Governor Huntsman has stated throughout the presidential campaign that he would withdraw the bulk of the troops from Afghanistan, and that the nation does not represent a strong enough national security interest to warrant the resources being dedicated to it.
In May of 2011, he stated that the US presence in Afghanistan was not consistent with how the US ought to be responding. A month later, he stated that the US had completed most of its objectives in Afghanistan, and that the future safety of the US was not likely to be determined on the plains of Afghanistan. He stated that he was not advocating for a complete withdraw from Afghanistan, but rather a drawdown to forces more inline with the mission.
Numerous times, Governor Huntsman noted that one in every six dollars from defense was being spent in Afghanistan. He noted that such an expense was not necessary.
George Stephanopoulis Interview
In May of 2011, Governor Huntsman was interviewed by George Stephanopoulis. When asked about the war in Afghanistan, he stated that he would support a faster drawdown of troops.
George Stephanopoulos: You also said, in the event, that a draw-down in Afghanistan is inevitable. So would you begin it today?
Jon Huntsman: I would tell you that we have to evaluate very carefully our presence in Afghanistan. And my inclination would be to say that it is a heavy and very expensive presence we have on the ground. That at a point in time where we need to be looking at our asymmetrical threats, what we have in Afghanistan today is not consistent with how we ought to be responding.
Wall Street Journal Interview
in June of 2011 Governor Huntsman was interviewed by the Wall Street Journal and stated that the US had completed most of it's mission in Afghanistan. He stated that a majority of the troops should be called home.
Now we have one out of every six defense department dollars going to Afghanistan. We've achieved much of what we set out to do. We've been able to rout the Taliban from power. We've been able to disrupt to a large extent al Qaeda. We've had free elections going back to 2004. And we still have 100,000 troops on the ground. The future well-being of the United States is likely not going to be fought on the prairies of Afghanistan. It's likely to be the result of our ability or inability to compete competitively across the Pacific against the rising giants.
(I am) not suggesting pulling out completely ... (but) leave behind a very capable fighting force that is appropriately positioned given the asymmetric threat that we face—the intelligence-gathering capability, the special forces capability, the training of Afghan forces capability, and the ability to work with friends in the region who believe as we do that those who are coming after us, we should go after very aggressively.
George Stephanopoulis Interview
In June of 2011, Governor Huntsman was interviewed by George Stephanopoulis. Governor Huntsman states that President Obama's drawdown of troops is not fast enough and that Afghanistan does not represent a significant national security interest.
GS: President Obama is likely to say that up to 10,000 troops will come home this year, all the surge troops – 30,000 – by the end of 2012. Does that sound like the right exit strategy to you? Because in the past you’ve said that without that, we’re “wasting our money and wasting our strategic resources.”
JH: It sounds a little slow and a little cautious, when you look at one out of every six Defense Department dollars going in support of what we’re doing in Afghanistan.
GS: So you would withdraw more now?
JH: I think over the next year there’s room to draw down more.
GS: How many more?
JH: Well, we’ll get serious about the numbers at some point, but I think more aggressively than is likely to be on the table.
GS: More than 10,000 over the next year?
JH: More than 10,000 over the next year. I think what you want to be left with is a good counter-terror capability, intelligence collection capability, some training capability. I think we have to see -- 9 years and 50 days into this conflict, the money that has been spent on both conflicts, well over one trillion dollars, I think we have to say, ‘What have we accomplished in Afghanistan?’
Esquire Interview
In August of 2011, Governor Huntsman was interviewed by Esquire magazine and discussed his desire to end the war in Afghanistan.
If you can't define a winning exit strategy for the American people, where we somehow come out ahead, then we're wasting our money, and we're wasting our strategic resources. It's a tribal state, and it always will be. Whether we like it or not, whenever we withdraw from Afghanistan, whether it's now or years from now, we'll have an incendiary situation... Should we stay and play traffic cop? I don't think that serves our strategic interests.
