U.S. Foreign Service Officer Matthew Hoh has resigned his position in Zabul, Afghanistan over protest about the direction of the war in Afghanistan. His protest is not about how the war is being pursued, but is about the why and to what end we are still involved.
Mr. Hoh, 36, is an intelligent man with Marine Corps combat experience in Iraq. Plus he has served in uniform at the Pentagon, and as a civilian in Iraq and at the State Department. Until his resignation, he was the senior U.S. civilian in Zabul province.
He has stated in an interview that there are others who are considering the same step he has taken however, he is the first to have done so.
A traitor? Did he jump ship too soon? Or is he a hero who has brought the feelings of many to the attention of the general public?
Let's discuss. I would love to hear your opinions.
U.S. official resigns over Afghan war
Foreign Service officer and former Marine captain says he no longer knows why his nation is fighting
A former Marine Corps captain with combat experience in Iraq, Hoh had also served in uniform at the Pentagon, and as a civilian in Iraq and at the State Department. By July, he was the senior U.S. civilian in Zabul province, a Taliban hotbed.
But last month, in a move that has sent ripples all the way to the White House, Hoh, 36, became the first U.S. official known to resign in protest over the Afghan war, which he had come to believe simply fueled the insurgency.
"I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan," he wrote Sept. 10 in afour-page letter to the department's head of personnel. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."
The reaction to Hoh's letter was immediate. Senior U.S. officials, concerned that they would lose an outstanding officer and perhaps gain a prominent critic, appealed to him to stay.
U.S. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry brought him to Kabul and offered him a job on his senior embassy staff. Hoh declined. From there, he was flown home for a face-to-face meeting with Richard C. Holbrooke, the administration's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
"We took his letter very seriously, because he was a good officer," Holbrooke said in an interview. "We all thought that given how serious his letter was, how much commitment there was, and his prior track record, we should pay close attention to him."
While he did not share Hoh's view that the war "wasn't worth the fight," Holbrooke said, "I agreed with much of his analysis." He asked Hoh to join his team in Washington, saying that "if he really wanted to affect policy and help reduce the cost of the war on lives and treasure," why not be "inside the building, rather than outside, where you can get a lot of attention but you won't have the same political impact?"
Hoh accepted the argument and the job, but changed his mind a week later. "I recognize the career implications, but it wasn't the right thing to do," he said in an interview Friday, two days after his resignation became final.
"I'm not some peacenik, pot-smoking hippie who wants everyone to be in love," Hoh said. Although he said his time in Zabul was the "second-best job I've ever had," his dominant experience is from the Marines, where many of his closest friends still serve.
But many Afghans, he wrote in his resignation letter, are fighting the United States largely because its troops are there -- a growing military presence in villages and valleys where outsiders, including other Afghans, are not welcome and where the corrupt, U.S.-backed national government is rejected. While the Taliban is a malign presence, and Pakistan-based al-Qaeda needs to be confronted, he said, the United States is asking its troops to die in Afghanistan for what is essentially a far-off civil war.
U.S. official resigns over Afghan war continued...
Resignation Letter from US Foreign Service Officer Matthew P. Hoh
I like how pundits who spend their time casting doubt on the assessments and opinions of those with in-depth understanding of Afghanistan and NATO operations there jump at the chance to sing the praises of others with in-depth understanding of Afghanistan and NATO operations when they conveniently advance assessments and opinions that match up with conclusions they themselves have already reached. (Here's but one example.)
On Huffington Post, Earl Ofari Hutchinson urged the president to listen to Mr. Hoh lest Afghanistan ruin his domestic agenda and severely wound Democrats in the 2010 midterm elections.
Malou Innocent of the libertarian Cato Institute, also writing on Huffington Post, said that Mr. Hoh had largely echoed her view that the conflict involves “a local and regional ethnic Pashtun population fighting against what they perceive to be a foreign occupation of their region; that our current strategy does not answer why and to what end we are pursuing this war; and that Afghanistan holds little intrinsic strategic value to the security of the United States.”
But on his blog Forward Movement, Jules Crittenden argues that Mr. Hoh has given in to despair, that defeating the Taliban and Al Qaeda will require far more patience and resolve and that drawing down in Afghanistan now will show America’s enemies that “If you bleed them, they will run.”
On The Captain’s Journal, TSAlfabet wrote, “As I predicted months ago, this Admin will not commit the resources to win this fight, so getting out, as horrible as that would be, is less evil than sacrificing troops to a half-hearted approach that is under-resourced and, therefore, doomed to failure.”
Andrew Exum, an occasional adviser to General McChrystal who blogs at Abu Muqawama, counseled caution in making too much of Mr. Hoh’s resignation.
