Today in Mr Obama's Neighborhood: The Latest in US Foreign Policy (9 February)

Related Post: Binyam Mohamed at Guantanamo Bay - “I Know Beyond A Doubt He Was Tortured”
Related Post: Obama v. The Generals (Again) - The Closure of Guantanamo Bay

The Neighborhood Today: An Economy Day, But Clouds over Afghanistan

Evening Update (11:25 p.m.): Move Along, Nothing to See Here. Genius/General David Petraeus, the head of US Central Command, and Frnech Defense Minister Herve Morin discussed Afghanistan today in a meeting in Paris. Of course, Petraeus told reporters afterwards, they did not talk about the issue of troop reinforcements: "That wasn't part of the discussion today. What we were doing was discussing how we perceive the 20 countries in the central command area of responsibility."

Which is sort of the equivalent of visiting the Pope and not mentioning Catholicism.



6:55 p.m. Either the Obama Administration is playing a good cop, bad cop game from Iran, or the departing US Ambassador to Iraq, Ryan Crocker, is being none-too-subtle in his distance from the White House and, I suspect, his alliance with American military commanders.

As the White House talks of engagement with Iran, Crocker has told Al Arabiya Television that Tehran is still supporting Iraqi insurgents, despite US-Iran talks over the security situation: ""There is also what I would call a terrorist element from some Shia extremists and we believe that they are supported still by elements within Iran...The question is what decisions the Iranians are going to make about their future relationship with Iraq."

6:50 p.m. Reports indicate four US soldiers and an Iraqi interpreter have been killed in a suicide car bombing in Mosul in northern Iraq.

6:15 p.m. Interesting twist in the drama over the US airbase in Kyrgyzstan. The Cable, the blog of the journal Foreign Policy, claims that the dispute arose in part because more than $100 million in American payments did not go to the Kyrgyzstan Government but to the family of former Kyrgyz leader Askar Akayev. The US failure to renegotiate agreements to ensure its payments made it to the correct location, i.e., the Kyrgyz Treasury, prompted Kyrgyzstan to take action.

Afternoon Update (4:30 p.m.): It appears there are further manoeuvres around the closure of the US Manas airbase in Kyrgyzstan. A Parliamentary vote has been delayed because the Kyrgyz Government is "sending more paperwork" to the parliamentarians.

Russian sign of goodwill for the Biden speech? Kyrgyz horse-trading for more income? Your speculation is as good as mine.

11:40 a.m. The BBC has just released a poll of more than 1500 Afghans on the political, economic, and military situation. The percentage who think the country is "headed in the right direction" is falling. While there was a 2:1 margin saying Yes two years ago, opinion is now evenly divided.

Support for the Afghan Government is still high, although it is declining. Perhaps most provocatively, given the debate in Washington, is this finding: "Support for the presence of foreign troops is also strong but declining."

11:25 a.m. South Korean Lee Myung-Bak has vowed to take a "firm" stance against North Korea's suspension of all political and military agreements.

11 a.m.: Juan Cole has an interesting analysis of former President Mohammad Khatami's declared candidacy for June's Iranian presidential election. It's an optimistic assessment: "Could Khatami be Iran's Obama?"

6:30 a.m. GMT: The general talk of US engagement with Iran, buttressed by Vice President Joe Biden's speech on Saturday, prompts some frankly ludicrous speculation on Iranian politics and society. Michael Ledeen is howling at the Tehran moon: "The terror masters in Tehran believe [Iran's] satellite has an even greater significance -- another step toward the return of the Shiite messiah, or Mahdi, the long-vanished 12th Imam." Worst Sentence of the Day comes from Roger Cohen in The New York Times: "The core debate is: can Iran manage a Chinese-style reform where its Islamic hierarchy endures through change, or does opening to America equal Soviet-style implosion?"

So let's get to the important, unresolved question: did Iranian officials meet US counterparts privately in Munich this weekend? Any clues most appreciated....

