US Diplomat Matthew Hoh Resigns Over Afghan War Effort

by Yuliya Talmazan | October 27, 2009 at 12:09 pm

467 views | 52 Recommendations | 17 comments

Matthew Hoh, one of America's top diplomats in Afghanistan, has resigned from his post, stating that he is not happy with the U.S. war strategy in Afghanistan. Hoh is the first U.S. official to resign openly over the war effort in Afghanistan. There are speculations that the U.S. government tried to convince Hoh to stay, but ultimately decided that Hoh has a right to represent his own views.

Matthew Hoh, the senior state department official in Aghanistan's Zabul province, said in a letter released on Tuesday that he had "lost understanding of, and confidence in, the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan".

In his four-letter address to Ambassador Nancy Powell, Hoh said, "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."

The news comes months after President Obama committed thousands more troops to the war effort in Afghanistan.

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend This comment thread is now closed

a211423

at 12:16 on October 27th, 2009

Praises to Matthew Hoh for standing by his decisions and not yeilding to political sway. Unfortnately, it is people like Mr. Hoh who could be trusted to give a full and unfettered assessment of the politcal climate in his diplomatic position in Afghanistan. But perhaps leaving sends a greater message to this administration.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 14:33 on October 27th, 2009

Matthew Hoh is asking exactly what many Americans have been asking because of a lack of clear and defined goals. The politicians of both parties have done a horrible job on defining the goals and objectives of this mission. What constitutes a victory has also not been defined.

The fact that Matthew Hoh's superiors tried to muzzle him by bribing him with a better job is troublesome.

The highlighted portion below from an article in the Washington Post, although lengthy, is interesting reading and gives some background on Matthew Hoh, who is a former Marine Corps Captain.

"I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan," he wrote Sept. 10 in a four-page letter to the department's head of personnel. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."

The reaction to Hoh's letter was immediate. Senior U.S. officials, concerned that they would lose an outstanding officer and perhaps gain a prominent critic, appealed to him to stay.

Here is a link to Matthew Hoh's Profile

Rory Cripps

at 15:17 on October 27th, 2009

ACP: Hopefully others will follow Matthew Hoh's lead. The Obama Administration needs to take a dump or get off the pot in terms of Afghanistan. The number of troops KIA in Afghanistan increases every month while Obama holds war strategy sessions and continues his obsession with passing health care reform and figuring out ways to shut up his media critics. Who in their right mind wouldn't have doubts about serving under a commander in chief such as Obama given his virtual paralysis in coming up with a coherent war strategy?

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 16:38 on October 27th, 2009

There is no doubt that this Marine has principles. Tomorrow your President is meeting with the Joint Chiefs for the first time in 9 months. Personally I would have sought their advice, especially that of the Chief of the Army and the Commandant of the Marine Corps, who have troops fighting on the ground to get their reaction of General McChrystal's report first hand.

Despite the White House Chief of Staff;s comments on Bush administration inaction and VP Cheney's response, Obama put forward his own strategy in March, which makes Afghanistan his war and he can;t play the blame game with the Bush administration anymore.

Troops hate uncertainty, especially in light of increasing casualties.

As our former Chief of Defence Staff and former ISAF Commander, General (retired) Rick Hillier said in an interview last night on CBC Television, "There should be an outcry by the Mothers and Fathers in this Country".

Rory Cripps

at 18:48 on October 27th, 2009

ACP:

The difference between those "mothers and fathers" and their sons and daughters that serve and Obama and his administration is that they understand (and fully comprehend) duty, honor, and country.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 20:06 on October 27th, 2009

Yes and so do Stan and Rick:)

nanute

at 02:38 on October 28th, 2009

Your comment is appalling.

Here's another excerpt from the letter of resignation:(M)any Afghans, he wrote in his resignation letter, are fighting the United States largely because its troops are there -- a growing military presence in villages and valleys where outsiders, including other Afghans, are not welcome and where the corrupt, U.S.-backed national government is rejected. While the Taliban is a malign presence, and Pakistan-based al-Qaeda needs to be confronted, he said, the United States is asking its troops to die in Afghanistan for what is essentially a far-off civil war.

