On that day in 2009 few foresaw just how serious and deep a recession we were entering. State budgets were slashed just as more and more people needed services to prevent economic catastrophes in their own lives. Congress engaged in heated debates about spending, and almost allowed the government to shut down. We at WAND were pleased to see that after a decade of unchecked growth in the Pentagon budget, there was finally some action in Congress to limit Pentagon spending, but there is still much more to be done. We will continue to work with members on both sides of the aisle to bring fiscal discipline to Pentagon spending. We cannot afford to spend money on weapons we don’t need and pad Pentagon contractors’ pockets. We must fight for investments in the things that make us strong here at home and counter the influence of Pentagon lobbyists.

President Obama campaigned for an end to the Iraq War and he quickly followed through on that promise. He is also bringing an end to the war in Afghanistan. Yet we know that even as our troops come home, we must ensure that women and children in Afghanistan do not lose the gains they have made. We must continue to work for political, not military, solutions to the conflict in Afghanistan. We can
also do more to ensure the rights of women all over the world with ratification of CEDAW, the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, and passing legislation in support of the National Action Place on Women, Peace, and Security.

Successful, bipartisan ratification of the New START Treaty (Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) was a huge victory in December 2010. We will continue to push for ratification of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. President Obama’s speech in Prague in the spring of 2010 was a reminder that while we may have a long road ahead of us, a world free of nuclear weapons is a goal worth working for. First up, we must stop pouring billions of dollars into maintaining and modernizing these Cold War-era relics. WAND has been working for a world safe from the threat of nuclear weapons for over thirty years. We’ll continue this fight in the next four years of President Obama’s administration.

Finally, how could we not celebrate the record number of women entering Congress this year? We are eager to get to work with returning champions on our issues and bring newly elected women into critical debates about our national security and budget priorities. This year’s Inauguration Day falls on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day. As he so powerfully said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.” We may be starting this term with less unbridled optimism, but we know that our priories are worth fighting for and we will continue to work hard with all of our WAND members for a better country and a better world.

WAND celebrates this news.

We are also pushing forward to expedite homecoming for troops in Afghanistan.

As we reflect on this past decade of war and the toll it has taken, we especially recommend this op-ed Our Children Will Finally Learn that Wars Can and Do End by Ryan McDermott.

 

In going to war, I learned to better appreciate the basic things that life offers more than I did before, such as holding my son. Hopefully, our leaders of this and subsequent generations will learn that wars always require more sacrifice than expected and that the human costs continue even after the troops come home. Perhaps we will avoid the next Iraq War. History suggests that the odds are stacked against us.

For our children, who have known only wars that do not end, they will soon learn that wars can and do end.

-Originally published in The Huffington Post

Below is a compilation of statements from WAND/WiLL women about the 10th Anniversary of the War in Afghanistan.

Representative Yvette D. Clarke (D-NY)

“I rise today in recognition of the tenth anniversary of the war with Afghanistan.  For ten years our country, and the brave men and women who fight for us on the battlefield, have been mired in a seemingly unwinnable war in Afghanistan, a war that has resulted in tens of thousands of casualties, and the death of 1,723 American service members.  More and more Americans are expressing a desire to end the war in Afghanistan.

“Recent polls have shown that 73% of Americans want to withdraw troops, and 66% of all veterans believe the war is not worth its cost.  There is no better time than now, on the 10th anniversary of this war, to reevaluate the continued conflict, and to commit to bringing our troops home.

“It is irresponsible to continue to spend over one hundred billion dollars a year on a war that Americans support less and less each day, especially as our country tries to fight its way out of the worst economic recession of our lifetimes.  This is money that is desperately needed domestically, and would be better spent on fixing our deteriorating infrastructure and fixing our education system.

“Our mission after September 11th 2001 was to dismantle the infrastructure of al-Qaeda and to bring Osama bin Laden to justice, and there is no denying that the current administration and our courageous men and women serving overseas have accomplished these goals.  It is time to bring our troops home, reinvest in our nation, and let the Afghani people take responsibility for securing their own nation.

“I believe the time to withdraw from Afghanistan is now, which is why I joined my colleagues from both sides of the aisle in support of H.R. 651, the United States-Afghanistan Status of Forces Agreement Act of 2011 which would establish a redeployment date for U.S. troops.  I will continue to work with my colleagues in Congress, the President, and commanders in our Armed Forces to press for a speedier end to this war.  I yield back the balance of my time.”

