The answers to three questions will determine whether President Obama’s 30,000 soldier escalation in Afghanistan is successful.  The first is whether American soldiers are fueling the insurgency or defeating it.  The second is whether 30,000 is enough.  The third is whether the mission should be exclusively targeting al Qaeda (which is in Pakistan) and its supporters. 

Like the Iraq war escalation, President Obama’s specific objectives are to “target the insurgency” and secure “key population areas.”  But this isn’t Iraq. 

My sense is that this will not work.  The troop level is inadequate, the country lacks basic infrastructure, and the population is extremely impoverished, illiterate and traumatized by violence.  Furthermore, the terrain is unforgiving, the government is non-functional outside of Kabul, history suggests a much larger force is necessary (maybe 750,000?) and the existing government in Afghanistan is corrupt.

In short, Afghanistan is beyond our capabilities of securing, stabilizing and saving.  But we don’t have to build Afghanistan to keep America safe.  Pakistan has nuclear weapons, a functional government, an educated population, infrastructure, and an economic base. Most importantly, al Qaeda is in Pakistan, not Afghanistan.  Many of the dangers to the US and the keys to successfully protecting the US from al Qaeda are in Pakistan and its border region with Afghanistan.

Al Qaeda is limited geographically, unpopular in the region and under pressure from US special operations.  Our goal should be to stabilize Pakistan, destroy al Qaeda and control the border.  In other words, the mission will succeed if it becomes focused exclusively on what we need to keep Americans safe rather than that which we would like Afghanistan to become.