I think, and correct me if I'm wrong, he's basically saying get the fuck out of Afghanistan. Would you support Obama if he decided to pull all the troops out without a "victory"? Will you support his actions under any conditions? Please tell us what should President Obama do to gain your support.

Karl Gotthardt - albertacowpoke

at 03:41 on October 28th, 2009

Who is your comment directed to nanute?

nanute

at 03:43 on October 28th, 2009

not you acp. it was a reply to rory's comment above you.

Dr. Cripps (proud small "r" republican) (not verified)

at 07:32 on October 28th, 2009

nanute: Let's be honest here: Would you be appalled if they same were said about a Republican president given the same set of circumstances? One thing that I find appalling is that 20% or so of Americans view President Obama as something more than what he his: namely just another politician that slick-talked his way into getting elected. Bush and the Republican Party have been accused of all sorts of things. Some warranted and some not warranted. Why is it not fair to hold Obama's and the Democratic party's feet to the fire as well?

nanute

at 09:26 on October 28th, 2009

Dr. Cripps, Once again a series of questions are posed, and you obfuscate and create a distraction by asking more questions. Your comment regarding Obama's having no sense of duty, honor or country is as opposed to what, real Americans is what I find appalling. It is shameful, especially in wartime. But, I will defend your right to express the sentiment.

You've got a very short memory. Anyone that was critical of Bush policies regarding the war were labeled as "unpatriotic" or DFH's. Never mind the substance of the criticism.

You still haven't answered my original questions regarding what you would support in this regard.

Rory Cripps

at 21:03 on October 28th, 2009

nanute: Cut the crap! You know damn well what I support! And you're implying the same thing about those that don't support Obama's war policies as was implied about those that didn't support Bush's war policies. namely that they're unpatriotic and that we've all got to support Obama in order to maintain our "patriot" standing. Is Afghanistan really a war? You'd never know it by Obama's indecisive actions!

I'm an extremist when it comes to war and killing the enemy. AA88! (that's Dr. Cripps' code for :dead man's hand") Let no quarter be given! HA! And if you think that I've never been in life and death situations before, and faced the end of a gun and a knife and those that simply wanted to murder me, don't think it because you'll be wrong in your thinking. Peace through superior firepower! And if you don't possess superior firepower then you've got to hide out in the bush with what weapons you have and imagine over and over again that you're looking out for your buddies, and that you're doing God's work, and that you're coming home to your family and that the only way to do that is to descend upon the enemy like a bat out of hell and take no prisoners. All this crap about "America is better than that" and that American troops shouldn't torture Muslim terrorists is just that--crap! Al Qaeda and the Taliban (the throat-cutting savages that they are) are getting stronger and stronger every day while the Obama Administration sits on its pampered collective/anti-military ass holding the equivalent of "focus sessions" in order to come up with a war strategy while American, Canadian, and the rest of the NATO troops, are getting killed everyday by a rag-tag bunch of drugged-out Neanderthals that have never taken a bath or shower in their entire lives and have no regard for human life.

I've implied it before, and now I'll be brutally frank in stating "it" in order to clear up any "obfuscation" on my part: Obama doesn't know one end of a gun from the other. And judging from the left-wing cartoon characters that he has chosen to surround himself with it's obvious that the existence of the U.S. armed forces, let alone those individuals that serve in the armed forces, are anathemas to President Obama's and his administration's world-view and ideology. In other words, Obama and members of his administration are completely and totally detached from (nor do they give a crap about) the plight of American military personnel.

I urge all military families, that have sons and daughters serving in Afghanistan and the Middle East, to pull out all the emotional stops in order to convince their loved ones that the only thing that the Obama Administration is going to do for them is get them killed. In other words, get your sons and daughters the hell out of there because the Obama Administration obviously couldn't give a crap whether they live or die . . . .