• Research
  • Politika
  • About
Carnegie Russia Eurasia center logoCarnegie lettermark logo
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Moisés Naím"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "SAP",
  "programs": [
    "South Asia"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States",
    "South Asia",
    "Afghanistan"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Security",
    "Military",
    "Foreign Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

The Surprising Lt. Colonel Davis

The fact that the Afghanistan war is not going well is no surprise. The surprise is that, according to Lt. Col. Davis, it is going even worse.

Link Copied
By Moisés Naím
Published on Feb 23, 2012

Source: El País

You may not have heard of Lt. Colonel Davis of the US army, who now works at the Pentagon, after several tours of duty in Iraq and more recently, Afghanistan. Davis just returned and wrote a report that begins thus: “Senior ranking military leaders have so distorted the truth when communicating with the US Congress and American people in regard to conditions on the ground in Afghanistan that the truth has become unrecognizable. This deception has damaged America’s credibility both among our allies and enemies, severely limiting our ability to reach a political solution to the war in Afghanistan. It has likely cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars Congress might not otherwise have appropriated had it known the truth, and our senior leaders’ behavior has almost certainly prolonged this war. The single greatest penalty our nation has suffered, however, has been that we have lost the blood, limbs and lives of tens of thousands of American Service Members with little to no gain to our country as a consequence of this deception.” And this is just the public version of his report. He also produced a confidential version, for a few congressmen and senators with security clearances.

A few days ago Col. Davis published an explosive article in the respected Armed Forces Journal. In “Truth, Lies and Afghanistan,” he writes: “I witnessed the absence of success at virtually every level. […] How many more must die in a mission that is having no success?” And it was only after distributing his report to members of Congress, publishing the article and giving some interviews, that Davis informed his superiors. This, I told him, might seem to be the behavior of someone who doesn’t care about being cold-shouldered out of the Armed Forces, or court-martialed. “Not at all,” says Davis. “This is my life and my career, and I want to go on with it as long as I can serve my country.” He also emphatically rejects the accusation that he is driven by political calculations, or that his conclusions are based on anecdotes and not on the rigorous information that those who are running the war have. Michael Hastings, Rolling Stone’s military correspondent, who obtained and posted the non-confidential copy of Davis’s report online, says that “this is one of the most important documents. published by an active-service officer in the last 10 years.”

What are the implications of all this? That the Afghanistan war is going badly is no surprise. The surprise is that, according to Davis, it is going even worse than we thought, and much worse than we are told in the far from encouraging reports from top American officers. Naturally, the other surprise is that an officer on active service has decided to run the risk of breaking the rules, disseminating his devastating evaluation of the situation, and denouncing what he considers the mendacity of top Pentagon officials. Even more surprising is the fact that Davis has not yet been punished for his actions. A Pentagon spokesman hastily denied an NBC report that an investigation had been opened against Davis.

One possibility is that the colonel enjoys the support and protection of a group of senior military officers, and is in some way acting as their spokesman, something that Davis stridently denies. Another possibility is that the Pentagon fears that a reprisal against Davis might spark a wave of protest, and only serve to boost the visibility and influence of his views.

Lastly, another surprise is that Colonel Davis does not believe that the US ought to withdraw its troops from Afghanistan in 2014, as President Obama has promised. For Davis, the strategy ought to be to leave strong military bastions located at strategic points, while changing the nature of the mission. The troops, he says, ought to concern themselves mainly with capturing — or killing — terrorists that may be using the country as a base of operations. This is a crude way of saying that there is no hope of Afghanistan developing into a peaceful, prosperous and democratic nation.

This article originally appeared in El País.

About the Author

Moisés Naím

Distinguished Fellow

Moisés Naím is a distinguished fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a best-selling author, and an internationally syndicated columnist.

    Recent Work

  • Research
    The World Reacts to Biden’s First 100 Days
      • +10

      Rosa Balfour, Frances Z. Brown, Yasmine Farouk, …

  • Commentary
    View From Latin America

      Moisés Naím

Moisés Naím
Distinguished Fellow
Moisés Naím
SecurityMilitaryForeign PolicyNorth AmericaUnited StatesSouth AsiaAfghanistan

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    What Should We Take From Andrey Melnichenko’s Essay in the Economist?

    Andrey Melnichenko’s essay offers no answer to the fundamental question of how, under any kind of negotiated settlement, Europe can protect itself from the Russian ressentiment that is inevitable in all scenarios except for an outright victory for Putin.

      Leonid Bershidsky

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Parliamentary Elections in Occupied Ukraine Risk Backfiring for the Kremlin

    Despite unhappiness on the ground, Moscow is determined to use both carrot and stick to ensure there is record support for United Russia in occupied Ukraine.

      Konstantin Skorkin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Lukashenko’s Concessions to Kyiv Reflect Russia’s Weakness

    The recent damage inflicted by Ukrainian drones and missiles on Russia has made Belarus aware of its own vulnerabilities—and surprisingly amenable to Kyiv’s demands.

      Artyom Shraibman

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Could Ukraine Succeed in Torpedoing Putin’s Approval Ratings?

    It is not a phenomenon unique to Russia that the public of a country at war (even the aggressor) enduring airstrikes will not overturn its government but rather show solidarity with it and blame its woes on the enemy.

      Vladislav Gorin

  • Commentary
    Carnegie Politika
    Iran War Fallout Gifts Putin Diplomatic Victory at ASEAN Summit

    Russia looks set to reap economic benefits from closer ties with Southeast Asian countries that are keen to find reliable energy suppliers and diversify trade ties.

      • Alexander Gabuev

      Alexander Gabuev

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
Carnegie Russia Eurasia logo, white
  • Research
  • Politika
  • About
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.