There is a tantalising story in The Wall Street Journal today highlighting the link between Iran and Afghanistan. US officials have told the paper that Obama envoy Richard Holbrooke will "engage Iran as part of a broad effort to stabilize Afghanistan and combat the country's growing drug trade". The article notes that one of Holbrooke's advisors is Professor Vali Nasr, who has written extensively on Iran.

Morning Update (5:30 a.m. GMT; 12:30 a.m. Washington): US politics will be pre-occupied today with the Congressional debates over the Obama economic stimulus package, giving us a bit of space to read the developments after this weekend's Munich Security Conference.

As we updated last night, the President v. military contest over American strategy in Afghanistan is taking on the look of a centrepiece, with envoy Richard Holbrooke bigging it up as "tougher than Iraq". The latest development, however, gives more weight to the argument that the idea of a military-first surge is in trouble: the Germans have let it be known that a new political approach, rather than an increase in troops, is the best way forward, and the French Defense Minister, Herve Morin, has repeated his statement of two weeks ago that Paris will not send additional forces.

Politically, the reaction to Afghan President Hamid Karzai's speech needs to be watched, given his attempt to take the initiative from the Americans with the proposal of talks with "moderate Taliban". Given the implications of that suggestion, and Karzai's tenuous position with Washington, there is surprisingly little response in US and British media this morning to the speech.

Meanwhile, the talk of Genius/General David Petraeus in Munich seems to have slipped by most journalists. What coverage there is offers Petraeus' Afghanistan-surge-as-Iraq-surge rationale, a situation that "has deteriorated markedly in the past two years" in a "downward spiral of security", and the close-to-useless summary, "Terrorism – the be-all and end-all of policy towards the region under President George Bush – is now seen as much as a product as a cause of Afghanistan’s instability. National reconciliation is to be pursued as the longer-term objective."

For better or worse (in my opinion, worse), the Obama Administration has welded the Afghanistan issue to Pakistan as "Afpak", so envoy Richard Holbrooke starts in Islamabad today. White House staff are telling media that the Pakistani situation is the one that "scares" Obama, but it is clearly unclear what Washington is proposing to do --- the politics inside the country, be they at national level or in the regions, seem to beyond US grasp at the momen. So is the fighting: the military approach appears to be in suspension after the two missile strikes just after Obama took office, while dozens have died this week in battles in the Swat Valley between local insurgents and the Pakistani Army.

The New York Times' overview of Holbrooke's visit is simple but concise:

On almost every front, Pakistani leaders are calling for less American involvement, or at least the appearance of it. The main reason for the swell in resentment here is the very strategy that the United States government considers its prime success against Al Qaeda: missile strikes delivered by remotely piloted aircraft against militants in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

Update on Obama v. The Military: Where Next in Afghanistan?

Is President Obama preparing to stall out the military's request for 25,000 more US troops to Afghanistan?

The Times of London, in an article that is not replicated elsewhere, thinks so. It asserts, on the basis of an unnamed source:

The Pentagon was set to announce the deployment of 17,000 extra soldiers and marines last week but Robert Gates, the defence secretary, postponed the decision after questions from Obama.

The president was concerned by a lack of strategy at his first meeting with Gates and the US joint chiefs of staff last month in “the tank”, the secure conference room in the Pentagon. He asked: “What’s the endgame?” and did not receive a convincing answer.

On its own, that's not strong evidence that Obama is going to block the military's insistence on a "surge" to be announced before the NATO summit on 5 April. However, the excellent Juan Cole stacks up the reasons why Obama might want to pull the plug on Genius/General David Petraeus's plan.

As we've noted for weeks, the US is in a real logistical bind. With the closure of its main supply route from Pakistan, it has to find an alternative for all those extra forces. Russia, however, is playing a double game: while it says publicly it will allow the US to move supplies across its territory, it has encouraged Kyrgyzstan to close the US Manas airbase that is needed for the effort. Meanwhile Uzbekistan, which did host US bases after 9/11 but then evicted American forces in 2005, is only prepared to allow non-military supplies across its supplies.

