The Obama administration faces some tough choices about what to do in Afghanistan.

The problem is complicated by decreasing support for the war by Americans. Add to that the men and women who have lost their lives in a futile attempt to bring stability to the country.

The problem is further complicated by the generals on the ground calling for a massive increase in the numbers of troops deployed there.

This is not a time for a hasty decision, but rather looking thoughtfully and rationally at all possible options. It appears we find ourselves in a Catch-22 situation where we are damned if we do and damned if we don't.

Much of the discussion about Afghanistan revolves around two options - either pulling our forces out or yielding to the request for thousands of additional troops. The Soviets occupied Afghanistan for 10 years, then left, unable to achieve their objectives. We have been there eight years and appear no closer to a solution.

I suggest that neither of these options makes sense. If we abandon Afghanistan, the country may disintegrate and allow the Taliban to rule with their harsh and dangerous practices.

But if we beef up our troop strength, we are committed to a military solution, and there seems to be general agreement a military solution is not what Afghanistan needs.

The problem is further complicated by the lack of a strong central government, which is riddled with corruption and is powerless to bring order to the chaos in the country.

What I propose is a third option that gives Afghanistan back to the Afghans and gives us an exit strategy, allowing us to leave with some sense of dignity. This option will be denounced by those who are gung-ho to send thousands of troops into harm's way, but to me it is the only option that makes sense, that has a chance of succeeding and that gives Afghanistan a better future for its citizens.

After all, it is their country, and only they can create the better future they deserve. This option would mean American lives would no longer be lost in an endless war, and we could feel we have done our best to help usher in a new age for a country that has had enough of war and violence.

The Afghans I have met are compassionate, well-educated people who want the best for their families and their country.

The option I propose is not my idea, but I have heard it voiced by people whose judgment I respect. One is Tom Brokaw, respected elder of the media, who in a recent interview offered his idea for dealing with Afghanistan.

He said the country is essentially run by warlords, each of whom is responsible for the territory under his control.

Brokaw's proposal is to go to the warlords and tell them a huge sum of money ($5 million?) was deposited for them in a Swiss bank account. This money was to be used for building a stable country.

But every time they screwed up, money would be deducted from their account.

The understanding would be that the money was to be used only for purposes that would help them govern their people and take responsibility for their future.

I think such a plan has a chance of succeeding. It would save the lives of soldiers, give us an exit strategy and end our pouring billions of dollars down a rat hole. It would require an investment of money, but we are spending that now without positive results.

So let us invest money in a way that makes Afghans responsible for their own destiny and that allows us to withdraw with dignity from our involvement there.

If the Afghans want a country where women are free, where children can get an education and where citizens can live without fear, that can happen only if Afghans themselves create an environment where this can occur.

Since America is having this intense debate about Afghanistan, I believe the option suggested here is the only one that has a chance of success.

Not only would it give us a way to leave with honor, but it also would give Afghanistan back to the people who are most interested in a better future.