My Turn: Winning war requires both power and will
Our troops have been fighting in Afghanistan now for nearly four years and in Iraq for nearly two and a half.
When the “global war on terrorism” began, U.S. public support for it was high. Now, as the war drags on and casualties mount, public support is waning.
Reasons for the recent decline in public support vary. Critics blame the Bush administration for allegedly misleading the American people by citing “weapons of mass destruction” as the rationale for going to war in Iraq, then mishandling that war by employing too few troops to handle unforeseen contingencies following the “Baghdad Blitz.”
Be that as it may, we are at war, and the stakes are high, for Afghanistan, for Iraq, and for us. Clearly, we have the power to prevail. The question is: do we have the will? As a two-tour combat veteran of Vietnam, I wonder.
Even some of our leaders seem to wavering in their resolve. Senior White House and Pentagon officials have been changing their rhetoric lately. We hear less these days about the “global war on terrorism” and more about the “global struggle against violent extremism.”
To some, this might seem like a distinction without a difference. Maybe, maybe not.
Apparently, the “global struggle” language is meant to convey the notion that winning against the Islamic terrorists requires more than just a military response to the challenges these terrorists pose for national and international security. Though true, this notion rather naively ignores the fact that all wars are about more than just the military forces that have to fight them. They are first and foremost, political. They deal with diametrically opposite political values. They also deal with national will.
For example, in World War II, the last war we actually won, the difference in the political values of our enemies and those we and our allies espoused was deep and dramatic. Even then, it took the traumatic and galvanizing effect of the Japanese Empire’s attack on Pearl Harbor to unite the nation.?It also took courageous leadership, civilian and military, to prevail against the Axis powers of Germany, Japan, and Italy.
Our allies, too, knew what was at stake in World War II. Together, we persevered and ultimately prevailed over that other “axis of evil.”
The Korean War was a different story. Even President Truman was loath to call it a “war,” preferring instead, the euphemistic phrase, “police action.”
However, as those who fought there know best, it was war, pure and simple, with all the hardship, horror, calamity, and courage that defines war. The upshot of that conflict was a stalemate. Fifty-two years later, we are still grappling with the North Korean threat to regional and world peace.
The Vietnam War, though long and divisive, was essentially a limited war on our part. For the North Vietnamese, though, it was a total war. They prevailed, not because they had more power, but because they had more will.
The point is, wars, including the global war on terrorism, are not fought in a vacuum.?They are fought, won, and lost over conflicting political values.
They require both power and will to prevail.
(Thomas B. Vaughn?is a professor at Motlow College and co-host of radio show “Viewpoints,” which airs on WCPI 91.3 FM.)