- October 6, 2011

Representative Barbara Lee (D-CA)

“After ten years and $460 billion invested in an unstable country with untrustworthy leadership, it is past time to end the war in Afghanistan,” said Congresswoman Lee.  “Ten years is ten years too long for this wasteful war; it is time to bring our troops and our tax dollars home.  That’s why I introduced HR 780 to safely and swiftly redeploy all combat troops and military contractors from Afghanistan.”

Panelists discussed the cost of ten years of endless warfare since the overly broad Authorization of Use of Military Force was approved in 2001.  Thousands of soldiers’ lives have been lost, civilian Afghani casualties continue to destabilize efforts for peace, and the United States has committed to borrowing trillions of precious dollars to an open-ended military commitment.  Civil liberties have been compromised, there have been illegal wiretaps, unlawful detentions, the use of torture – all justified in the name of fighting the war on terrorism.

Boston University Professor of Political Science and United States Foreign Policy Neta Crawford provided the following testimony at the hearing: “The costs in blood and treasure in Afghanistan for the U.S., its allies, and for Afghans have been underestimated and undercounted. A comprehensive accounting shows that the intensity of the war is increasing, not decreasing.”

Panelists also discussed peaceful alternatives to military action in Afghanistan.  Ria Dellawar, an expert on Afghanistan testified that “with the surge, the violence has escalated and any opportunity for dialogue has closed.  Despite the failure of counter-insurgency to stop the Taliban and rising civilian and troop casualties, the U.S. continues to pursue its military-first strategy.”

“Afghan civil society leaders want a shift in military strategy,” said Lisa Schirch, Director of 3P Human Security: Partners for Peacebuilding Policy.  “Excluding key stakeholders, especially diverse sectors of civil society, will create a recipe for failure.”

-October 7, 2011

Representative Louise Slaughter (D-NY)

"Let's not forget why we entered Afghanistan 10 years ago: to find Osama bin Laden and prevent Al-Qaeda from using the country as a base to attack the United States. Bin Laden is gone, Al-Qaeda has been scattered around the globe, and yet we continue to risk the lives of brave Americans and squander billions of dollars after a decade of interminable conflict. We have spent $444 billion on the war in Afghanistan – all on the nation's credit card. At least $31 billion has vanished into thin air due to contracting waste, fraud, and abuse during wars over the past 10 years. Ask yourself: how many roads, bridges, and schools could we build here with that money?

"Yet we foolishly continue the longest war in American history. It has to stop. Instead of wasting taxpayer dollars building a nation for Afghanistan, we should be using American taxpayer dollars to put Americans back to work."

-October 6, 2011

Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)

“Good morning.  This anniversary – 10 tragic, horrendous years at war with Afghanistan – is cause not for celebration but for sober and solemn reflection.

“On this occasion let’s remember the 1,800 brave service members who’ve given their lives in Afghanistan over the last decade.  Their service and sacrifice couldn’t be more honorable; the mission they were sent on, however, was a moral disgrace.

“Let’s also acknowledge the thousands of Afghan civilians caught in the line of fire and killed for the cause of their so-called liberation.  They are casualties of this war and must not be forgotten either.

“We have paid too high a price in blood and treasure over the last 10 years….too high a price for a policy that has not advanced our national security interests.

“This war would be a ripoff at any cost, but when I think about the fact that it’s costing us $10 billion every month, it takes my breath away.

“$10 billion a month!  Think of what we could do with $10 billion a month.  We could use it to help create the jobs the American people need.  $10 billion a month could pay for a lot of Pell Grants, a lot of Head Start slots, a lot of Medicare reimbursements, a lot of school lunches.

“For pennies on the dollar, we can and we must invest in an entirely new approach to protecting America, one that emphasizes diplomacy, multilateral cooperation and peaceful conflict resolution.

“I call this platform Smart Security, and I’ve been promoting it just about every day for the last several years.  Instead of invasions and occupations, Smart Security offers other nations partnership and humanitarian aid.

“Instead of a military surge, it promises a much bolder civilian surge that shows American compassion…that embodies the very best American values…that fights poverty, promotes education, rebuilds infrastructure and restores hope.

“The American people have had enough of this war.  A new poll even shows that only half of post 9/11 veterans think the Afghanistan war was worth fighting.  Isn’t it time we listened to them?  Isn’t it time public policy caught up with public sentiment on this life-and-death issue?

