The United States did the right thing going into Afghanistan in 2001, said Catherine Bertini, professor of practice at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs.
Because of deteriorating stability, President Obama has already nearly doubled troops in Afghanistan from 34,000 to 64,000. He is now considering sending an additional 40,000 troops to the region.
The United States has invested in Afghanistan's economy, government and military.
Afghanistan is a tribal country. Since 2001, there has been an increase in territorial wars between tribes. Many domestic and international experts agree that the war's success relies on peace between these tribes.
The Taliban has also made a comeback in the region since the U.S.-led invasion.
Winning the Nobel Peace Prize has further complicated President Obama's decision to deploy more troops, said Mehrzad Boroujerdi, director of the Middle Eastern studies program.
"It's very awkward because he is still prosecuting two wars and the Guantanamo Bay prison is still open. He is still sending back these characters to be subjected to torture in their home countries, for anyone who accepts them back," Boroujerdi said. "These are clear violations of the spirit of the prize."
While the Obama administration is debating a troop increase, it would be impossible for the United States to end the war soon, Boroujerdi said.
"I don't know if it's advisable to stay there long-term, but if the U.S. pulls out we'll have an Afghanistan in chaos," Boroujerdi said.
Syracuse University professors weighed in on the factors of the president's decision.
The Daily Orange asks: Would a U.S. troop increase be effective in stabilizing Afghanistan in light of the costs?
Meet the Expert: William Smullen, director of national security studies
"Well, I think the President needs to carefully consider the investment in sending more troops, which is inextricably tied to whether or not the government in Afghanistan is in a position to increase the size of its own military and police force. Before sending more troops, I would say to the president, 'Pause, let's let the run-off election play out. Let's sit down with the new president, whoever that president is, and lay out those standards.'"
Meet the Expert: Mehrzad Boroujerdi, director of the Middle Eastern studies program
"The predicament that Obama is facing right now - an additional 40,000 troops - in my view is not necessarily going to work. Whether it is an additional 3,000 or an additional 100,000 troops. I think it's going to be hugely undermining Obama's mandate. If this becomes the defining moment in his presidency, then, frankly, he can kiss many of these domestic programs goodbye, because the expenses from the war are going to catch up with him."
Meet the Expert: Catherine Bertini, professor of practice at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs
"It's obvious that Osama bin Laden is running things from wherever he is, and Mullah Omar, the head of the Taliban, is still running things from wherever he is. We weren't diligent enough in destroying the heads of these organizations and we got ourselves further into this quagmire. That's since 2001. Where are we with those initial objectives? That should be our number one objective, and then the country can move forward from there."
rastrum@syr.edu
Be the first to comment on this article!