Opportunity passing for Obama on Afghanistan

The upshot of Abdullah pulling out is: 1) we couldn't prevent Karzai from cheating his way to victory in the first election; and 2) we couldn't strong-arm Karzai into accepting a coalition with Abdullah (Kerry's mission to arm-twist for a second round has now backfired completely).

So the question begs: with those two pronounced failures, what makes us think we're going to ever get a strong partner in Karzai?

If I'm advising Obama and pushing for a smaller effort, I push very hard right now to take advantage of this fiasco. I shift my money overtly to Pakistan and say, "We have to work with governments that can at least make a decent show of democracy."

Is our concern really about democracy? Not so much as competency. Karzai is just competent enough to cheat his way to victory but not competent to keep the country together or rule it in an uncorrupt fashion.

So I see an opportunity passing here, unless we were to get very tough and then we negotiate further from that point.

But, as always, the State Department pipes in with the clumsiest of congratulations, demonstrating we know how to pick sides in disputed events (and that Honduras wasn't a fluke but the normal ham-handedness).

As it is, I see us approaching the "victorious" Karzai with less-than-zero leverage now--if we choose to reward his non-win with more money and more troops.

Ironically enough, I don't see this outcome playing well for us in terms of regionalizing the solution set. If I'm a regional power and witness this turn of events, I imagine the U.S. owns Karzai, so why bother? Of course, I believe the opposite to be true, thus we're screwed all the more.

First impression after a narcotic-filled weekend, but I see this development as bad, bad, bad.

And if I was Obama looking to leave, I would take advantage.

Comments

[large]

I believe that this is really a non issue . . We've held Karzai's hand for 8 years, and now all of a sudden, he's toxic because He's "Corrupt" . . Hell, half the House Committee leaders in OUR Congress are under investigation for corruption of one kind or another, several Cabinet members can't seem to get their taxes straight and we accuse some well dressed dude we put in power in a literal "Fourth World Country" of being "Corrupt" . . Obama's kidding, right?

The Taliban are there because they always have been there, recruiting, collecting money, getting better and more arms. We've pressured Pakistan to apply pressure in the West, they are beginning to reciprocate as are the Taliban out of self defense . . I don't believe Karzai or Abdullah would have much influence on the Taliban in the country. Neither represent security to the rural people.

And without security, whoever lives and rules in Kabul is a very, very moot point! Fact is, Abdullah may be the lucky one . . If decisions aren't made damn fast, Karzai may be decorating a lamp post in somewhere downtown Kabul!

[Javaid Akhtar]

Its more about good governace.If Karzai's sucking in money to hold a coalition together then theres no money for the rest of the country means thats kabul does'nt matter.Accountability through the possiblity of real change through the ballot box should create a less venal kabul.Its Kabul thats making itself irrelevent and creating the space for the Taliban.Maybe dealing with the Taliban is more up Karzai's street because I think that is inevitable now.