The Non-Decider Decides
Three months after he took the McChrystal report with him to Camp David for a weekend read, and 10 months after taking office, President Obama said Tuesday that he is ready to announce a new strategy for the United States in Afghanistan.
In confirming the news during an East Room gathering with India's prime minister, Obama immediately talked of how his administration's lengthy review of its options was "comprehensive and extremely useful," while taking a thinly veiled swipe the Bush administration for not always having a clear strategy.
"It is my intention to finish the job," the president said.
That line seemed a deliberate attempt to sound forceful in teasing his long-awaited announcement, which comes after nine meetings of his "war council." The public nature of his long deliberation, as illustrated through photo releases and press office readouts, has been portrayed by the White House as the commander in chief giving this solemn decision the careful consideration it deserves.
But critics, most famously former Vice President Dick Cheney, have called it "dithering," and say the delay in reaching a conclusion not only undercuts the military leadership, but unnerves allies and shows some measure of weakness to enemies. Regardless of one's opinion, it's a notable departure from the frequent modus operandi President Bush, who famously called himself "The Decider" in 2006.
Obama will reportedly make that public announcement in a nationally televised address after Thanksgiving.
"And I feel very confident that when the American people hear a clear rationale for what we're doing there and how we intend to achieve our goals that they will be supportive," Obama said Tuesday.
A new USA Today/Gallup poll shows that Americans right now are not supportive of Obama's handling of the issue -- 55 percent disapprove now, compared to 56 percent who approved a month ago. The nation also appears divided on the proper course of action, with 39 percent saying the United States should begin withdrawing, and 37 percent supportive of an increase on par with General McChrystal's recommendation of about 40,000 more troops.
"I think he's in an impossible situation," said Caroline Wadhams, national security senior policy analyst for the Center for American Progress. Though an announcement will be received politely in the Senate, the more liberal House Democrats will be "in open revolt," she predicted.
Sure enough, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said during a conference call Tuesday that there is "serious unrest in our caucus" about just the cost of the war.
One result of the delay in Obama's decision-making has been it galvanized both sides of the debate. Still, Wadhams said she's inclined to side with the White House in stating that the time has been needed for "a genuine grappling with the issues."
"After the McChrystal request and the election fiasco, they felt they had to reconsider, re-look at all the options," she said. "What McChrystal requested was so costly and I think that it was sort of a wake up call for what counterinsurgency actually meant, what it actually cost. And in the middle of a financial crisis, there are all these domestic priorities to think about."
It may cost the president some political capital at a time when he can't afford to spend much more. Ultimately, though, officials are confident it won't cost the president.
"The president understands that the war in Afghanistan was one that he was always going to have to deal with, and I don't think that dealing with that as an issue threatens the president from also being able to deal with very important issues like the economy, like health care, and many other things that are either part of his agenda or might not be planned but end up on his desk anyway," Robert Gibbs said Monday.