ARTICLE: U.S. Envoy Urges Caution on Forces for Afghanistan, By ELISABETH BUMILLER and MARK LANDLER, New York Times, November 11, 2009
Per my recent post regarding the Abdullah pull-out, Eikenberry's reluctance gives Obama the chance I stated he should take advantage of--if he's really looking to keep it light. This isn't a question of whether or not Karzai is corrupt (he is--hardly out of the norm for the region), but whether he presents legitimate competency as our counterparty going forward.
The commitment here is large and lengthy, as Obama seems aware based on his questions:
Mr. Obama asked General Eikenberry about his concerns during the meeting on Wednesday, officials said, and raised questions about each of the four military options and how they might be tinkered with or changed. A central focus of Mr. Obama's questions, officials said, was how long it would take to see results and be able to withdraw."He wants to know where the off-ramps are," one official said.
Any surge in forces will take months to unfold, then there's months before you can expect results, but then you've also bought yourself a significant delay on any desired downstream drawdown. In short, it's a serious second mortgage not to be undertaken lightly.
Ultimately, I think--and have said--that we need to show commitment. But Obama's leverage on Karzai is a now thing, something that will evaporate rather quickly once the commitment is announced. So better to raise your qualms now and make your pressures happen now, and if Eikenberry gives him that option, then Eikenberry is doing his job.
Me? If I'm Obama, I go to Beijing and tell them straight, "Listen, I'd like to be able to stay in Afghanistan long enough for you guys to see your $3.5B investment work out--along with other goals you might have, but what are you going to do for me in the meantime? Because I've got a domestic situation that does not support this long term, so if I cannot find some movement from neighbors like you, I may be offering you advice on how to deal with YOUR Afghanistan woes next time we meet."
Again, Obama's leverage on this whole decision is a wasting asset, so I don't mind the dithering, so long as side conversations like that are being pursued.
Are they? Rest assured you never hear about the truly serious ones.
So let's hope these guys are thinking glidepaths beyond just showing staying power, because that's why I voted for the man.
| Permalink |
Comments (4)
Failure in Afghanistan is more dangerous for China than the US. Training fighters to cross the border and fight the Chinese in far western China is much easier than plotting complicated terrorist attacks against the US.
Posted by Robert Armstrong | November 12, 2009 12:21 PM
Yes, the China lever is important as is leverage on India.
From a practical standpoint, I think its a matter of starving Karzai's central government and going right to the province. Ignore Karzai essentially and do the work needed among the people.
Posted by Dan Hare | November 12, 2009 1:44 PM
"Obama's leverage on Karzai is a now thing, something that will evaporate rather quickly once the commitment is announced."
"Again, Obama's leverage on this whole decision is a wasting asset,"
That's why it's hard to do the right thing, and necessary to have an informed and mature media.
Posted by Louis Heberlein | November 12, 2009 2:41 PM
But those are the conversation I need to hear about. As someone who only found a reason to be hopeful about Iraq because it offered the Iraqi's connectivity and an opportunity for a life closer to mine, and who supports a continued engagement in AFPAK for the same reason I need to hear the conversation that are being held that will make the burden on America easier to bear.
Because if you guys fold, that I doubt Mr Rudd will keep our lads there, and then Mr Brown follows suit and then what do we have.
But if we know that maybe the Chinese or the Indians are coming in to help then maybe we hold fast, the rabble rousing dies down and Obama is freer to get on with the other jobs he needs to get done.
Posted by David Sutton
|
November 12, 2009 5:59 PM