Afghans See Sharp Shift in U.S. Tone

[Cees Binkhorst]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Naar mijn mening was de essentie van de boodschap niet alleen gericht
aan de Afghanen, Amerikanen en bondgenoten, maar ook aan de
Republikeinen en Generaal McChrystal die kort geleden in Londen voor hun
beurt praatten.

Groet / Cees


PS. Waarom eigenlijk in Londen?

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/04/world/asia/04afghan.htm

December 4, 2009
Afghans See Sharp Shift in U.S. Tone
By CARLOTTA GALL
KABUL, Afghanistan — For Afghans, the change in tone was unmistakable.
Unlike Bush-era speeches pledging unending support, President Obama
suddenly introduced a timeline and a period of 18 months before the
start of a drawdown of troops.

The timetable set off alarm here. It was the subject of television
discussions and journalists’ questions to the American ambassador, Karl
W. Eikenberry, a retired lieutenant general, as well as to Gen. Stanley
A. McChrystal, the commander of American forces here.

If Tuesday night was about President Obama sending a message to the
American public that the war in Afghanistan would not be open-ended,
then Wednesday in Kabul was about reassuring the Afghans of America’s
long-term commitment.

To underscore that, General Eikenberry signed an agreement with the
Afghan foreign minister, Rangin Dadfar Spanta, at a ceremony to open the
first United States consulate in Afghanistan in the northern city of
Mazar-i-Sharif, with another planned in the city of Herat.

“I want to emphasize that we have a very comprehensive approach and a
long-term friendship and partnership with Afghanistan,” General
Eikenberry said. President Obama discussed further assistance in energy,
water management, mines, agriculture and improvement of the civil
service in his video conference call on Tuesday with President Hamid
Karzai, he added.

He explained to the mostly Afghan journalists gathered that when the
drawdown begins in 18 months, the number of troops on the ground would
be as much as 35,000 more than at present and the Afghan forces
stronger.

Mr. Spanta said he was reassured in an hourlong call on Tuesday with his
counterpart, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. But he admitted
that the 18-month timeline for the start of a transition to Afghan
authority had served something of a shock therapy to the Afghan
government.

“Can we do it?” he said. “That is the main question. This is not done in
a moment. It is a process. They have to have strategic patience with
us.”

In a clear sign of his government’s uneasiness at the flagging American
enthusiasm for the Afghan war, Mr. Spanta said he had just presented a
proposal to Mr. Karzai to work out a new strategic partnership with the
United States to secure the kind of predictable, long-term assistance
that close American allies like Israel and Egypt enjoy.

All parties involved agreed that a great deal of the job ahead was about
managing perceptions.

“We have to manage the public,” said a senior Afghan government aide,
speaking anonymously so he could talk more freely.

President Obama was very much speaking to the American public in his
speech, he said. American military officials had assured them that the
18-month timeline was more for the American public opinion than any
unmovable deadline for the Afghans.

The Afghans had to persuade their own public, the aide said. “Our own
problem is that people have a war-torn mentality; they will side with
the winner, and we have to show them that the Afghan government can be
the winner,” he said.

The Taliban jumped in with their own draft of reality. President Obama
was ignoring the interests of his own people, who were suffering an
economic downturn, the group said in an e-mail message. “It clearly
indicates that the United States has broad, long-term, brazen plans not
only for Afghanistan but also for the region,” said the statement,
bearing the heading of the Islamic Emirates of Afghanistan.

The Taliban are prepared for a long and patient resistance against the
increase of American troops, the statement said, warning that sending
more troops will only lead to more casualties for NATO and American
troops and cause more Afghan civilian casualties.

For Mr. Karzai, who is under exceptionally strong pressure to choose a
clean and competent cabinet, and to move decisively to combat
corruption, the speech itself was not overly harsh. “Tough love,” one
aide called it. Far stronger words are being used in private to push for
reforms and the appointment of effective minister and officials, one
Western official said.

One idea that has raised concern in the Karzai government was a plan to
bypass the central government and give direct assistance to effective
regional governors and ministers, and Mr. Spanta soundly rejected the
idea.

Mr. Karzai, who has been smarting ever since he was forced to accept
that he did not win the presidential election outright, avoided any
comment on the president’s speech.

A statement from the presidential palace stated only that the government
welcomed President Obama’s new strategy for the support it offered in
development and training for Afghan institutions and in protecting the
Afghan people, and commended it for the recognition that terrorists were
operating in the region beyond Afghanistan’s borders in Pakistan.

“Afghanistan will spare no effort in achieving the above objectives,” it
said.

Mr. Spanta was the only minister who commented on the speech. He praised
Mr. Obama’s comments pinpointing that Afghanistan suffered from
extremist safe havens in Pakistan, the first time an American president
had stated it so publicly that the center of terrorism was across the
border in Pakistan, Mr. Spanta said. “This is the first time we heard
that from the president,” he said. “It is a tremendous change and
progress.”

But for some it was not enough. “Faced with a surge the Taliban will go
to Pakistan,” said Nader Khan Kutawaisi, a member of Parliament from
Paktika province, which borders Pakistan’s tribal areas. “It is better
to concentrate on their safe havens. As everyone knows they have a big
headquarters in Quetta and shadow governors living there and I know
people went to congratulate one governor for Id,” he said, referring to
Id al-Adha, the Muslim holiday celebrated last week.

Yet generally Afghan officials have commended the new strategy — much of
which has already been in place since General McChrystal took command
for six months — to lower civilian casualties, protect the Afghan
people, train more Afghan forces and hand over more responsibility to
them.

In particular, those officials pitted on the front line against the
Taliban insurgents said a rapid surge of 30,000 troops this winter was
desperately needed, since Afghan forces could not fight off the current
insurgency on their own.

“It’s a very good idea,” said a senior security official who has been in
the forefront of tracking Al Qaeda and Taliban since 2001. The United
States had very good human intelligence on Taliban on both sides of the
border in Afghanistan and Pakistan but they did not have enough good
fighters in the Afghan army and police, he said.

“They need the Americans,” he said. A surge of extra forces could
undercut the insurgency in six months since many of the Taliban were
ready to negotiate and could be persuaded to swap sides with a concerted
effort, he said.

In Kabul, an increase in troops was generally seen as a gesture of
welcome strength. Yet in the south, where the civilian cost has been
highest and there is a deep weariness of the war, the mood has been
generally against an increase in troops since many fear it would only
increase the civilian cost. The test would be in how the extra troops
perform, one government official said.

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********