Reagan Debate
In September of 2011, Governor Huntsman participated in the Republican debate at the Reagan library. He stated that he would bring the troops home from Afghanistan as the US needed to be rebuilt and our focus should not be on Afghanistan.
WILLIAMS: I want to go back to your comments on 9/11 to ask kind of an obvious follow-up. Do you think we're safer today?
HUNTSMAN: I think we've lost our confidence as a country. I think we have had our innocence shattered. I think, 10 years later, we look at the situation and we say, we have 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. This is not about nation-building in Afghanistan. This is about nation-building at home.
Our core is broken. We are weak. We have got to strengthen ourselves. I say we've got to bring those troops home.
(APPLAUSE) In Afghanistan -- in Afghanistan, the reality is it is an asymmetrical counterterror effort. We need intelligence. We need special forces. And we need some training on the ground.
But I think one way to commemorate our 10-year anniversary of 9/11, remembering the 3,000-plus people who died in New York and in Pennsylvania and in Washington, is to say it's time for this country to set a goal for ourselves: We're going to get our core fixed. We're going to do some nation-building right here at home.
TEA Party Debate
In September of 2011, Governor Huntsman participated in the TEA Party debate. He was asked about Afghanistan and stated that he would support immediate removal of troops from Afghanistan.
SAHAR HEKMATI, TEA PARTY EXPRESS: Hi. My name is Sahar Hekmati. I was brought here from Ronald Reagan. I am from Afghanistan. And my question to you is, as the next president of the United States, what will you do to secure safety and protection for the women and the children of Afghanistan from the radicals?
(APPLAUSE)
BLITZER: Governor Huntsman?
HUNTSMAN: We are 10 years into this war, Sahar. America has given its all in Afghanistan.
We have families who have given the ultimate sacrifice. And it's to them that we offer our heartfelt salute and a deep sense of gratitude. But the time has come for us to get out of Afghanistan.
(APPLAUSE)
HUNTSMAN: We don't need 100,000 troops in Afghanistan nation- building at a time when this nation needs to be built. We are of no value to the rest of the world if our core is crumbling, which it is in this country.
I like those days when Ronald Reagan -- you talked about -- when Ronald Reagan would ensure that the light of this country would shine brightly for liberty, democracy, human rights, and free markets. We're not shining like we used to shine. We need to shine again.
And I'm here to tell you, Sahar, when we start shining again, it's going to help the women of Afghanistan, along with any other NGO work that can be done there and the collaborative efforts of great volunteer efforts here in the United States. We can get it done, but we have to make sure that the Afghan people increasingly take responsibility for their security going forward.
Fox News / Google Debate
On September 22, 2011 Governor Huntsman participated in the Fox News / Google debate. He stated that ultimately, only Afghanistans can save Afghanistan and that the US was ready for its troops to come home.
KELLY: Governor Huntsman?
HUNTSMAN: Just one issue. I just want to respond to my friend, Rick Santorum, here. Is the microphone working?
BAIER: It is.
HUNTSMAN: Thank you. We do have a difference of opinion here in terms of overall foreign policy. And I think, you know, as the only one on stage with any hands-on foreign policy experience, having served -- having lived overseas four different times, we're at a critical juncture in our country. We don't have a foreign policy, and we don't project the goodness of this country in terms of liberty, democracy, open markets, and human rights, with a weak core.
And right now in this country, our core, our economy, is broken.
And we don't shine that light today. We're 25 percent of the world's GDP. The world is a better place when the United States is strong. So guiding anything that we talk about from a foreign policy standpoint needs to be fixing our core.
But, second of all, I believe that, you know, after 10 years of fighting the war on terror, people are ready to bring our troops home from Afghanistan, Rick.
(APPLAUSE)
They're ready to bring our troops home. This country -- this country has given its all.
KELLY: Governor Huntsman?
HUNTSMAN: What remains behind, some element to collect intelligence, special forces capability, and we're going to have to do that in every corner of the world. But we need to fix this core and get serious about what the rest of the 21st century holds for this country.