“Moral decency, fiscal sanity and public opinion all tell us to do the same thing – after 10 long years, it’s time to bring the troops home.”

-October 6, 2011

This list was compiled by WAND Intern Christina Djossa

Yesterday the Congressional Progressive Caucus (CPC) Peace and Security Task Force held a hearing on the 10^th anniversary of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. WAND/WiLL women Rep.Barbara Lee (D-CA) and Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) both serve as co-chairs of the CPC Peace and Security Task Force, and have been staunch advocates against the war in Afghanistan.

Congresswoman Woolsey delivered opening remarks by promoting her Smart Security initiative. House Resolution 19 calls for the adoption of a “smart security” platform for the 21^st century that makes war a last resort by focusing on diplomacy, multilateral cooperation, and peaceful conflict resolution. Following the Congresswoman’s remarks, a panel of academics, experts, and advocates described the costs of the ongoing war in Afghanistan, and provided practical alternatives to continued military action in Afghanistan.

Shukria Dellawar, an Afghanistan expert with extensive contacts in Afghani civil society, criticized the heavy US military strategy and lack of serious commitment to supporting the Afghani people. Dellawar highlighted the failure of reconciliation efforts, and reiterated questions she heard on a recent trip to Afghanistan: “Where is the security?” and “When will aerial bombings and air raids end?” She also emphasized the need to reconcile ethnic and political leaders in Afghanistan and to bring Pakistan to the table. The military policy has failed to consider the lives of the Afghani people and will not succeed if it continues.

Lisa Schirch, Director of 3P Security and a Research Professor at Eastern Mennonite University, offered three recommendations to bolster the peace process. To reach a successful political settlement, Schirch emphasized the need to have more members of civil society, especially women, be a part of the peace process. More stakeholders must participate in the negotiations, not just the Taliban and the Karzai Administration. She also highlighted the need for the U.S. to deploy more diplomatic staff to Afghanistan, Pakistan, and the surrounding region. In addition, Schirch recommended that the U.S. State Department develop a mediation and negotiation support unit to work on the comprehensive peace process. Unlike other nations, the U.S. does not have a well-trained team with the knowledge, experiences, and skills to support peace processes.

Brock McIntosh, an Army National Guard Specialist and conscientious objector status applicant, spoke about the power of nonviolence. He recently met with the Afghan Youth Peace Volunteers and cited the growing peace movement in Afghanistan. McIntosh emphasized nonviolence as a viable alternative to war and one which has a history in Afghanistan. One significant point McIntosh raised was that there is no “precise measure of violence required to yield peace.” This is a concept which has become increasingly clear and further underlines the need to end the US contribution to violence in Afghanistan.

Written by Ellen Freedman (WAND Intern) and Elaina Ramsey (WAND Field Coordinator)

Additional Information:

• WAND/WiLL Women’s Statements about the 10^th Anniversary of the War in Afghanistan
• WAND/WiLL Women Respond to President Obama’s Afghanistan Troop Withdrawal Plan
  

Today the House completed consideration of the Fiscal Year 2012 Defense Appropriations Act, passing it by a vote of 336 to 87. The overall bill provides about $530 billion for the Department of Defense base budget- a $17 billion increase over this year. This does not include war spending or spending on nuclear weapons. Additionally, $119 billion is provided for war spending.

At the same time that we spend more money at the Pentagon, other programs are subject to cuts and caps.  Lawmakers are in the midst of fevered negotiations to find a way to cut deficit spending and reduce the debt. As Barney Frank (D-MA) said, “The military budget is not on the table. The military is at the table, and it is eating everybody else's lunch.”

Below are some highlighted amendments related to military spending cuts, the war in Afghanistan, and Libya.

Highlighted Amendments to Fiscal Year 2012 Defense Appropriations Bill

Military Spending Cuts (to Defense Department’s Base Budget):

Freeze DOD at This Year’s Level - Offered by Mulvaney (R-SC): Would have cut the Defense base budget by $17 billion, freezing the budget at the Fiscal Year 2011 level.

Defeated 135-290 (click here to see how your Rep. voted)

Scale Back Increase to DOD Budget - Offered by Frank (D-MA)-Campbell (R-CA)-Holt (D-NJ)-Jones (R-NC)-Moore (D-WI)-Paul (R-TX): Would have scaled back the planned FY 2012 increase in the Defense base budget of $$17.3 billion by $8.5 billion (approximately one half). The amendment stipulated that none of the reduction in expenditures would come from payroll for military personnel, Department of Defense health programs and emergency war spending. Given the scale of our nation’s fiscal problems, the proposed $17 billion increase in non-war spending in the reported bill shows an insufficient commitment to the necessity of cutting waste and unnecessary spending.  THANK YOU to those who made calls yesterday supporting this modest amendment.  Even though it failed we were pleased to see a fairly close vote, indicating that there are rising concerns about the Pentagon budget.

