Dear President Obama (An Open Letter on Afghanistan)

by Brian McLaren 10-22-2009

I am a loyal supporter of your presidency. I worked hard in the campaign and have never been as proud of my country as I was when we elected you.

I’m writing to ask you to find another way ahead in Afghanistan. I wrote a similar letter to President Bush when he was preparing for war in Iraq.

I believe now, as you and I both did then, that war is not the answer. Violence breeds violence, and as Dr. King said, you can murder a murderer, but you can’t murder murder. As the apostle Paul said, evil must be overcome with good, which means that violence and hate must be overcome with justice and love, not more of the same.

Obviously, you know things the rest of us don’t know. And you have pressures and responsibilities the rest of us don’t have. But we have based our lives on the moral principles that guided leaders like Dr. King, Desmond Tutu, and Nelson Mandela. We share a profound faith in a loving, non-violent God. We share a commitment to live in the way of Jesus the peacemaker. That’s why escalation is not a change we can believe in.

I don’t argue for leaving Afghanistan high and dry as we’ve done too often in the past. Evil can’t be overcome by passivity or abdication, but only by positive good and creative action. In that spirit, I offer this humble proposal:

1. Take the $65 billion we would have spent there in the coming year and turn it into an aid and development fund. If you want to go farther, you could put a value on the cost of American lives that would be lost there (I have no idea how this inestimable cost could be calculated), and add that sum to the fund. $65 billion could build a lot of peace-oriented schools and hospitals in Afghanistan. It could serve as start-up capital for a lot of new businesses and it could pave a lot of roads. It could train a lot of police officers and it could enhance a lot of social infrastructure. It could give hope to a lot of women and girls who currently don’t have much hope, and it could provide a lot of constructive outlets for men and boys who right now don’t have many options besides picking up a machine gun and joining a warlord.

2. Other nations might contribute to this fund as well, and the fund could be extended into the future based on the number of years our military would have been engaged in Afghanistan. The fund could be administered by the U.S., or better (in the spirit of international cooperation), an IAEC-like agency could be created, subsidiary to the United Nations, to monitor progress in Afghanistan.

3. Then a set of benchmarks could be set, and the money could be released for development in Afghanistan as the nation reached appropriate benchmarks. This fund would be an enticement to mobilize public opinion in the direction of peace and justice, as people would know that their lives could be substantially improved if their factionalized leaders would start collaborating nonviolently for the common good.

4. With this kind of approach, the people of Afghanistan (and Pakistan) would have two clear choices. Al Qaeda and other extremists offer violence and unrest. But the international community would be offering support for order, rebuilding, collaboration, justice, and peace. This choice is a much clearer and better one than the choice between two groups of leaders who both depend on violence to achieve their aims.

5. Conservatives could support this kind of approach because it emphasizes personal choice and responsibility among the Afghan people. It would come alongside them in their own nation-building efforts at their own best pace, rather than trying to impose our own nation-building on them at a pace we determine. Progressives could support this approach because it changes the role of the U.S. in the global neighborhood — from reactive bully or intentional dominator to responsible neighbor and partner for the common good.

Mr. President, you have my respect and my prayers at this important time. I believe you have the intelligence and insight to find a creative way to use a new kind of force in the world — something far more powerful than bombs, guns, and bullets: the generative force of creativity, of justice, of collaboration, and yes, of hope. Can we find a new and better way to help Afghanistan rise out of chaos and complicity with Al Qaeda? You know the answer many of us will shout and chant: yes, we can.

With respect and hope,
A citizen

Brian McLaren (brianmclaren.net) is a speaker and author, most recently of Everything Must Change and Finding Our Way Again.

Categories: War & Peace

jonabark

There is a way that this idea could be combined with a strengthening grass-roots democracy in Iraq or Afghanistan. Instead of giving the money to an often corrupt central government. Make the money available to local democratically organized councils with lots of accountability to various members to watch the money. New England town hall style. This would reinforce grass roots habits of shared democratic decision making.

The problem is that war is now a way of controlling the money tied up in the military industrial complex for political gain. There is no evidence that the Obama team is immune from this corruption. The average cost of a gallon of gas in Afghanistan or Iraq for the military is 400 dollars.

