(Richmond Times-Dispatch, 02-01-09)
Donald Nuechterlein, a political scientist, is the author of “America Recommitted: A Superpower Assesses Its Role in a Turbulent World.” Contact him at nuechtd@cstone.net.
CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. – The United States has fought four costly wars since 1945 and none of them ended as World War II did, with complete victory.

In Korea, after nearly three years of huge American troop casualties, the war ended in 1953 in a draw with North and South Korea divided along roughly the same border they had at the start of the war.

The Vietnam war, begun in 1965, was an even costlier one for U.S. troops. And it ended in defeat when North Vietnam’s army took control of the south after Congress cut off funding for U.S. operations in 1975.

The third and fourth wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are still in progress. Although the outcome in Afghanistan is not clear, Iraq appears to be on track to become a stable but fragile democratic state.

In Afghanistan, U.S. and allied forces that ousted the Taliban regime in 2001 now find a resurgent Taliban that threatens security in large parts of the country. Many experts conclude that Afghanistan is a fractured country, threatened by Taliban forces in the south and east, and by warlords elsewhere. Unlike Iraq,
Afghanistan has never had a government that controlled the entire country.

In all of these wars, the presidents made difficult choices: Agree to an unsatisfactory outcome (Korea), accept a stalemate and eventual defeat (Vietnam), persevere to achieve success (Iraq), and, until recently, neglect the enemy’s resurgence (Afghanistan).

LET’S EXAMINE the choices made on Vietnam and Iraq by presidents Richard Nixon and George W. Bush and consider the alternatives President Obama has as he deals with Iraq and Afghanistan in the coming years.
A noted historian, Margaret MacMillan, authored an excellent book two years ago titled Nixon and Mao: The Week That Changed the World. She recounts how Nixon and his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger, secretly planned a presidential trip to China in 1972 to end a 23-year freeze on U.S. relations with Communist China. Here, according to MacMillan, is the situation that Nixon faced when he entered the White House in 1969:

“The Soviet Union and its allies had watched with pleasure as American power failed to crush North Vietnam. American allies had watched uneasily as their superpower showed its weakness. Their publics had increasingly turned sour on the United States; in Canada and Western Europe, huge demonstrations demanded that the United States get out of Vietnam. Much of the criticism, and not just from the left, was disturbingly anti-American. The United States was portrayed as an international bully.”

Nixon believed that opening relations with China would persuade both China and the Soviet Union to support a negotiated settlement in Vietnam that preserved the south as a viable state. Although he succeeded in withdrawing American ground troops in 1973, he failed in Vietnam when North Vietnamese forces took over the south in 1975 and forced a humiliating evacuation of all Americans.

In Iraq in 2007, George Bush faced this difficult choice: whether to withdraw American forces, as domestic and international opinion was demanding, or order a surge of forces in an effort to reverse the downward trend in security that threatened to turn into full-scale civil war. He chose a surge. After a year of sustained operations, it brought security to nearly all of Iraq’s cities as well as countryside.

WHAT ARE Barack Obama’s options in Afghanistan and Iraq?

U.S. commanders in Afghanistan have asked for 30,000 more troops to fight the Taliban and to strengthen the Kabul government. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said last week that he has recommended about 12,000 additional troops. Yet, none of our NATO allies, with the exception of Britain, Canada, and the Netherlands, is willing to add to current forces. Germany doesn’t currently permit its troops to engage in combat.

If the president adds troops in Afghanistan, he will need to decide soon whether to seek a negotiated settlement of the war, one that doesn’t result in a withdrawal of American forces. Secretary Gates has stated that the United States will continue to pursue al-Qaida leaders hiding in neighboring Pakistan. The alternative to a negotiated settlement is adding many more combat troops in an effort to stabilize the entire country.

The president’s choice in Iraq is far easier. He will be able to withdraw the troops within 16 to 18 months and be reasonably confident that the new government, which assumes power this month, will take responsibility for policing the country. Washington will continue to provide logistic, intelligence, and training support.

If things go well in Iraq in the next two years, Barack Obama will see the country’s successful transition to a stable, democratic government. And if so, part of the credit will go to George Bush, who was not willing to accept a defeat.