Abstract
On May 1, 2012, President Barack Obama made an address in Kabul, Afghanistan regarding the future of America's involvement in Afghanistan. Over the course of the speech, the President details the signing of an "historic agreement" between the two countries that establishes their relationship for the foreseeable future, one in which an "equal partnership" is created and the war in Afghanistan is slowly ended. Over the course of this speech, and in the plan itself, President Obama reveals a very neoliberalist attitude taken toward the United States and its relationship with Afghanistan; instead of conquering the country, or attempting to simply pull out of its involvement in their affairs, the equal partnership alluded to in the plan and in the speech demonstrates a desire for absolute gains for all countries involve, rather than just relative gains.
In creating the agreement to slowly pull out while training Afghan security forces and negotiating a peace for both Afghanistan and South Asia, Obama seeks to create "complex interdependence" between these nations; Afghanistan needs American troops to help them maintain stability during the transition, and the United States needs Afghanistan to galvanize support throughout the rest of South Asia for peace.
On May 1, 2012, President Barack Obama made an address in Kabul, Afghanistan regarding the future of America's involvement in Afghanistan. Over the course of the speech, the President details the signing of an "historic agreement" between the two countries that establishes their relationship for the foreseeable future, one in which an "equal partnership" is created and the war in Afghanistan is slowly ended. Over the course of this speech, and in the plan itself, President Obama reveals a very neoliberalist attitude taken toward the United States and its relationship with Afghanistan; instead of conquering the country, or attempting to simply pull out of its involvement in their affairs, the equal partnership alluded to in the plan and in the speech demonstrates a desire for absolute gains for all countries involve, rather than just relative gains. By decentralizing the relationship, Obama establishes a sense of complex interdependence between the two nations that connect them inexorably. This is meant to achieve more amicable foreign relations and establish a more lenient foreign policy on Obama's part.
Neoliberalism, as it relates to international relations, emphasizes the importance of decisions regarding policy in terms of absolute gains. What this means is that the decision must make sense within the international community, weighing its total effect on the nation state as a whole. In the case of Afghanistan, there are myriad pressures on the President to make this kind of accord. First, we have been in Afghanistan since 2002, and we showed no signs of letting up. We have lost people over there, and both Americans and Afghanis are anxious to have American forces pull out. However, the Afghan government still requires some help establishing a stable economy and government in the shadow of the Taliban. With that in mind, Obama's agreement is a very neoliberalist move; wealth and wellbeing is meant to expand by making these decisions to merge and collaborate with Afghanistan. "The agreement we signed today sends a clear message to the Afghan people: as you stand up, you will not stand alone" (Obama, 2012).
Of course, Obama does make it evident that the gains both countries receive have to be the result of a united front, with a direct communication with what remains of the Taliban in order to negotiate peace. This falls in with the ideals of neoliberalism where a united effort and consensus must be reached to find absolute gains. "We have made it clear that they can be a part of this future if they break with al Qaeda, renounce violence, and abide by Afghan laws" (Obama, 2012).
Obama then goes into the concept of a global consensus, extending the agreement beyond just the US and Afghanistan to the international community on the whole; Afghanistan's partner, Pakistan, is noted to be an integral part of this agreement going through. "In pursuit of a durable peace, America has no designs beyond an end to al Qaeda safe-havens, and respect for Afghan sovereignty" (Obama, 2012). He makes sure to state this in order to establish that America is not interested in total victory over Afghanistan, and wants them to be able to stand on their own two feet. Obama openly criticizes the cliche that America is an imperialist nation, or at least will act imperialistically in this decision; "our goal is not to build a country in America’s image, or to eradicate every vestige of the Taliban Our goal is to destroy al Qaeda, and we are on a path to do exactly that" (Obama, 2012).
Obama, recognizing the need to appease American voters and citizens, makes sure to emphasize the troops' role in the efforts in Afghanistan - a laudable goal, and one which helps to keep American citizens on board with this equal partnership with Afghanistan. "This future is only within reach because of our men and women in uniform" (Obama, 2012). At the same time, he emphasizes the ideals that the soldiers, both living and dead, fought for - the ones that have fuelled this neoliberalist need for absolute gains on the part of the international community;"through dark days we have drawn strength from their example, and the ideals that have guided our nation and lit the world: a belief that all people are created equal, and deserve the freedom to determine their destiny" (Obama, 2012). By emphasizing "all people," he includes the people of Afghanistan, linking their destinies with those of American lives, and creating that relationship he hops the American people can stand behind.
In creating the agreement to slowly pull out while training Afghan security forces and negotiating a peace for both Afghanistan and South Asia, Obama seeks to create "complex interdependence" between these nations; Afghanistan needs American troops to help them maintain stability during the transition, and the United States needs Afghanistan to galvanize support throughout the rest of South Asia for peace. According to Keohane and Nye, issues of a nation state are not hierarchical; there is no issue that is more or less important than foreign policy (1977).
Obama seeks to create complex interdependence in order to eliminate the need for military force, which is no longer required to settle disputes. Instead, the mutual needs of all parties involved negates the need for conflict requiring a military. To that end, Obama seeks to pull out the troops and replace their presence with peaceful cooperation between nations. Instead of furthering the agenda of a neorealist perspective, where relative gains are valued and a country's progress is weighed comparative to others', Obama seeks to unite the international community and build bridges that can lead to greater relations in the Middle East. This speech was meant to be one brick in the foundation of a more unilateral initiative of creating stable, self-sustained government that remains peaceful for decades to come.
Works Cited
Evans, Graham. The Penguin Dictionary of International Relations. London: Penguin Books.
Keohane, Robert O. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy.
Princeton, 1984. Print.
Keohane, Robert O. , and Joseph S. Nye. Power and Interdependence: World Politics in
Transition. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1977.
Mearsheimer,. John J. "A Realist Reply,” International Security 20, no. 1, Summer 1995. p. 82.
Obama, Barack. "Text of Obama's Speech in Afghanistan." The New York Times, May 1, 2012.
Print.