CBS Foreign Policy Debate
On November 12, 2011 Govenror Huntsman participated in the CBS Foreign Policy Debate. When asked about Afghanistan, he noted that in his view, it was time to come home from the country and leave only a small contingent behind.
Scott Pelley: Thank you, Congress-- Congresswoman Bach-- Bachmann, thank you very much. Let me come over to you, Governor Huntsman. And-- and ask you, we are seeing spikes in casualties in Afghanistan, in new places. Can you explain to me what's happening there and how you would change that as commander in chief?
Jon Huntsman: Well, I think the-- spikes obviously are driven by-- lack of security, proper security, in certain parts of the country, which could plague us for a very, very long time to come. I take a different approach on Afghanistan. I say it's time to come home. I say this-- I say this nation has achieved its key objectives in Afghanistan. We've had free elections in 2004. We've uprooted the Taliban. We've dismantled Al Qaeda. We have killed Osama bin Laden. I say this nation's future is not Afghanistan. This nation's future is not Iraq. This nation's future is how prepared we are to meet the 21st Century competitive challenges. That's economic and that's education. And that's gonna play out over the Asia-Pacific region. And we're either prepared for that reality or we're not. I don't want to be nation building in Afghanistan when this nation so desperately needs to be built.
Scott Pelley: Make sure I understand. Bring all the troops home today?
Jon Huntsman: Here's what I would keep behind, because we still have work to do. We don't need 100,000 troops nation building, many of whom can't cross the wire. I think we need a component that gathers tactical intelligence. We need enhanced special forces, response capability for rapid response. And we need some ongoing commitment to train the local Afghan National Army. That's not 100,000 troops. That's well south of that. We are fighting an asymmetric threat, a counterterror threat. Not only there, but in Waziristan and every other corner of the world. And we need to prepare for that as a reality of our 21st Century foreign policy.
Scott Pelley: And that's time. Thank you, sir.
CNN National Security Debate
On November 22, 2011 Governor Huntsman participated in the national security debate on CNN. Governor Huntsman addresses Afghanistan in several questions. He states that the American people are growing weary of not knowing the end point in Afghanistan and that we need to begin drawing down troops there.
HUNTSMAN: No, I -- I totally disagree. I think we need to square with the American people about what we've achieved. We need an honest conversation in this country about the sacrifices that have been made over nearly 10 years. We have -- we have dismantled the Taliban. We've run them out of Kabul. We've had free elections in 2004. We've killed Osama bin Laden. We've upended, dismantled al Qaeda. We have achieved some very important goals for the United States of America.
Now, the fact that we have 100,000 troops nation-building in Afghanistan when this nation so desperately needs to be built, when, on the ground, we do need intelligence gathering, no doubt about that. We need a strong Special Forces presence. We need a drone presence. And we need some ongoing training of the Afghan National Army.
But we haven't done a very good job defining and articulating what the end point is in Afghanistan. And I think the American people are getting very tired about where we find ourselves today.
(APPLAUSE)
BLITZER: Let me let Governor Romney respond.
ROMNEY: Well, let me respond.
Are you suggesting, Governor, that we just take all our troops out next week or what -- what's your proposal?
HUNTSMAN: Did you hear what I just said?
I said we should draw down from 100,000. We don't need 100,000 troops. We don't need 100,000 troops in Afghanistan...
(CROSSTALK)
HUNTSMAN: -- many of whom can't even cross the wire. We need a presence on the ground that is more akin to 10,000 or 15,000. That will serve our interests in terms of intelligence gathering and Special Forces response capability. And we need to prepare for a world, not just in South Asia, but, indeed, in every corner of the world in which counter-terror -- counter-terrorism is going to be in front of us for as far as the eye can see into the 21st century.
ROMNEY: And the -- and the commanders on the ground feel that we should bring down our surge troops by December of 2012 and bring down all of our troops, other than, perhaps, 10,000 or so, by the end of -- of 2014.
The decision to pull our troops out before that, they believe, would put at risk the extraordinary investment of treasure and blood which has been sacrificed by the American military.