The problem is not a lack of good ideas. The problem is a lack of will to stop using war and the threat of war as the US first line of international policy. The problem is the lack of will to curb military spending. So far, not a trace of a hint of a scintilla of evidence that Obama has the courage or will or interest to move in this direction.
The wars you despise are now Obama's wars, the mutilated children are his and ours. The Democratic party doesn't appear to care what peacemakers think anymore than the Republican party does. It is money that talks in our corporate kleptocracy.

schroeder37

I would have to mostly agree. Obama never had this in mind to deal with while running for president. he had an agenda, and this is just in the way, as is finding jobs for americans, the debt etc. he seems to not how to deal with any of these things. we continue to loose jobs, the stimulus that he said would stop unemployment at 8% is now at almost 10%, he is still just like bush spending us into massive debt and wanting us to keeping doing it. So where is the change, I think this is why his approval rating is falling so fast, nobody is seeing the "CHANGE".

Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

Wow. You don't like him, do you?

(You're behind on the polls. His approval rating has climbed back up- for what that's worth.)

So, after the worst President in US history, after spending trillions on wars and devastating the economy and the environment, after stripping us of civil liberties and trying to rewrite the constitution, it is surprising that Obama hasn't fixed all of that in less than a year?

He's not the Messiah, you know.

jonabark

I am not surprised that he hasn't fixed the Bush mess, I'm surprised that he hasn't tried, but instead seems intent on completing the Bush mission with a different style. I actually do like him as a person but I despise his policies .
It was not Bush I object to but the criminal violation of the Geneva accords and illegitimate invasion and occupation of countries not at war with us.

schroeder37

seeing how most of what you say is over stated. Well its not a good start double the spending, not create any knew jobs while spending a trillion to make jobs, continue in the war just the same as bush, totally ignore the constitution, and try to pass a environment bill that would litteral kill many poor americans and destroy small business and create a heavy burden on every american especially the poor in apying for the increase in gas and energy bills passed to us, all the while the big evil corporations make more money. This cap and tax wont hurt the biggest companies amd it will not at all make the environment better. SO no I do not like him. I have that right do I not. Of course obama would rasther I shut up and get out of the way. But again that isnt going to happen.

xfree9

AMEN!

woodchucker531

Amen

schroeder37

nice ideas. but we are there fighting the terrorist not afghanistan. You left out all tghe opium farmers. We need to have them produce food at which they will get paid a decent price so they will stop making opium. I think you were against irag war as well I didnt see anything in there on that front which obama said he would be out within 6 months, though hes said a lot of things and not followed up on any of them yet. well except killing babies. Personaly I dont see how you can continue to support a corrupt lieing president. I also am not sure how you can ignore his 20 years in black liberal theology, just the black KKK. I would think if it was the other way around you would be all over this.

squeaky

"Personaly I dont see how you can continue to support a corrupt lieing president. "

Did you support President Bush? There are many who would say the same thing about him, you know. Maybe it is just a matter of perspective, but understand a statement like that leveled against President Obama sounds incredibly hypocritical to those who think we were being lied to for eight years.

xfree9

This isn't about Bush, or Clinton, or Reagan. This is about the present, and about Obama dealing with the hand he's been dealt. More troops, more killing, more violence, is NEVER the answer.

Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

Actually, it was bin Laden who attacked the world, and the U.S.- not Afghanistan.

Ngchen

All excellent ideas, except for the fundamental problem of security. No amount of investment will ever work without at least a credible force to prevent "dead-enders" from destroying/vandalising what's invested. And it's unrealistic to expect 100% of the Taliban to turn around voluntarily. So, while it might be possible for an Afghan force to do it, someone has to provide security before enduring reconstruction can take plance. And such can't take place without the defeat of the Taliban fanatics first.

irish_annie

reasonable concern - in addition to building schools and clinics, not in lieu of.

ando

NPR did a report today on the debate going on among intelligence experts over Afghanistan. A big part of the debate is whether the Taliban will start providing financial aid to the beleaguered Al quaeda. Some think that it's payback time, where Taliban will provide money from the opium trade in exchange for more fighters to step up the battles. So, to whom shall we thank for a weakened Al Quaeda?

schroeder37

the biggest mistake when they first went in. overestimated there willingness to help and take up arms against them, and not helping the farmers out. I dont understand why they still dont discuss this issue. the opium farming is a big problem now and in the future if they continue to produce it.