Defeated 181-244

New nuclear bomber - Welch (D-VT)-Paul (R-TX)-Woolsey (D-CA) offered: Amendment would have eliminated $297 million in funding for a new nuclear weapons bomber.

Defeated 98-322

B-1 bomber - Offered by Neugebauer (R-TX): Bars retirement of any B-1 bombers; six are slated to be retired so we need to maintain all of the bombers we have and build more. Rep. Norm Dicks (D-WA) said that these bombers are important to preserve “the ability to penetrate China or the Soviet Union or wherever we might have to penetrate at some point.” Apparently the news that the Soviet Union no longer exists hasn’t penetrated Congress.

Approved by voice vote

Reducing Troops in Europe - Offered by Polis (D-CO) – To take 50,000 troops out of Europe and save $800 million.

Defeated 113 to 307

Pentagon bands - Offered by McCollum (D-MN): To cut funds for Pentagon bands by $124.8 million. Kudos to Rep. Betty McCollum for her perseverance on this issue – she was finally able to “drum up” enough support for this common sense cut.  Schools across the country are cutting music programs, Maybe we could scale back military bands just a bit…

Approved 226-201

Pentagon sponsorship of NASCAR races - Offered by McCollum (D-MN): Would have limited spending on Motor Sports sponsorships to $20 million. Well, so much for common sense after all. Thanks to  Rep. McCollum for trying.

Libya:

Congress continues to flirt with a shifting line in the sand on Libya. There are clearly many concerns and efforts to limit the U.S. role, but so far Congress has not been willing to pull the plug to stop all funding for Libya.

Limiting Activities in Libya - Offered by Cole (R-OK): “None of the funds made available by this Act may be used by the Department of Defense to furnish military equipment, military training or advice, or other support for military activities, to any group or individual, not part of a country's armed forces, for the purpose of assisting that group or individual in carrying out military activities in or against Libya.”

Approved 225-201

Libya and War Powers - Offered by Sherman (D-CA): Bars spending that violates the War Powers Act, which, according to Sherman, would limit the Administration from spending on any military activities not currently underway. (On June 13, the House voted 248-163 for a similar Sherman (D-CA) amendment to the Military Construction appropriations bill.)

Adopted 316-111

Limit Spending - Gohmert (R-TX): Would have limited spending on Libya operations with no  funds made available by this Act may be obligated, expended, or used in any manner to support military operations, including NATO or United Nations operations in Libya or in Libya's airspace.

Defeated 162-265

Stop Funding: Offered by Amash (R-MI)-Kucinich (D-OH):
“None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the continued deployment of United States Armed Forces participating in North Atlantic Treaty Organization Operation Unified Protector.”

Defeated 199-229

Stop Funding- Offered by Kucinich (D-OH): Amendment would ban funds for Libya unless there is a declaration of war.

Defeated 169-251 (Vote tally pending – Check http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2011/roll530.xml)

Afghanistan:

End the War – Cut $33 Billion - Offered by Lee (D-CA)-Nadler (R-NY)-Woolsey (D-CA)-Olver (D-MA)- Stark (D-CA)- JacksonD-CA)-Honda (D-CA); Conyers (D-MI);-Grijalva (D-AZ)-Paul (R-TX);-Amash (R-MI): Would have cut $33 billion, to end the funding for combat operations in Afghanistan but provide funds to bring our troops home in a safe and orderly manner.

Defeated 97-322

Drawdown to 25,000 in 18 Months - Offered by Garamendi (D-CA): Would have cut $20.9 billion to wind down the war in a responsible way over the next 18 months so that at the end of the 18 months-- December 31, 2012-- there'd be no more than 25,000 troops in Afghanistan.

Defeated 133-295

Operations Transfer Fund (Slush Fund) Cut - Offered by Lee (D-CA)-Jones (R-NC): Would have cut the $5 billion of the Overseas Contingency Operations Transfer Fund

Defeated 114-314

Afghanistan Security Forces Fund - Offered by Cohen (D-TN):  Would have cut $200 million for Afghanistan security forces.

