I am glad we are taking another hard look at our policy in Afghanistan, and the entire region. As history shows, Afghanistan is not the place you would ever pick to fight, as can be seen from over 1,000 years of history. Ask the British who lost practically an entire Army, ask the Russians who recently tried to control Afghanistan and couldn’t. Afghanistan is tribal. A lot of the income from Afghanistan comes from the growing and selling of poppy. Its terrain is incredibly rugged. The idea that young Americans should be at the bottom of a valley trying to defend an outpost makes no sense whatsoever. Even in Vietnam, which was not our finest hour, many of these outposts were on the tops of hills, ridges or mountains.

I would recommend the President go ahead and send the additional troops requested. The reason is to buy time and to make it difficult for Al-Qaeda to function without subjecting itself to a lot of damage. The reason you buy time is not just for Afghanistan, but also for Pakistan, China, Russia, and India. In a recent outstanding article by Bob Kaplan in The New York Times (October 6th), he talks about “Beijing’s Afghan Gamble.” Kaplan points out that American and Chinese interests are similar in wanting a more stable Afghanistan, as China has a state-owned company exploiting copper reserves in Afghanistan which are worth tens of billions of dollars. Furthermore, he said if the U.S. leaves: “Kandahar and other areas will most likely fall to the Taliban, creating a truly lawless realm that wrecks China’s plans for energy and commodities passageway through South Asia.” He goes on to say: “Because of continuing unrest in the Islamic southern tier of the former Soviet Union, Moscow has an interest in America stabilizing Afghanistan.”

India obviously does not want to be involved in a nuclear war. Pakistan has nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. A destabilized Afghanistan/Pakistan could affect the whole Mid-East. Pakistan has political, economic, and military problems. Its economy is fragile and there is a great deal of corruption in the government. Pakistan has a long way to go to build a true civil society.

My recommendation would be to stabilize Afghanistan, and create a strong Afghanistan army and police force. We should increase the aid to Pakistan so that over the next five years you would end up with a Pakistan that can stand on its own. During the five year period we can draw down U.S. troops as we increase the aid to Pakistan. We cannot expect much military help from our allies. In combat situations we are getting help, as usual, from the Brits, the Australians, and the Canadians. That’s about it. There is also some small but appreciated help from other NATO nations.

If we use our time in the correct way, emphasizing more help for Pakistan, we should be able to have a stable situation in five years. I know many will throw up their hands and say we can’t wait that long. I am open to any common sense suggestions that would cut down our time in Afghanistan and help stabilize Pakistan.

Thank you for forwarding this e-newsletter and introducing your friends to The Frey Report. Please continue to share the Report by using the TELL A FRIEND hyperlink at the bottom of this newsletter.

Lou Frey represented East and Central Florida in the U. S. Congress from 1969 to 1979.  He was the fourth Republican elected to Congress from Florida since the late 1800's.  In his last election, he received nearly 80% of the vote.  He was one of five elected Republican leaders in the House of Representatives during the 93^rd and 94^th Congress.  He served on...