Conclusion? The US is going to have pay a very high price --- economic and political --- to get full support for an alternative supply route. That is --- and here's a crazy thought --- unless it's prepared to supply Afghanistan from the west via Iran.

But, as good as Cole's analysis is, I think it misses the wider political point. It's pretty clear that Washington would prefer to see the back of President Hamid Karzai, its choice to lead Afghanistan in 2001 but a leader who --- depending on your point of view --- is too tolerant of corruption or too critical of the US approach to be a solid ally in this new surge.

However, unless the US is prepared to abandon the semblance of national government, it needs someone to play the political partner in Kabul. And Karzai, who is getting bolder even as his position is more and more tenuous, has made the process more difficult by suspending elections for the foreseeable future.

That means that, short of a coup, the Obama Administration is encumbered by a national leader who is now an opponent of its plans. And that means that, even if the US can find short-term military success against the insurgents, it has no political "endgame" in sight.

I'm wary of the V-word as an analogy but, for students of history, it might not be a bad idea to revisit Ngo Dinh Diem and Saigon 1963. Let's hope that Barack Obama chooses to take a glance, and draw any suitable lessons, this week.

Today's Obamameter: The Latest in US Foreign Policy (8 February)

Latest Post: Update on Obama v. The Military - Where Next in Afghanistan?
Latest Post: A New US Foreign Policy? The Biden Speech in Munich
Latest Post: Transcript of Joe Biden's Speech on Obama Foreign Policy

Current Obamameter: Settled

7:20 p.m. We've just offered, in a separate post, a latest view of the battle in Washington over the proposed "surge" in Afghanistan.

5:10 p.m. Message to Georgia: No, No, NATO. Following up his overtures to Russia on Saturday in his Munich speech, Vice President Joe Biden made it clear on Sunday that the Obama Administration would not be pushing Georgia's accession to NATO.

After meeting Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, Biden responded to a question about accession: "I'm in favor of Georgia's continued independence and autonomy. That is a decision for Georgia to make."

5:05 p.m. Important news out of Tehran: former President Mohammad Khatami has announced he will run in June's Presidential election.

4:35 p.m. And It Went So Well in Baghdad. President Obama's envoy to Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke, has said that victory there will be "much tougher" than in Iraq. He told the Munich Security Conference, ""I have never seen anything like the mess we have inherited."

Two US troops and two Afghans were killed by a bomb in Helmand Province on Sunday.



Afternoon Update (4:15 p.m. GMT; 11:15 a.m. Washington): Another bit of publicity around the Afghanistan battle. National Security Advisor James Jones has told a German newspaper that a decision on strategy will be needed by the NATO summit on 5 April. Jones added platitudes such as "answers will not be unilateral but multilateral" and the insistance that NATO and the Afghan Government must stop the drug trade as the "economic fuel of the insurgency".

Decoding? Jones is flagging up the duties that US military, as it "surges", would like to pass on to European partners. That's especially pertinent in Germany, where there is public unease about taking on the hard-line enforcement of a drugs ban. Indeed, it is no coincidence that it was German media that leaked the unwise statement of an American military commander last week that troops should have the right to shoot drug producers on sight, whether or not they are connect to the Taliban.

On the Russian front, Moscow has welcomed Joe Biden's call "to reset the button" of relations. Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said, "It is obvious the new U.S. administration has a very strong desire to change and that inspires optimism,"

4 p.m.  Just back from recording for Al Jazeera's Inside Story and an engaging discussion on the Biden speech and US foreign policy with Daveed Gartenstein-Ross of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and Rosemary Hollis of City University, London. Airtime is 5:30 p.m. GMT.

