Aides Say Obama's Afghan Aims Elevate War.

[elleng]

Source: NYT

"President Obama intends to adopt a tougher line toward Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, as part of a new American approach to Afghanistan that will put more emphasis on waging war than on development, senior administration officials said Tuesday.

Mr. Karzai is now seen as a potential impediment to American goals in Afghanistan, the officials said, because corruption has become rampant in his government, contributing to a flourishing drug trade and the resurgence of the Taliban.

Among those pressing for Mr. Karzai to do more, the officials said, are Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and Richard C. Holbrooke, Mr. Obama’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The officials portrayed the approach as a departure from that of President Bush, who held videoconferences with Mr. Karzai every two weeks and sought to emphasize the American role in rebuilding Afghanistan and its civil institutions.

They said that the Obama administration would work with provincial leaders as an alternative to the central government, and that it would leave economic development and nation-building increasingly to European allies, so that American forces could focus on the fight against insurgents.">>>




Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/28/us/politics/28policy.html?_r=1&hp

[EFerrari]

1. Does NYTs garble this or is any discussion about Afghanistan garbled?

This is going to be the kind of situation that requires comparing different reports to piece together.

[MADem]

2. Afghanistan is going to have an army, a proper one, whether they like it or not.

They're going to be deployed to the rural areas, too. They're going to have to WORK, as well.

And so are US troops. Lots of 'em. They're going to move away from the super bases to a more regional/outpost approach.

Karzai knew this was coming, though. He's not stupid, and it would have been the same game plan no matter which Democrat won.

In fact, even if McCain had won, he'd be figuring this would be coming down the pike.

[FrenchieCat]

3. Asshole New York Times headline is really to piss us off, I'm assuming.

After what they did to Caroline Kennedy, and cheerleaded for Iraq War, this is their cherry on top, I guess. since the article doesn't really amount to heightened war with Afghanistan as much as heightened concentration on Al Qaeda, with NATO picking up the non military slack.

as the article reads.....

With the forces of the Taliban and Al Qaeda mounting more aggressive operations in eastern and southern Afghanistan, administration officials said they saw little option but to focus on the military campaign. They said Europeans would be asked to pick up more of the work on reconstruction, police training and cooperation with the Afghan government. They also said much of the international effort might shift to helping local governments and institutions, and away from the government in Kabul.

It’s not about dumping reconstruction at all,” said a senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic delicacy of the subject. “What we’re trying to do is to focus on the Al Qaeda problem. That has to be our first priority.”

Mr. Gates said Tuesday that under the redefined Afghan strategy, it would be vital for NATO allies to “provide more civilian support.” In particular, he said, the allies should be more responsible for building civil society institutions in Afghanistan, a task that had been falling to American forces. He also demanded that allies “step up to the plate” and defray costs of expanding the Afghan Army, an emerging power center, whose leaders could emerge as rivals to Mr. Karzai.

[tonycinla]

4. News Flash!

We did not "win" in Korea,we did not "win" in Vietnam and there is nothing to "win" in Afghanistan.Leave tomorrow morning.Al Aqeda is not going to launch ICBM from there.