Defeated 210-217

Afghanistan Security Forces Fund - Offered by Cohen (D-TN): Would have cut $4 billion for Afghanistan security forces

Defeated 119-306

Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund - Offered by Cicilline (D-RI): Would have cut $475 million from the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund.

Defeated 145-283

Cut Emergency Response Program - Offered by Welch (D-VT): Would have barred spending of more than $200 million for the Commander's Emergency Response Program.

Defeated 169-257

Child Soldiers

To end on a hopeful note …

Offered by Fortenberry (R-NE): Bars spending on military training for child soldiers in six countries.

Approved by voice vote

Thanks to John Isaacs from Council for the Livable World, Stephen Miles from Win Without War and Paul Kawika Martin from Peace Action for their help in tracking and summarizing key amendments.  WAND DC Intern Kathleen Kang also helped with research for this summary.

As noted in our official statement on the war in Afghanistan, WAND advocates helping Afghan civilians, especially women and girls, to obtain safety, basic necessities, access to education and employment, and participation in leadership positions in the peace-making process. This new Congressional task force aims to do just that by offering mentorship programs for Afghanistan’s female members of Parliament, prospective elected officials, as well as civic and business leaders.

The launch of the task force follows the announcement of President Obama’s troop draw-down, to which many Afghan women responded with fear of a reversal in freedom and human rights progress.  Afghanistan is considered the most dangerous country for women, and this task force serves to reassure them of our protection and support. The task force will aim to gain more human rights, especially women’s rights, and the present opportunity may be critical. In an op-ed for The Hill, former first lady Laura Bush said:

In 2007, I met with Afghan women at the White House who told me that they live in daily fear that the Taliban’s violence will reverse Afghanistan’s progress toward freedom. Their message was that we must take advantage of this time, or as one woman parliamentarian put it: “This is our only chance.” Today, there is a good chance of success as long as Americans remain engaged and women’s rights are protected.

While the task force’s stated mission is to help the women and girls of Afghanistan, it is also important to realize the greater impact its efforts will have on the rest of the country’s civilians. Ultimately, women’s leadership is extremely important for the long-term stabilization of Afghanistan. A fairer representation of women in leadership positions could lead to less corruption and more benefits
for local communities.

WAND is proud to have one of its own members leading this cause, and we wish everyone involved in the task force success.

This post was written by WAND DC Intern Kathleen Kang.

WAND/WiLL Woman Barbara Boxer

6/27/11- We have compiled a growing list of our WAND/WiLL women's responses to President Obama's June 22 speech on the plan to draw-down troops in Afghanistan.

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) –

“I am glad this war is ending, but it’s ending at far too slow a pace. We need a swifter turnover of responsibility to the nearly 300,000 Afghan forces we have trained, which would allow our brave military men and women to come home sooner.”

Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) –

“Tonight President Obama took a step in the right direction by outlining a drawdown of American troops from Afghanistan over the coming year. I have called for a sizeable and sustainable drawdown because I believe the human, economic and military resources we are spending in Afghanistan are unsustainable. The President’s announcement is a step forward, but I will continue to push the President to bring this war to a close and redeploy troops out of Afghanistan while providing the support they and their families deserve.

“Our terrorist enemies are not bound by lines on a map. Leaving tens of thousands of troops in Afghanistan is not the best use of our resources—especially as we work to tackle our debt and deficit. It’s time to redeploy, rebuild our military and refocus on the broader war on terror. I was glad to see President Obama take a step in that direction today.”

Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) –

“Tonight’s announcement is a profound disappointment.  The hope was that the President would offer an Afghanistan troop drawdown that is significant, swift and sizeable.  His proposal fails on all three counts.”

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA –Democratic Leader) –

“It has been the hope of many in Congress and across the country that the full drawdown of U.S. forces would happen sooner than the President laid out – and we will continue to press for a better outcome. Concluding this war will enable us to reduce the deficit and focus fuller attention on the priorities of the American people: creating jobs and investing in our nation’s future by building a strong, thriving economy for our children.”

Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) –

“A troop reduction of 10,000 by the end of this year is anything but significant, as it does not even get us back to pre-escalation levels.  A more significant and reasonable goal would have been the swift withdrawal of 50,000 combat troops, half of the roughly 100,000 U.S. troops currently on the ground. Waiting until the fall of 2012 to remove only 33,000 troops, which simply reverses the 2009 troop escalation and takes us back to square one, flies in the face of the growing bipartisan calls across our war-weary nation to exit Afghanistan and refocus on our domestic challenges and job creation.”

Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV) –

"Osama Bin Laden's death marked a new chapter for America's mission in Afghanistan and it's time we begin bringing our troops back home.  I support the President's decision to begin this withdrawal and recognize that it must be done in a manner that keeps our forces safe, but I also hope that conditions on the ground will allow us to transfer additional military responsibility to the Afghan people at an accelerated pace.  Such a move would enhance our ability to expedite the return home for even more of our brave men and women in uniform now serving in Afghanistan."

Rep. Yvette Clarke  (D-NY)-

“I applaud President Barack Obama for taking the first steps in beginning the drawdown of troops as we bring a responsible end to the war in Afghanistan.  It is clear that many in this nation, including those in my district, were hoping for a fuller and more robust withdrawal of U.S. forces much sooner than what President Obama presented last night.  With a war-weary nation who has invested ten years in this engagement, it is clear that we need to focus on the rebuilding our nation at home.

“As a Member of the House Homeland Security Committee, I understand the complex relationship between Afghanistan’s stability and our counterterrorism strategies.  However, with the U.S. spending more than 100 billion dollars annually in this war and countless lives lost both civilian and from our armed forces, now is the time for the Afghanistan forces to take full responsibility for securing their nation.”

Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) -

"Tonight the nation heard what we've been wanting to hear for a long time, that after some successes in fighting terrorism in and around Afghanistan we'll finally be bringing some of our troops home.  This is a good start.  I just pray for the day when we can bring even more of our men and women out of harm's way while at the same time making sure that terrorists, hell-bent on hurting Americans, don't take hold in the region again."

Rep. Jackie Speier (D-CA)  –

“President Obama should immediately withdraw at least 30,000 troops—the amount equivalent to the 2009 surge. The remainder should come home by the end of next year. It is time to shift to a counterterrorism mission—it was 79 Navy Seals that killed Osama Bin Laden, not 100,000 troops. We must start spending taxpayer dollars creating jobs and building roads in America, not Afghanistan.”

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) –

“I urge the President to build upon tonight’s announcement and bring home greater numbers of U.S. troops as part of an overall exit strategy from Afghanistan. We should instead invest in diplomatic and economic engagement with the Afghan people.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) –

“I am firmly convinced, especially with the death of Osama bin Laden and the resulting damage to al Qaeda leadership, it is time to significantly redeploy troops out of Afghanistan, and start to bring the longest running war in American history to a close. It is critical that Afghanistan’s government acts as a partner in the progress we have made, ensuring that what we have achieved is not lost. But I believe that the costs at a time when we should be focused on rebuilding our economy here at home are too high. It is time to bring our troops home.”

Rep. Diana DeGette (D-CO)–

“I commend President Obama for honoring his commitment to begin troop withdrawals from Afghanistan, but I urge him to provide his long-term strategy for total withdrawal as soon as possible. U.S. forces’ elimination of Osama bin Laden and other top al-Qaeda leadership – and the subsequent weakening of their organization in Afghanistan – underscore how our mission in that country has shifted and how the time has come to bring our troops home.”

Rep. Grace Napolitano (D-CA) –

“This troop withdrawal means we can finally begin welcoming our soldiers home to their families. We must be ready to support our fighting men and women and ensure they have the services, job training, and medical care they need to return to civilian life. It is critical for our economy and our country that we continue to bring our troops home. The funds being sent abroad are needed here in the U.S. to invest in job creation and pay down the debt.”

Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-FL) –

“I believe we need a sizeable, swift, and responsible reduction of troop levels to reunite our military families, refocus our priorities, and reinvest in jobs, education, and health care here at home. I applaud President Obama for fulfilling his promise of beginning a drawdown of troops this year. I only wish we could accelerate the process.”

Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-PA)-

“I support the President’s decision to transition Afghan security responsibility to the Afghan people through a clear strategy for reduction in U.S. troops over the next year and a half.  As our troops come home, the Afghan security forces will assume responsibility for their nation.  I commend President Obama for the planned, deliberate, and timely withdrawal of U.S. troops.”

Rep Tammy Baldwin (D-WI) –

“Our troops must be brought home safely and soon from Afghanistan and Iraq. For a decade now, U.S. troops have been fighting in Afghanistan, in a war that no longer has a clear mission, with no end in sight. We have spent nearly a trillion dollars of borrowed money and lost nearly 6,000 American lives. Thousands more servicemen and women have suffered serious, life-altering injuries.”

Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY) –

“I commend President Obama for his commitment to bring home 10,000 American troops by the end of 2011 and an additional 23,000 by next summer.  Thanks to the brave and effective service of the men and women in our Armed Forces, the ability of extremists in Afghanistan to target Americans has been severely diminished.  We must now redouble efforts to transition responsibility for providing security and basic services to Afghans themselves and remain committed to diplomacy and effective development that are critical to sustaining military gains in Afghanistan and stability in the region.”

President Obama had little chance of satisfying all constituencies with last night’s speech to the nation about drawing down our presence in Afghanistan.

WAND is not satisfied that the war still rages on --but we are heartened by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s remarks today before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

‘In the last four months, this Afghan-led political process has gained momentum.

Twenty-seven Provincial Peace Councils have been established in Afghanistan, and the Afghan High Peace Council has stepped up its efforts to engage civil society and women, even as it also begins reaching out to insurgents.

Including women and civil society in this process is not just the right thing to do – it is also the smart and strategic thing to do. Any potential for peace will be subverted if women are marginalized or silenced. And the United States will not abandon our values or support a political process that undoes the social progress that has been made in the past decade.”

We believe that any drawdown plan must establish a security network for citizens. Women and children have been terrorized in Afghanistan long enough.  Thank you to Secretary Clinton for reminding all the players in the drawdown of the need to include Afghan women in the transition and reconciliation.

We must all speak up now.  Never-ending wars in Afghanistan have left a cultural legacy of silencing women.  No civil society can exist harmoniously without the equal participation of women – and without the inclusion of women in planning and decision-making, the results will not create peace.

Thank you, Secretary Clinton for being a voice for women and for real peace.

Written by Susan Shaer

May 26, 2011

WASHINGTON – An amendment offered by Congresswoman Susan Davis (D-San Diego) would withhold federal funds from the Afghan government to ensure that women play a role in the country’s reconciliation.

Davis’s amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 1540) states that not more than 25% of the money for the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund for fiscal year 2012 may be used unless the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of State, certifies to Congress that Afghan women are an integral part of any reconciliation process between the Afghan government and the Taliban.

“We have heard that investment in women is often crucial in order for developing countries to see returns on economic growth and development,” said Davis, a senior member on the House Armed Services Committee. “By ensuring women are being brought to the table, we can truly know how much progress is being made with regards to the rights of Afghan women.  We should not walk away from our responsibility to these women and to the advancement of basic human rights.”

Having recently returned from a congressional trip to Kabul and Kandahar where Davis met with women from all walks of life, it was clear to her and the bipartisan group of congresswomen on the trip that developing the potential of women at all levels of Afghan society is crucial to the future development of a peaceful nation.

“Quite simply, the protection of the rights of women and girls in Afghanistan and their full and equal participation in Afghan civil society is essential to the development of stability in Afghanistan,” said Davis.

Division A, Title XII, Subtitle B SEC. 1219. LIMITATION ON AMOUNTS FROM AFGHANISTAN INFRASTRUCTURE FUND.

Not more than 75 percent of amounts made available to the Afghanistan Infrastructure Fund for fiscal year 2012 may be used to provide assistance to the Government of Afghanistan unless the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the Secretary of State, determines and certifies to Congress that women in Afghanistan are an integral part of the reconciliation process between the Afghan Government and the Taliban.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, May 26, 2011 FY 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, McGovern-Jones Amendment on Afghanistan

Ms. PELOSI: I thank the gentleman for yielding and thank him for his leadership and working with Congressman Walter Jones on this bipartisan amendment, which has been brought to the floor. They have worked again in a bipartisan way, in a patriotic way, to ensure that U.S. troops are brought home from Afghanistan safely and expeditiously.

Listening to the debate, it's interesting because I don't know that we are that far apart because we all want to ensure the national security of our country. We all respect our men and women in uniform and the job that they are doing to keep us the land of the free and the home of the brave.

We respect them when they come home as our veterans, but we have to know that involvement of nearly 10 years has serious consequences for our country.

I told the President of Afghanistan on my recent visit this spring that each time I go there I say the American people are growing tired of war; we are weary of war. We went into Afghanistan in the fall of 2001. For about 7 years, there was no plan. There was no plan on how we would execute what we went to do and how we would leave.

