OP-ED: The Tenacity Question, By DAVID BROOKS, New York Times, October 29, 2009
Good piece by Brooks, which captures, I think, the key unanswered question on Obama:
The experts I spoke with describe a vacuum at the heart of the war effort -- a determination vacuum. And if these experts do not know the state of President Obama's resolve, neither do the Afghan villagers. They are now hedging their bets, refusing to inform on Taliban force movements because they are aware that these Taliban fighters would be their masters if the U.S. withdraws. Nor does President Hamid Karzai know. He's cutting deals with the Afghan warlords he would need if NATO leaves his country.Nor do the Pakistanis or the Iranians or the Russians know. They are maintaining ties with the Taliban elements that would represent their interests in the event of a U.S. withdrawal.
The determination vacuum affects the debate in this country, too. Every argument about troop levels is really a proxy argument for whether the U.S. should stay or go. The administration is so divided because the fundamental issue of commitment has not been settled.
One of the key reasons why I voted for him was the sense that he would be suitably calculating and rational on these decisions--eschewing the romanticism of "good fights." But the determination quotient still matters: if you want to hand off or regionalize, you have to seem a credible partner--you have to demonstrate it.
And why I don't find a lot to complain about regarding the administration's key decisions to date, none have given them any great opportunities to define themselves in this manner.
And they should be looking for one, because the alternative of having the world guess on this subject is no good.
| Permalink |
