By The Kansas City Star Editorial Board

Shortly after Thanksgiving, President Barack Obama is expected to announce the way forward for the United States in Afghanistan. There is no simple solution, but it is clear that a radical rethink of our effort is needed.

Nothing about Afghanistan has ever been easy. For millennia, it’s been the graveyard of empires. It has not changed.

What has changed over the last few years is the U.S. mission. At first, it was clear: Get Osama bin Laden, destroy al Qaeda and ensure this harsh land would no longer serve as a base for terrorists bent on harming Americans. Eight years after 9/11, that mission is muddy.

Too often, parallels to the Iraq efforts were made to explain U.S. efforts in Afghanistan. But Iraq is a nation with natural resources, an educated populace and a history of a working civil society.
America has to resist the temptation to nation-build in Afghanistan, a sure route to quagmire.

Afghanistan is now Obama’s war, and he needs to once again clarify the mission: Wipe out al Qaeda, and its ability to re-establish in the impossible terrain of southern Afghanistan. Capture or kill bin Laden. Focus on the needs of Pakistan to quell the insurgency there.

After he’s established the what, the president will need to determine the how. There he has choices.

Keep American troops at the 68,000 level, where they’ve been taking record casualties this year. The high risks and low results make this option unlikely.

Bump up forces by another 30,000 to 40,000, the number Gen. Stanley McChrystal wants for counterinsurgency efforts. Some now doubt the possible success of a counterinsurgency strategy in a nation without a strong government, where fighting appears to be between a series of warring tribes, not a concentrated effort against Kabul.

Withdraw. This seems a route to disaster.

Shrink the force. In some military circles, there are rumblings that perhaps 6,000 Special Forces could effectively hunt down bin Laden and the small number of al Qaeda members still in the Afghan mountains, build good will on the ground, and ensure the area would no longer be a launching pad for anti-American activities.

Despite heavy criticism, the president should take his time on this decision.
Whatever he decides, he has to know much of what needs to be done cannot be successful through Kabul. The current, highly corrupt regime in Kabul barely has Afghan support inside the capital, much less in the provinces.

In the capital, U.S. forces can train a military and police force that can take over.

Afghanistan says it can be ready within five years, and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton this week said America would help achieve that goal.

Beyond Kabul, though, U.S. efforts should be directed at the provinces, building roads and schools, digging wells, stringing electrical lines and offering agricultural advice. But these can be civilian goals. There’s a growing belief in the military that some sections of the Taliban can be flipped, and working with those elements is essential.

Long-term solutions mean leaving a country that can protect its borders, feed, clothe and house its people, and trade with the rest of the world. Afghanistan cannot hope to do any of these things in the near future. With Afghanistan’s economy based on poppy production, the United States will not want to promote its only viable economy.

Capturing or killing bin Laden would offer Americans some sense of justice, although the risks would remain from anti-Western terrorists with or without his presence.
At best, perhaps U.S. forces could create pockets inside Afghanistan that would remain friendly for years to come.