A summary from the Diplopundit says:
Resignation of Matthew Hoh /Admire Mr. Hoh and Respect Sacrifices Made for His Country / Take His Opinions Seriously / Senior Officials Have Spoken With Him / Respect His Right to Dissent /Had Limited, Non-Career Appointment / Political Officer in PRT in Zabul/Believe We're on Track to Achieving Goals President Has Set Before Us/No Resignations By Career Foreign Service Officers Over Afghanistan/Allegation of Desecration of Qu'ran Denied by Pentagon
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 43
I consider him to be a brilliant man, who for reasons unknown, went along with the lies. He ended up resigning anyway, so what did he lose, except his own self-respect?
His Powell Doctrine left marks on both our society and Armed forces that still are being felt today. Chief among them was the decision to eliminate most Regular service and support/many combat support units to force a reliance on the Guard/Reserve for virtually any conflict. We can see how that has worked out.
So revering Powell is revering an image, not the reality of the man.
I'd hate to be in their shoes with an inept Commander in Chief, unable to make any decisions.
Ehren Watada, Army First Lt, is still waiting to learn if he will be on trial again or allowed to resign from the Army after Refusing to go to IRAQ after a tour in Afghanistan. He said that the war in Iraq was illegal.
One of the side effects of the 8 years GW Bush was Commander in Chief was the retirement of hundreds, perhaps thousands of experienced Officers, ranging from the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, TWO...to veterans of the Gulf War because they could not honorably fight the Iraq war.
Military people OFTEN stand on principal. It is the nature of the "Officer and Gentleman" to hold HONOR above nearly all else.
"Only 30% of the money we spend goes to Afghanistan. 70% goes to corporations getting big contracts," Wright said. "War is a racket and we're seeing it."
"Afghanistan is a quagmire and it's going to be sucking the life out of the Administration. Obama said as a candidate he would increase the war in Afghanistan and be taking us into Pakistan," Wright said.
"I think 40,000 new US troops is going to be very dangerous for America," Wright said. "The US has 135,000 still in Iraq. Obama is sticking to the timeline the Bush Administration had. We may still have 50,000 for a long time to go. Plus there are 180,000 contractors in Iraq with private security firms."
"I think we need to be very, very forceful with the new President. We need to take to the streets, we need to let the President know what we want. He said he wants us to talk to him."
"I want him to succeed... but he's got to succeed at getting us out of wars we shouldn't have gotten into. With Afghanistan, maybe there was sort of a reason to go in in the first place, but we stayed longer than we should've."
"The people of Afghanistan will take their country back. The question is if the US leaves with its tail between its legs, or we could say we're leaving you with schools, roads... thank you very much, we're going back home," Wright said.
with thanks Linda
Mark
Cathi L, sorry honey, not Linda
If he is right and this is something many on the Left and some on the Right have said for quite some time, then we need to either find a way to change the locals hearts/minds or pull out. If one of our guys is willing to make such a statement and obviously mean it, then it's likely time for a rethink. God knows I don't want this to keep shuffling along, either we do it 'right' or we pull out.
I understand the effort that has been put into training the ANA and the ANP. The ANA, to my mind, has been coming along well, albeit slowly. The ANP seems to be a different story, partially due to cultural differences, partially due to graft, corruption and a whole slue of other factors. But what we seem to be doing is training them to replace us as an occupying force. To carry on the same mission against the Taliban and all those who are aligned with the Taliban.
Doing it 'right' according to the current thinking seems to be far more than we can give and far more than allies are willing to give, at least at this time.
I agree that Hoh has put his career on the line where our political/military senior leadership needs to stand up for their principles. I think Hoh has provided a good and visual example but I'm concerned that the senior leadership is too willing to write him off.
My son has been in the Army for over 6 years now and this is the first time he's spent more than a year of it stateside. It's his job and I'm proud of him for doing it but I wish the political mucky mucks would get their act together and soon.
I wish the political mucky mucks would get their act together and soon.
DITTO
How many times has your son been deployed in 6 years??
3 times to Iraq and once to Afghanistan
Afghanistan is ONLY governable if the "government" cedes power to the pathologically religious warlords and self-appointed neighborhood enforcers of rectitude. Afghan is, as are ALL islamic nations, a 17th century country in a 21st century world. We need to be gone from there.
If the history of Afghanistan is one great stage play, the United States is no more than a supporting actor, among several previously, in a tragedy that not only pits tribes, valleys, clans, villages and families against one another, but, from at least the end of King Zahir Shah’s reign, has violently and savagely pitted the urban, secular, educated and modern of Afghanistan against the rural, religious, illiterate and traditional.
It's the "rural, religious, illiterate and traditional" who support the Pashtun insurgency. Plus the Pashtuns make up the largest group in Afghanistan, which doesn't bode will for change.
Before, I wasn't so willing to compare Vietnam with Afghanistan, but you're right and I fully agree, it's now sounding like the same old story "played out the same way."
Do you really see it as merely a conflict? This sounds almost like a conscientious objector situation and that's not what I see in it.
Thank you for taking the time to read. It is much appreciated.