WORLD  
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 4

MoveOn Should Oppose Obama on Afghanistan

MoveOn's new director says the group has other priorities than telling Obama he's wrong on Afghanistan. This is a mistake.
March 3, 2009  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest World headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

MoveOn.org became a meaningful force in American politics when it emerged as a muscular network of activists that was willing to challenge not just Republicans but Democrats when they were wrong about foreign policy.

Democratic leaders in Congress might have been willing to compromise with the Bush administration on Iraq back in 2002. But MoveOn said "no."

And MoveOn was right.

Now, more than ever, we need MoveOn to remain true to its historic mission.

We need MoveOn to be right about Afghanistan.

For that reason, I certainly hope that Justin Ruben, the new MoveOn executive director, was wrong when he told my colleague Ari Melber that he did not think the group would be letting President Obama know he is wrong to be surging more U.S. troops into Afghanistan.

Here's what Ruben said about MoveOn's agenda for the coming months:

And while MoveOn loudly led the battle against the Iraq "surge," Ruben said he not expect ending the war Afghanistan, where Obama is deploying additional troops, to make the priority list. The "overwhelming priority" is still Iraq, Ruben explains, and while his members are concerned about Afghanistan, they tend to 'differ on what ought to be done about it.'

Unless the MoveOn membership has lost touch with its values and its former allies, I am going to bet that they are a lot more concerned about Afghanistan than Ruben thinks.

Here's what Peace Action says:

Yesterday, President Obama announced his decision to send 17,000 additional U.S. troops to Afghanistan, on the grounds that ‘the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan demands urgent attention'. Peace Action strongly opposes Obama's recent announcement and urges people to immediately call on Obama to choose diplomacy, not escalation.

More troops won't solve our problems in Afghanistan...

We have seen the disastrous consequences of heading into war without a plan in Iraq. We are still mourning American and Iraqi lives lost, and struggling to rehabilitate our economy while spending billions of dollars on war.

Peace Action calls for the ‘rapid withdrawal' of U.S. troops from Afghanistan and a new commitment to a negotiated diplomatic solution involving all regional players.

The Obama Administration should:

-- De-escalate troop levels in Afghanistan and to reject the idea that there is a military solution to the region's problems;

-- Immediately stop military activities that indiscriminately impact civilians such as air and drone strikes;

-- Rapidly withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan;

-- Commit to negotiated diplomatic talks involving all major regional players, including major international peace-keeping bodies;

-- Address the real needs of Afghans, which include health-care, clean water, education, and security.

Here's what the new www.stateupcongress.org network -- which has been organized by the group Win Without War and is backed by TrueMajority.org, the Council for a Livable World, Working Assets, Women's Action for New Directions, Faithful America, 2020 Vision, the American Friends Service Committee, the Unitarian Universalist Service Committee, the Unitarian Universalist Association and NETWORK (the National Catholic Social Justice Lobby) -- says:

President Obama has announced a plan to send 17,000 additional troops to Afghanistan this spring and summer. In the absence of a clear mission or exit plan, this troop escalation is more likely to fuel anti-American sentiment and the Taliban-led insurgency than provide any meaningful improvement in security.

Here's the Afghanistan assessment of California Congresswoman Maxine Waters, the driving force behind the Congressional Out of Iraq Caucus:

We don't want to substitute Afghanistan for Iraq.

Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold, the member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee with the steadiest track record of challenging presidents of both parties when they make wrong moves on the international stage, adds:

After years of a failed foreign policy which distracted us from our top national security priority of defeating al Qaeda and its affiliates, I am encouraged by President Obama's focus on Afghanistan where the 9/11 attacks originated. But we need to make sure we have a strategy in place for Afghanistan that will actually work before we commit thousands more U.S. troops. A military escalation without a strategy to address the complex problems facing Afghanistan and the region could alienate the Afghan people and make it much more difficult to achieve our top national security goal of defeating al Qaeda.

Is MoveOn really out of synch with Peace Action, Win Without War and other major anti-war and religious groups and congressional allies of the peace movement?

Let's hope not.


