WASHINGTON --Some of President Barack Obama's most fervent supporters are openly questioning the wisdom of his decision to increase U.S. forces in Afghanistan by 30,000 troops next year
In Congress, Democrats are reacting to the president's new war strategy with a mixture of lukewarm support, skepticism and downright resistance. Among the most vocal opponents of Obama's plan: Sen. Russ Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat who is raising the possibility that the Senate could hold back funds for the troop escalation, and Rep.
David Obey, a veteran Democrat from Wisconsin who controls spending in the House and is calling for a war surtax to pay for the troop increase.
Liberal groups, meanwhile, already have begun urging members to call the White House to make their opposition known.
The friction within the Democratic Party could have broad implications for elections across the country next year. The rift also could force Obama to rely more heavily on congressional Republicans, who have generally opposed much of his agenda so far, to get the funding he needs for the troop escalation.
"The left has stuck with Obama thus far very grudgingly," said Ross Baker, a political scientist at Rutgers University. "I think this is further straining the relationship between Obama and Democrats."
Obama's announcement comes at a time when the majority of Americans disapprove of the way he is handling the war in Afghanistan. Roughly 55 percent of those polled said they disapprove of Obama's work on Afghanistan, compared with 34 percent in July, according to a recent Gallup poll. About 57 percent of Democrats want to reduce the number of troops in Afghanistan, according to another Gallup poll.
A day after Obama announced his decision to increase U.S. troops to nearly 100,000 by next summer, a number of Democrats in the House and Senate openly voiced their displeasure over Obama's plan. Appearing on CNN with Wolf Blitzer on Wednesday, Feingold said he disagreed with Obama's approach, saying al-Qaida is not principally based in Afghanistan any longer and that a troop buildup there could further destabilize Pakistan.
"It doesn't make sense," he said. "This seems to move in the wrong direction in almost every respect."
Rep. Dennis Kucinich, a liberal Ohio Democrat, said on Fox that he worried the Taliban would be strengthened as a result of an occupation that would turn more Afghanis against the West.
"If we're going to double down and send in more troops, they're only going to become stronger," he said.
On Wednesday, top members of Obama's administration _ Defense Secretary Robert Gates, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton _ tried to shore up congressional support for the plan at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing.
"Failure in Afghanistan would mean a Taliban takeover of much, if not most, of the country and likely a renewed civil war," Gates said. "Taliban-ruled areas could in short order become once again sanctuary for al-Qaida, as well as a staging area for resurgent military groups on the offensive in Pakistan."
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who ran against Obama in last year's presidential election, noted at the hearing that while he supports the buildup, he thinks the president should not have set a target date to start withdrawing troops.
"A date for withdrawal sends exactly the wrong message to both our friends and our enemies in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the entire region, all of whom currently doubt whether America is committed to winning this war," he said.
Be the first to comment on this article! Log in to Comment
You must be logged in to comment on an article. Not already a member? Register now