I stand with the commanders in this regard and have no information that suggests that pulling our troops out faster than that would do anything but put at -- at great peril the extraordinary sacrifice that's been made. This is not time for America to cut and run. We have been in for 10 years. We are winding down. The Afghan troops are picking up the capacity to secure their country. And the mission is pretty straightforward, and that is to allow the Afghan people to have a sovereign nation not taken over by the Taliban. BLITZER: Let me bring the speaker in. What do you say...
GINGRICH: I would...
BLITZER: -- pull out?
HUNTSMAN: Just -- just one point.
BLITZER: You want -- oh, go ahead.
HUNTSMAN: Yes, just about the generals on the ground. And listen, I think it's important for the American people to know we have achieved some very important objectives in raising standards in Afghanistan and helping to build civil society.
But at the end of the day, the president of the United States is commander-in-chief, commander-in-chief. Of course you're going to listen to the generals. But...
(APPLAUSE)
HUNTSMAN: -- I also remember when people listened to the generals in 1967 and we heard a certain course of action in South Asia that didn't serve our interests very well.
The president is the commander-in-chief and ought to be informed by a lot of different voices, including of those of his generals Jr. ) on the ground.
2012 Campaign Website Statements
RENEWING AMERICA'S LEADERSHIP IN THE WORLD
The Way Forward in Afghanistan-Pakistan
Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, the United States invaded Afghanistan to prevent Al-Qaeda terrorists from continuing to train freely and plot attacks against our country. Our brave men and women in the U.S. military and intelligence community can be proud of their accomplishments: Al-Qaeda has been largely driven from Afghanistan, the Taliban has been removed from governing power, and Osama Bin Laden has been killed. Yet, our mission has evolved into an ill-advised counterinsurgency campaign which continues to carry heavy costs in terms of blood and treasure.
Counterinsurgency strategies applied in Iraq have not been nearly as effective when tried in Afghanistan where conditions differ considerably. Remnants of the Taliban take refuge in the ungoverned spaces of northwest Pakistan. The Pakistani intelligence services appear to be actively hedging bets by supporting terrorist activities that target Americans in Afghanistan. And our partner government in Kabul lacks the capacity and perhaps even the will to fight for their fledgling democracy. It is unclear that any amount of time or resources committed to the conflict by the United States would render our efforts in Afghanistan effective.
Pakistan is an important country that we ignore at our own peril. It is the sixth most populous country in the world, has the dangerous mix of a young median age and low GDP, has a demonstrated nuclear weapons capability, and has directly or indirectly been a sponsor of terrorist networks and proliferation activities. If Pakistan is unstable, we will all be less secure.
Our relationship with Pakistan is purely transactional. Going forward, our interests would be best served if Pakistan becomes a genuine partner in fighting terrorism, and contributes constructively to Afghanistan's future as a more stable multi-ethnic democracy. For Pakistan to pursue that course, they need to understand Washington will not give blank checks. Our assistance should be quid pro quo based on the decisions Pakistan makes. This does not commit us to saving Pakistan – a job we are not fit for at this juncture in our history. This does commit us to a course that gives us the best chance to keep America safe and allows us to focus on our priorities at home.
Jon Huntsman Priorities:
Exit Afghanistan: After a decade of fighting and thousands of American lives lost, it is time to bring our brave troops home.
Shift to counter-terrorism mission. Our remaining presence should be committed to ensuring that Afghanistan will not be a base for Al-Qaeda and other potential terrorists who target the U.S. and our allies. A counterterrorism strategy, involving small, nimble Special Forces and intelligence teams, would thwart efforts by terrorists to reestablish a presence in Afghanistan. At the same time, the United States should continue to train Afghan military and police forces and help build governmental capacity so that responsibility for the counterterrorism campaign can be turned over as quickly as reasonably possible to the Afghan government.
Only Pakistan can save Pakistan. The Pakistanis must be made to understand a hard quid pro quo: future U.S. assistance will be tied to Pakistan’s efforts to combat terrorists, curb proliferation, and the extent to which they contribute in constructive ways to Afghanistan’s future.