1 p.m. Al Jazeera English is now focusing on Afghan President Hamid Karzai's address to the Munich Security Conference. karzai has made a big political play, setting out a strategy of reaching out to the "moderate Taliban" for discussions. This is not a new position for Karzai, but in the midst of the US consideration of a military "surge", the timing of this makes it an important intervention.

Interesting that AJE is framing this as a US v. Afghanistan battle in which "the US will get its way" on the troop build-up, missing the emering story of division within the White House.

We'll follow up later, after speaking with AJE, about the latest from Washington. It appears that President Obama is holding out against immediate approval of the military's proposals because of the lack of an "exit strategy".

8:45 a.m. So how intensive is the Obama Administration's spin campaign on Afghanistan and Pakistan? In the same New York Times that tells Afghan leader Hamid Karzai he could soon be yesterday's man, there is a loving profile of Obama envoy Richard Holbrooke, complete with family photos and Superman rhetoric:

You have a problem that is larger than life. To deal with it you need someone who’s larger than life.

8:33 a.m. The New York Times has a dramatic article on the widening gap between the US and Afghan leader Hamid Karzai, adding weight to the speculation that Washington may try to "ditch" its erstwhile choice to run the country. Fed by inside information from Obama Adminsitration officials, the article opens with an account of how Vice President Joe Biden walked out on a dinner with Karzai last month after the Afghan leader denied any corruption in his Government:

President Obama said he regarded Mr. Karzai as unreliable and ineffective. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said he presided over a “narco-state.” The Americans making Afghan policy, worried that the war is being lost, are vowing to bypass Mr. Karzai and deal directly with the governors in the countryside.

Morning Update (8:30 a.m. GMT; 3:30 a.m. Washington): Pretty quiet overnight, so we've focused this morning, in a separate entry, on an analysis of Joe Biden's speech to the Munich Security Conference, setting out the "new tone" (and, for us, troubling cases) in US foreign policy. We've also posted the transcript of the speech.

Scott Lucas of Enduring America will be appearing on Al Jazeera English at 2 p.m. GMT to discuss the Obama/Biden approach.

Today's Obamameter: The Latest on US Foreign Policy (4 February)

Latest Post: US-Russia Relations - A Grand Obama Bargain on Nuclear Warheads?
Latest Post: Secret US-Iran Talks This Week?
Latest Post: US Military to Obama on Afghanistan: Make a Decision Now

Current Obamameter Reading: Distant Clouds, Local Storms

10:30 p.m. The British Council has suspended all operations in Iran after visas were denied to British staff and local employees were summoned to President Ahmadinejad's office and ordered to resign from their posts.

8 p.m. Red Alert of the Day. Isaac Ben Israel, a Member of the Knesset, has declared that Israel has a year in which to attack Iran before Tehran has a nuclear bomb: Ben Israel, a former general and senior defence official, said, "Last resort means when you reach the stage when everything else failed. When is this? Maybe a year, give or take."

Meanwhile, Prime Ministerial candidate Benjamin Netanyahu told a conference that Iran poses "the gravest challenge Israel has faced since the War of Independence in 1948. We will work on all levels to neutralise this danger." (cross-posted from Israel-Gaza-Palestine thread)

3:25 p.m. We've posted a separate entry on the reports of an Obama proposal to reduce US and Russian warheads by 80 percent.

2:50 p.m. Carrots and Sticks. Only a day after Moscow's provision of incentives helped persuade Kyrgyzstan to end the lease on the US airbase in that country, the Russian Foreign Ministry has stated:

We positively reacted to the request of the United States for the transit through Russia of goods and materials to Afghanistan. We will be flexible in many other ways which will support our joint success in Afghanistan -- that would be the basic school of thinking from which we will proceed.

2:40 p.m. Karzai Strikes Back. The Afghan President, amidst stories that the US military is prepared to "ditch" him as part of the US surge, has fought back with criticism of American military operations:

Our demands are clear and they are that house searches of Afghans, arrests of Afghans and civilian casualties must cease. And they (U.S. and NATO countries) are naturally putting on pressure to make us silent and retract from this claim. This is not possible.

