Is Barack Obama’s hawkish line on Afghanistan for real?

Ideologically, many Canadians agree with Barack Obama’s more liberal approach rather than that of George W. Bush. However, Obama’s policy on Afghanistan may not align with Canadian sentiment. According to results from an Environics poll in September, 56 percent of Canadians disapprove of Canada’s military role in Afghanistan.

Obama has often said that Iraq is “the wrong war”. He has declared the fight against al-Qaeda and the Taliban a top priority, promising to send two additional combat brigades to Afghanistan. In the October 7 presidential debate, Obama stated that if Osama bin Laden and his colleagues were in the Americans’ sight and “the Pakistani government is unable or unwilling to take them out, then I think that we have to act and we will take them out. We will kill bin Laden; we will crush al-Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national-security priority.”

Some Vancouver academics wonder how Obama’s hawkish stance on Afghanistan and Pakistan will affect Canada’s role in those countries. Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in the recent election campaign that the bulk of Canadian troops in Afghanistan will return home by 2011.

Sunera Thobani, a UBC associate professor of women’s and gender studies, expressed concern about Obama’s commitment to winning a war in Afghanistan that she thinks is “all but lost”. Thobani, who has written and spoken critically about U.S. foreign policy, told the Georgia Straight she hopes that Obama will revisit the Afghanistan issue if he is elected. “Negotiations with the Taliban need to be a part of his plan,” she said in a phone interview. “It’s clear they [the Taliban] are a very strong part of the political environment in Afghanistan.”

Thobani added that a shift toward a more liberal approach to politics in the U.S. provides a “perfect opening” for the antiwar movement to put pressure on Obama to develop a more moderate position on Afghanistan. She also thinks that the more liberal wind could have an impact on Canada, but she doesn’t underestimate Harper’s willingness to stop it.

Last March, when free trade became a hot issue in the Democratic race, it was suspected that Harper’s staff leaked information to the media undermining Obama’s public position. An unnamed source described Obama’s pledge to consider renegotiating NAFTA as “political positioning”, an act that Thobani calls a “clear anti-Obama intervention”.

Thobani is not alone in her belief that an Obama presidency could result in a new approach to Afghanistan. Michael Byers, a UBC political scientist, told the Straight that Obama will be a much more progressive leader than his campaign has led people to believe. “He is being as congruent with mainstream current opinion as possible, trying to appeal to as large a sector as possible,” Byers said in a phone interview.

Byers maintained that Obama must take the necessary steps to become president, and once in that position, he will have the opportunity to be more progressive in his plans. That, he added, includes assessing how many troops should be sent to places such as Afghanistan and Pakistan.

“Mr. Obama won’t be hawkish on Afghanistan,” Byers said. “He will make a concerted effort to reevaluate the situation and see what is the best approach.”

Byers, a former NDP candidate, emphasized that Obama needs to be perceived as tough on terrorism and as someone who can be trusted with the nation’s security. If he isn’t, according to Byers, it will be that much more difficult for him to win the election.

SFU political-science professor Alexander Moens, on the other hand, told the Straight that he believes Obama will follow through on his promise to send more troops to Afghanistan. Moens, a senior fellow at the Fraser Institute, noted that although it would be easier for Harper to work with Republican John McCain, Obama’s promises regarding Afghanistan may benefit the Canadian government. He explained that because of this, the Harper government can discuss what the Obama administration could do on various bilateral files.

“We’ve got to use that as political capital,” Moens said.

Moens recognized that Canadians generally favour Obama on ideological grounds. However, he fears that they aren’t looking at the national best interest. “If they were to vote [hypothetically] with their wallets and their interests, they would be a lot more cautious about Obama,” Moens said.