (ultimately resulting in the establishment of a concrete national government for the people), rapid deployment of an African stabilization force and mobilization of international assistance to help bolster the governance capacity of Transitional Federal Institutions. The US government intends to help the Somali people rebuild services such as law enforcement, a judiciary, health and education to support the cause of peace in the country and rehabilitate its people. Economically, the US intends to eliminate the terrorist threat in the country by increasing their security capabilities and eliminating the factors motivating the people to join hands with the terrorists such as poor employment, healthcare, lack of education etc. It also aims to reach out to the humanitarian needs of the Somalis by supporting international NGOs such as The UN World Food Program and Care International that provide aid to the Somalis, thus helping meet the basic needs of the vulnerable population of the country. 4. In 2007, the US government came up with a strategy to establish an African Union peacekeeping operation in Somalia, spearheaded by the United States, to bring stability and peace to the country and eliminate the extremist threat emanating from it. Though noble and seemingly sensible, this strategy came associated with various risks, as have been detailed below. For starters, the US aid efforts were aimed at bolstering the capabilities of the Transitional Federal Government (TFI) within the country, which they hoped would give way to a functional representative central government. However, there was always the risk that the TFI might not find acceptance among the people, which would make the establishment of peace and order within the country an uphill battle. Another risk that the operation faces is alienation by the Somali people, or being seen as a threat. The US intends to depend on aid by the neighboring countries of Somalia to establish and maintain peace in the country. However, a prolonged deployment of troops from another country might be perceived as an attempt at occupation of their land and be met with intense hostility. At the same time, a force not strong enough to offer security (formerly offered by the ICU Islamists) to the people to conduct their business without any threat to their life or property would not be able to create the impact desired. Another factor to be taken into consideration is that the aid offered to the Somalis might well differ from their immediate requirements. If the US and its international allies concentrated on providing stereotypical remedies to the Somalis rather than finding out their actual needs and providing for the same, they would not be able to bring about significant change in the country, leading to a waste of time and resources. Last but not least, as Somalia is a country which is inhabited by numerous groups (clans) vying for control, it is important that the US gives each one a stake in the future of their country. If they are seen to support any one party or disfavor any, it would be extremely difficult to secure the support required for the Somali government to succeed. Work Cited National Defense Strategy. 2008. Web. 28 March 2011. < http://www.defense.gov/news/2008%20national%20defense%20strategy.pdf> Read More