When President Obama became President, many of us who were eager to bring our troops home gave him a chance to put forth a plan, which he did, which calls for the drawdown of troops in July 2011, and drawing down more completely by 2014.

President Obama himself had said earlier this month, I have already made a commitment that starting in July of this year we are drawing down troops and we are transitioning. We are training Afghan forces so they can start securing their own country.

The President went on to say we don't need to have a perpetual footprint of the size we have now. So, therefore, I think it's really important for us to know what this amendment does that I think reflects the mood of the American people.

It requires within 60 days of enactment, a plan and time frame for the accelerated transition of military and security operations to the Government of Afghanistan; within 60 days of enactment, a plan and time frame for negotiations leading to a political solution and reconciliation in Afghanistan, and within 90 days of enactment, a National Intelligence Estimate on leadership, location and capabilities of al Qaeda and affiliated networks and cells.

Who can be against that? Who can be against that? We are talking about 60 days a plan for transition, and 60 days a plan for negotiations.

I appreciate the efforts of this amendment, as it underscores the importance of having a plan and a time frame for a transition of responsibility, a transition of responsibility for security and stability to the Afghans so that we can bring our troops home.

The National Intelligence Estimate on al Qaeda that is called for in the plan will also help ensure our policymakers that they have updated information on the threat posed by al Qaeda and its affiliates who remain a threat even following the death of Osama bin Laden. Careful intelligence analysis is essential to keeping the American people safe.

So as I salute our men and women in uniform, I also want to salute our men and women in the intelligence community who are an important part of keeping the American people safe. I commend them and CIA Director Panetta for his leadership in the Osama bin Laden operation.

But back to the specific point of this amendment. I have gone to Afghanistan year after year after year, never thinking that we would be engaged in the longest war in America's history. The first 7 years, not even a plan; but now the President has put into motion how we make judgments about how we stay and how we leave.

If you visit the women in Afghanistan, as many women in the Congress have done and some of our male colleagues as well, they will tell you whether you are talking to educated women in Kabul, but really more relevant to me, poor, poor women in the provinces, they are all saying the same thing.

I visited a group of women in the province of Zabul, just as I have visited a number of provinces and spoken to the women across Afghanistan. The women in Zabul said we really want to educate our daughters, we want to have access to health care clinics and the rest, but we can't have that until we have security, and we can't have security until we end corruption.

There are many things going on in Afghanistan that must change. There will be a better chance for change if we make an investment in the civilian side of this transition, whether it's diplomacy, whether it's part of the construction. They tell me not to say reconstruction because not much was there before. Construction there includes building schools. We visited little schools and schools in different parts of Afghanistan. It's very encouraging.

Our troops know that we have to leave, that we have to transition out. But as I told President Karzai also, we didn't come here, and we are not staying here 10 years so that when we leave women return to the subjugated position they were in under the Taliban.

So the answer to that is women must be at the table when you have the negotiations for reconciliation of the leadership of the Taliban, and reintegration of rank-and-file members of the Taliban. As we move toward more stability in Afghanistan, women must play a role. Women in America, women throughout the world care about how this all turns out there.

So here we are, almost 10 years later in a situation where we just want to have some management of this issue.  Let's have a plan for how negotiations will take place. Let's have a plan after we see the National Intelligence Estimate based on what the al Qaeda threat is.

This is a very wise amendment. I thank Mr. McGovern and Mr. Jones for how they put it together because it is very reasonable. It has a goal in sight. It has a reasonable approach as to how we get there. But make no mistake: in overwhelming numbers, the American people think we have done our job there in terms of helping the Afghan people. Our purpose there was to protect the American people. We can do both by focusing more on the civilian side of governance issues and how Afghanistan is governed on anti-corruption issues. And our initiatives that I have seen there on this recent trip are an improvement over the past, by training the national security forces of Afghanistan, be it police or the military, so they can maintain their own security, and by diplomatically enlisting other countries in the region because they all have a vested interest in the stability of Afghanistan.

But an open-ended, unending war there, which is costly but is nothing compared to the cost of the loss of our young men and women, that's our first and foremost concern. But there is also the cost in dollars, the cost in opportunity and in military strength. This involvement and engagement in Afghanistan is not strengthening our military.

So Americans are paying a big price. We want to make sure we are getting a return on that investment, and time is a very important factor. It's time for our troops to come home. And I thank Mr. McGovern and Mr. Jones for their leadership.