John Nichols is The Nation's Washington correspondent.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest World headlines via email


Comments are closed-

MoveOn should have dug its collective head out of its ass a lot sooner
Posted by: xbj on Mar 4, 2009 1:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And not supported the blank slate empty suit in the first place.

WE told you so. Over and over again. FROM DAY ONE. Your lord was a neocon warmonger in neolib clothes pimped out by Karl Rove.

And now innocent people are dying. And will continue to die.

Congratulations. To MoveOn and ObamaNet.

Doin' a helluva job.

Wonder if Obama is still taking Soros' 3 AM calls.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

MOVE-ON's Embracing the Status Quo Wants Me to Move-On From Them
Posted by: kunndunn on Mar 6, 2009 12:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Move-On has become a neo-liberal elite. They are not polling their members on priority agendas; Afganistan wasn't even listed. They should be way-out-front on this one. What we didn't learn from the Russian failure in Afganistan, is the same thing we did not learn from the French failure in Viet Nam. It is like our nation's leaders have gotten stuck in a retro-status quo time warp; that the military-industrial complex rules our democracy, not the other way around. Wake Up Move.On !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Bluesblues
Posted by: When In Doubt on Mar 7, 2009 12:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for this article.
Now i understand why Moveon.org has refused several of my commentaries.

So what else is news

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

MoveOn's Responsibility to Remind Leaders of History
Posted by: Muser on Mar 11, 2009 9:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
History has made it clear that military conquest never works in Afghanistan. Nichols is right to point out to MoveOn.org that it should realize that its role as a liberal consciense includes reminding progressives like the Obama Administration that forceful intervention in foreign societies is only justified when our security is immediately at stake.

It is sad that one of the few prominent figures in U.S. government, who appears to understand that achieving long-term order in Afghanistan may involve our supporting moderate religious fundamentalists in their struggle to control the Taliban, is General Petraeus. Unfortunately, because he is in the military he defines solutions to problems like Afghanistan in terms of troop levels. Let's hope that the leadership role of Richard Holbrooke in regional policy will result in the use of diplomatic, economic and inculcative tactics to prevent the creation of sanctuaries for threats to international order like Al Qaeda in the future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

MoveOn should have dug its collective head out of its ass a lot sooner
Posted by: xbj on Mar 4, 2009 1:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And not supported the blank slate empty suit in the first place.

WE told you so. Over and over again. FROM DAY ONE. Your lord was a neocon warmonger in neolib clothes pimped out by Karl Rove.

And now innocent people are dying. And will continue to die.

Congratulations. To MoveOn and ObamaNet.

Doin' a helluva job.

Wonder if Obama is still taking Soros' 3 AM calls.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

MOVE-ON's Embracing the Status Quo Wants Me to Move-On From Them
Posted by: kunndunn on Mar 6, 2009 12:36 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Move-On has become a neo-liberal elite. They are not polling their members on priority agendas; Afganistan wasn't even listed. They should be way-out-front on this one. What we didn't learn from the Russian failure in Afganistan, is the same thing we did not learn from the French failure in Viet Nam. It is like our nation's leaders have gotten stuck in a retro-status quo time warp; that the military-industrial complex rules our democracy, not the other way around. Wake Up Move.On !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Bluesblues
Posted by: When In Doubt on Mar 7, 2009 12:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks for this article.
Now i understand why Moveon.org has refused several of my commentaries.

So what else is news

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

MoveOn's Responsibility to Remind Leaders of History
Posted by: Muser on Mar 11, 2009 9:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
History has made it clear that military conquest never works in Afghanistan. Nichols is right to point out to MoveOn.org that it should realize that its role as a liberal consciense includes reminding progressives like the Obama Administration that forceful intervention in foreign societies is only justified when our security is immediately at stake.

It is sad that one of the few prominent figures in U.S. government, who appears to understand that achieving long-term order in Afghanistan may involve our supporting moderate religious fundamentalists in their struggle to control the Taliban, is General Petraeus. Unfortunately, because he is in the military he defines solutions to problems like Afghanistan in terms of troop levels. Let's hope that the leadership role of Richard Holbrooke in regional policy will result in the use of diplomatic, economic and inculcative tactics to prevent the creation of sanctuaries for threats to international order like Al Qaeda in the future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS