[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 141 (Wednesday, September 21, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1673-E1674]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




 CORRESPONDENCE WITH PRESIDENT OBAMA ON THE AFGHANISTAN/PAKISTAN STUDY 
                                 GROUP

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. FRANK R. WOLF

                              of virginia

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 21, 2011

  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, I have been writing President Obama and 
administration officials since August 2010 outlining my concerns about 
the progress of the war in Afghanistan and asking that an Afghanistan/
Pakistan Study Group be established to engage outside experts to bring 
fresh eyes to U.S. strategy in South Asia.
  It's now over a year later and the administration continues to balk 
at any suggestion for such a panel to be formed. Yet we continue to 
read headlines every week reporting about casualties among our brave 
troops and stepped up attacks by the Taliban, including assassinations 
of Afghan leaders.
  I firmly believe that success in South Asia requires a complete 
reexamination of U.S. policy with both Afghanistan and Pakistan. 
Establishing the Af/Pak Stud Group will demonstrate that U.S. political 
leaders and government officials are willing to take whatever steps 
necessary to ensure we have the best strategy for long-term success in 
South Asia.
  I will begin today to insert in the Record my correspondence with the 
administration on this matter. My letter of August 4, 2010, to the 
president follows:
                                    Congress of the United States,


                                     House of Representatives,

                                   Washington, DC, August 4, 2010.
     Hon. Barack H. Obama,
     The President,
     The White House, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: On September 14, 2001, following the 
     catastrophic and deliberate terrorist attack on our country, 
     I voted to go to war in Afghanistan. I stand by that decision 
     and have the utmost confidence in General Petraeus's proven 
     leadership. I also remain unequivocally committed to the 
     success of our mission there and to the more than 100,000 
     American troops sacrificing toward that end. In fact, it is 
     this

[[Page E1674]]

     commitment which has led me to write to you. While I have 
     been a consistent supporter of the war effort in both 
     Afgahnistan and Iraq, I believe that with this support comes 
     a responsibility. This was true during a Republican 
     administration in the midst of the wars, and it remains true 
     today.
       In 2005, I returned from my third trip to Iraq where I saw 
     firsthand the deteriorating security situation. I was deeply 
     concerned that Congress was failing to exercise the necessary 
     oversight of the war effort. Against this backdrop I authored 
     the legislation that created the Iraq Study Group (ISG). The 
     ISG was a 10-member bipartisan group of well-respected, 
     nationally known figures who were brought together with the 
     help of four reputable organizations--the U.S. Institute for 
     Peace, the Center for the Study of the Presidency, the Center 
     for Strategic and International Studies, and the Baker 
     Institute for Public Policy at Rice University--and charged 
     with undertaking a comprehensive review of U.S. efforts 
     there. This panel was intended to serve as ``fresh eyes on 
     the target''--the target being success in Iraq.
       While reticent at first, to their credit President Bush, 
     State Secretary Rice and Defense Secretary Rumsfeld came to 
     support the ISG, ably led by bipartisan co-chairs, former 
     Secretary of State James Baker and former Congressman Lee 
     Hamilton. Two members of your national security team, 
     Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and CIA Director Leon 
     Panetta, saw the merit of the ISG and, in fact, served on the 
     panel. Vice President Biden, too, then serving in the Senate, 
     was supportive and saw it as a means to unite the Congress at 
     a critical time. A number of the ISG's recommendations and 
     ideas were adopted. Retired General Jack Keane, senior 
     military adviser to the ISG, was a lead proponent of ``the 
     surge,'' and the ISG referenced the possibility on page 73. 
     Aside from the specific policy recommendations of the panel, 
     the ISG helped force a moment of truth in our national 
     conversation about the war effort.
       I believe our nation is again facing such a moment in the 
     Afghanistan war effort, and that a similar model is needed. 
     In recent days I have spoken with a number of knowledgeable 
     individuals including former senior diplomats, public policy 
     experts and retired and active military. Many believe our 
     Afghanistan policy is adrift, and all agreed that there is an 
     urgent need for what I call an Afghanistan-Pakistan Study 
     Group (APG). We must examine our efforts in the region 
     holistically, given Pakistan's strategic significance to 
     our efforts in Afghanistan and the Taliban's presence in 
     that country as well, especially in the border areas.
       This likely will not come as a surprise to you as commander 
     in chief. You are well acquainted with the sobering 
     statistics of the past several weeks--notably that July 
     surpassed June as the deadliest month for U.S. troops. There 
     is a palpable shift in the nation's mood and in the halls of 
     Congress. A July 2010 CBS news poll found that 62 percent of 
     Americans say the war is going badly in Afghanistan, up from 
     49 percent in May. Further, last week, 102 Democrats voted 
     against the war spending bill, which is 70 more than last 
     year, and they were joined by 12 members of my own party. 
     Senator Lindsay Graham, speaking last Sunday on CNN's ``State 
     of the Union,'' candidly expressed concern about an ``unholy 
     alliance'' emerging of anti-war Democrats and Republicans.
       I have heard it said that Vietnam was not lost in Saigon; 
     rather, it was lost in Washington. While the Vietnam and 
     Afghanistan parallels are imperfect at best, the shadow of 
     history looms large. Eroding political will has 
     consequences--and in the case of Afghanistan, the stakes 
     could not be higher. A year ago, speaking before the Veterans 
     of Foreign Wars National Convention, you rightly said, 
     ``Those who attacked America on 9/11 are plotting to do so 
     again. If left unchecked, the Taliban insurgency will mean an 
     even larger safe haven from which al Qaeda would plot to kill 
     more Americans. So this is not only a war worth fighting . . 
     . this is fundamental to the defense of our people.'' Indeed 
     it is fundamental. We must soberly consider the implication 
     of failure in Afghanistan. Those that we know for certain are 
     chilling--namely an emboldened al Qaeda, a reconstituted 
     Taliban with an open staging ground for future worldwide 
     attacks, and a destabilized, nuclear-armed Pakistan.
       Given these realities and wavering public and political 
     support, I urge you to act immediately, through executive 
     order, to convene an Afghanistan-Pakistan Study Group modeled 
     after the Iraq Study Group. The participation of nationally 
     known and respected individuals is of paramount importance. 
     Among the names that surfaced in my discussions with others, 
     all of whom more than meet the criteria described above, are 
     ISO co-chairs Baker and Hamilton; former Senators Chuck Robb, 
     Bob Kerrey and Sam Nunn; former Congressman Duncan Hunter; 
     former U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker, former Secretary of 
     Defense James Schlesinger, and General Keane. These names are 
     simply suggestions among a cadre of capable men and women, as 
     evidenced by the make-up of the ISG, who would be more than 
     up to the task.
       I firmly believe that an Afghanistan-Pakistan Study Group 
     could reinvigorate national confidence in how America can be 
     successful and move toward a shared mission in Afghanistan. 
     This is a crucial task. On the Sunday morning news shows this 
     past weekend, it was unsettling to hear conflicting 
     statements from within the leadership of the administration 
     that revealed a lack of clarity about the endgame in 
     Afghanistan. How much more so is this true for the rest of 
     the country? An APSG is necessary for precisely that reason. 
     We are nine years into our nation's longest running war and 
     the American people and their elected representatives do not 
     have a clear sense of what we are aiming to achieve, why it 
     is necessary and how far we are from attaining that goal. 
     Further, an APSG could strengthen many of our NATO allies in 
     Afghanistan who are also facing dwindling public support, as 
     evidenced by the recent Dutch troop withdrawal, and would 
     give them a tangible vision to which to commit.
       Just as was true at the time of the Iraq Study Group, I 
     believe that Americans of all political viewpoints, liberals 
     and conservatives alike, and varied opinions on the war will 
     embrace this ``fresh eyes'' approach. Like the previous 
     administration's support of the Iraq Study Group, which 
     involved taking the group's members to Iraq and providing 
     high-level access to policy and decision makers, I urge you 
     to embrace an Afghanistan-Pakistan Study Group. It is always 
     in our national interest to openly assess the challenges 
     before us and to chart a clear course to success.
       As you know, the full Congress comes back in session in 
     mid-September--days after Americans around the country will 
     once again pause and remember that horrific morning nine 
     years ago when passenger airlines became weapons, when the 
     skyline of one of America's greatest cities was forever 
     changed, when a symbol of America's military might was left 
     with a gaping hole. The experts with whom I have spoken in 
     recent days believe that time is of the essence in moving 
     forward with a study panel, and waiting for Congress to 
     reconvene is too long to wait. As such, I am hopeful you will 
     use an executive order and the power of the bully pulpit to 
     convene this group in short order, and explain to the 
     American people why it is both necessary and timely. Should 
     you choose not to take this path, respectfully, I intend to 
     offer an amendment by whatever vehicle necessary to mandate 
     the group's creation at the earliest possible opportunity.
       The ISO's report opened with a letter from the co-chairs 
     that read, ``There is no magic formula to solve the problems 
     of Iraq. However, there are actions that can be taken to 
     improve the situation and protect American interests.'' The 
     same can be said of Afghanistan.
       I understand that you are a great admirer of Abraham 
     Lincoln. He too, governed during a time of war, albeit a war 
     that pitted brother against brother, and father against son. 
     In the midst of that epic struggle, he relied on a cabinet 
     with strong, oftentimes opposing viewpoints. Historians 
     assert this served to develop his thinking on complex 
     matters. Similarly, while total agreement may not emerge from 
     a study group for Afghanistan and Pakistan, I believe that 
     vigorous, thoughtful and principled debate and discussion 
     among some of our nation's greatest minds on these matters 
     will only serve the national interest. The biblical 
     admonition that iron sharpens iron rings true.
       Best wishes.
       P.S. We as a nation must be successful in Afghanistan. We 
     owe this to our men and women in the military serving in 
     harm's way and to the American people.

                          ____________________