David Guttenfelder Photo of Troops Sleeping in AfghanistanThere is a great Calvin and Hobbes quote - "A good compromise leaves everyone mad" - that sums up Obama's decision to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.  The left has learned more about this war it wants nothing more to do with, while the right does not like Obama's plan to start removing troops in July 2011 as it seems defeatist.  I'm more charitable, but then this is exactly the recommendation I gave last month: give the generals what they want on the condition of leaving, rather than create a fragile peace that invested us there long term.  In a vacuum we should just leave now, but Afghanistan isn't a vacuum.  As Andrew Sullivan points out: 

The sanest option - leave now - would leave allies high and dry, prompt domestic cries of surrender, demoralize the military, break a clear campaign pledge, and signal to Pakistan that the Taliban is their problem now. Everything but the latter are worth avoiding.

The backlash from just leaving would be enormous.  It can not be orderly, it would spark a reaction here and abroad, and it would be difficult to explain since all of Obama's military advisors, including the new general he installed in Afghanistan, advocated staying. Obama is not intemperate - he took a year to do health care reform and is delaying closing Guantanamo until he has all of the details figured out - a radical turn around is unlikely and out of character.  Obama's new Afghanistan strategy is careful, pragmatic and opportunistic.  It balances the reality of the situation - we are stuck there for awhile anyway, and it is difficult to leave as the terms stand - with the long term goal of unwinding all of the wars he inherited.

The ship of military policy takes a really long time to turn; that's why when Robert Gates cuts Defense spending the year over year defense budget still goes up.  We are going to be in Afghanistan for years anyway.  We are going to be Iraq for a year after we stop doing anything.  It is going to take 6-9 months to get the pieces in play for this surge and then a year from then the troops start coming back.  That is warp speed in defense terms.

The schedule of the plan demonstrates Obama's political acumen.  Before the Midterm Elections troops are going to come back from Iraq.  Before the reelection campaign troops are going to come back from Afghanistan.  The Democratic base isn't happy, but Obama still has plenty of time on the clock before he has to worry about that.

Ultimately, I am skeptical of exactly how much we can do in Afghanistan.  I just finished Dexter Filkins's The Forever War, and it lays out pretty convincingly that American troops do not necessarily stabilize the situation.  If we are causing a backlash than it will only intensify with more troops.  However, if we are out no matter what in 18 months then I don't see how this strategy can fail.  The goal is to not be there anymore with the least amount of blowback from leaving, not to make Afghanistan perfectly stable and secure.  We can plausibly make the case that we tried and left on our own terms after this surge; that is good strategy and good politics.