Afghanistan - a riddle wrapped in an emigma
The central question hinges on the nature of the current relationship between the Taliban and Al Queda. Therein is the question. The predictability of the future of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan has to be settled by the President. Recent successes with surgical strikes against Al Qaeda in Afghanistan may make it less central to U.S. strategy. The administration pointed out to the Times in an anonymous interview that there are fewer than 100 Al Qaeda fighters left in Afghanistan. Another anonymous official characterizes the strategy as one of viewing the Taliban, militants local to Afghanistan and jihadist Al Qaeda as very different. President Obama has reiterated that his goal is to protect the United States and to prevent the jihadists from getting safe haven. Mark Knoller reported on Twitter that "a WH official says Obama received a 'comprehensive intelligence and counterterrorism assessment' on political & diplomatic situation in Pakistan."
President Obama requested an early look at General McChrystal's troop request from Defense Secretary Gates, according to McClatchy Wednesday. The President wanted to see it before the top military officials reviewed it so that it would not be leaked to reporters as was McChrystal's Afghanistan assessment. This may suggest friction between the military and the commander in chief. And there has certainly been friction between General McChrystal and his superiors because of his public stances, and because of the leak.
Similarly Pakistan's army has objected publicly to the conditions in the $1.5 billion U.S. (Kerry-Lugar) aid package still to be signed by the President, McClatchy reported. This pits the military "against the fragile civilian government of the Pakistan Peoples Party, which has championed the U.S. assistance deal," as well as the opposition in parliament. The bill has a number of requirements including, "monitoring and certification of Pakistan's action against terrorism. . . requires the country to work to prevent nuclear proliferation and to show that its military isn't interfering in Pakistani politics." This objection, according to McClatchy caught the administration by surprise and comes at a time just prior to a planned offensive towards militants in the border region of Waziristan. Pakistan's Foreign minister on a trip to Washington played down concerns over the bill, while acknowledging that the language could have been more sensitive to Pakistan's sovereignty. Marc Ambinder posted this on Twitter:"RT @nickschifrin: Is the Pakistani military statement of doubt about the Kerry-Lugar bill in #Pakistan a game changer?" It was linked to a related BBC News story explaining more about the nature of the Pakistani military's objections.
Finally, many of us remember Charlie Wilson's War. Huffingington Post reports that Wilson now thinks that we ought to consider a new strategy regarding the war in Afghanistan. "I'd probably shut it down, rather than lose a lot of soldiers and treasure," noting the President's "very tough situation." See the Scranton Times-Tribune
References:
"Gross: Massive Fraud in Afghanistan Election," is by Nasrine Gross at Juan Cole's Informed Comment (10/7/09).
"Robert Kaplan on the Regional Dimensions of Afghanistan," is from Steve Clemons' The Washington Note (10/7/09).
"Guest Post by Michael Cohen: The Trouble with Counter-Insurgency," is from Steve Clemons' The Washington Note (4/1/09).
"Battle of Books rages in Afghan debate," is from The Wall Street Journal at Memeorandum (10/7/09). Regards Lessons in Disaster and A Better War.
" 'Code Pink' rethinks its call for Afghanistan pullout," is from the Christian Science Monitor at Memeorandum (10/7/09).










![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=e7609639-bb38-4f91-acb7-d065cd283a32)