NC77

I do not believe the Afghan people are currently choosing to side with Al Qaeda because they have no other choice. Do you really think Al Qaeda will seek peace with the Afghan people if we build infrastructure in the country? Al Qaeda will do what it wants to do, and it is driven by an evil philosophy that has completely consumed the spirit and soul of its members.

I do not endorse war, but how long do you turn away and ignore the killing of innocent people? If the church were the church as Jesus intended it to be we could easily take down Al Qaeda through spiritual warfare (i.e., prayer).

Jedidiah Abdul Muhib Palosaari

Afghanistan is the quagmire of all quagmires. Even the Mongols didn't really control there- and they had the greatest empire the world has ever seen. There is no way to win- not by fighting.

What would work would be a great cost. We're there now, and we can't disengage or unentangle. We can change the entire way we do war. We go over there, without weapons of any sort. We go and help the Afghani people. We go and work for them and serve them, building and doing development, but with no protection. We see hundreds and thousands and tens of thousands and maybe even hundreds of thousands of Americans killed. We keep on loving the Afghani people without killing them. We become martyrs for the sake of love. We do this until even the Taliban realize that we mean business- we will love until we die, for we love that much, and we care for them that much.

This is the only thing that will change the situation on the ground there.

schroeder37

again we are not at war with afghanistan. We are there looking for the terrorist. We are helping in reconstruction there just like we did in irag. Except the more they kill the more they are inspired, thats why they are terrorist, body count is rather a good thing for them.

xfree9

I think this letter not only shows sincerity, it proves that at least McLaren is willing to ask hard questions of even his favored politicians. That shows character.

Thank you, Brian. Kudos and amen!

irish_annie

perhaps. or perhaps tis the regret of one who sold their birthright for a bowl of stew and is just now experiencing dawning realization of it.

some trust in chariots, some in horses, some in the kingdoms of man (whether political left or right)...

john_mustol

I resonate with McLaren's comments, but they seem to make a lot of assumptions about how things work in Afganistan that may not be true. I fear that McLaren and all of us may not appreciate the extreme complexity of Afganistan, Pakistan, and the region. This is part of our problem. We Americans do not understand. (And we are unaware of our own worldview and assumptions.) As Gen. McChrystal said in his speech, 10/1/09, things are not always what they seem in Afganistan. You can dig a well for a village with the best of intentions, but in the process upset power relationships and cause enormous problems. When we don't understand what is actually going on and how things work in that culture, in that place, in that village, in that valley, etc., our development efforts can be just as clumsy and stupid as making war, if not as deadly.

A shift toward aide and "development" may be good, but the aide work we do must be done wisely. It has to align with Afgani culture, worldview, customs, values, and ways - not ours. Therefore, I suggest that both the military and the aide agencies working in Afganistan need carefully trained language/cross-cultural specialists (a lot of them) who can make contact with the Afgan people in their own language, in their villages and homes, in order to try to understand them and the extreme complexities of local situations and relationships. We need these specialists for every ethnic/language/regional group in Afganistan. We need to carefully study the history, social structures, politics, religion, and cultures of the area. Our leaders need to do this. We need to do a lot of watching and listening.

Development work and, I suggest, military work in a place like Afganistan is cross-cultural work. Cross-cultural work is very difficult to do in way that is effective. Some people can do it; others can't. A major part of this is understanding our own American culture and worldview - much of which functions below the level of consciousness. Languag-learning and cross-cultural work are very difficult. They are not just intellectual/physical challenges but also moral spiritual challenges. I can only imagine that military cross-cultural work would be even more difficult. You have to recognize that we are as much a part of the problem as the Afghans are. We need to address our own assumptions and culture (our rationalism, individualism,& materialism for starters).

Development work in Afganistan will probably take many many years. If we really want to see it through, we need to realize that. Then, perhaps we can get down to the tough language-learning, study, watching, listening, and cross-cultural work required and eventually leave the country in peace. But it will be extremely difficult.