Karzai's comments follow a meeting with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, who expressed his concern at the civilian death toll. The UN said on Tuesday that 2100 civilians had been killed in 2008, a 40 percent rise from the previous case, and added that 700 had died at the hands of Afghan and foreign forces. Last week NATO claimed only 90 civilians had been killed by Afghan/foreign military action.



2:25 p.m. Potentially significant news from Iran. Former President Mohammad Khatami, according to family and friends, will stand as a candidate in this spring's Presidential election.

12:45 p.m. Pakistani Taliban have released 29 policemen that they captured (see 9:10 a.m.) in fighting in the Swat Valley.

12:25 p.m. The battle over the US airbase in Kyrgyzstan (see 6 a.m.) is heating up. The American Embassy is insisting that it has received no formal notification that the Kyrgyz Government wishes to close the base, and talks are continuing on its future. The Kyrgyz Government has sent Parliament a decree on closure, however, and Parliamentary debate could begin on Thursday.

The base hosts approximately 1,000 military personnel from the US, Spain, and France and 650 U.S. and Kyrgyz contractors.

12:15 p.m. Iraqi authorities are investigating allegations, raised by tribal parties the day after the provincial elections, of serious voter fraud in Anbar province.

9:10 a.m. Pakistani Taliban claim to have captured 30 policemen in fighting in the Swat Valley. Insurgents have fired on NATO trucks, destroying nine vehicles.

8:30 a.m. The US has finally responded to North Korea's verbal provocations, which have declared the scrapping of all agreements with South Korea, the warning that the two countries are "on the brink of war", and Tuesday's announcement of Pyongyang's intention to test-fire a long-range missile.

The American military commander in South Korea, General Walter Sharp, warned to "stop the provocations that have been going on, whether it is declaring all the agreements to be no longer valid or missile technology that they continue to develop."

7:15 a.m. Iraq Developments. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, bolstered by apparent victories in provincial elections, has re-entered the battle over President Obama's plan to withdraw all US combat forces within 16 months. Al-Maliki has effectively weighed in on Obama's side,  and indeed given a subtle warning to the President that he should stick to his schedule despite the US military's opposition:

The new US Administration has sent messages on its plans to withdraw the US forces ahead of the agreed upon schedule which is something we consider to be good, and we are ready for any political or military commitment Iraq faces in the coming stage, stressing that the agreement on the pullout of the US forces has opened the door wide open to regaining Iraq's full sovereignty.

Meanwhile, The New York Times has a lengthy profile of another apparent election winner, former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, which it considers a sign that those favouring a strong central Iraqi Government have triumphed prevailed in this week's vote.

7:05 a.m. Ethiopian forces, who had only withdrawn from Somalia last month, have reportedly returned to a border town. The regional leader of the Islamic Courts Union has threatened force if the troops do not leave.

6:50 a.m. An important economic signal from Obama. In discussions with British businessman and bankers, we've thought the possibility that the President will move to "protectionism" was exaggerated.

Yesterday Obama indicated on US television that he would set aside a "Buy American" provision, which requires that all iron and steel for infrastructure in his economic stimulus package must be made in the US: ""That is a potential source of trade wars that we can't afford at a time when trade is sinking all across the globe."

That message is likely to be reinforced by the President's visit on 19 February to Canada, which is understandably very worried about any US trade restrictions.

6:10 a.m. For the sake of the record, Al Qa'eda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri has released another audio statement, focusing on Gaza. It's a ritual denuncation of "western collaboration" with Israel.

As readers know, we are more concerned with local situations than we are with Al Qa'eda, which we believe is increasingly peripheral to political and military conflict and even terrorism. It is interesting that al-Zawahiri apparently did not refer directly to the situation in Pakistan and Afghanistan, preferring to use a more distant issue for support.

Morning Update (6 a.m. GMT; 1 a.m. Washington): US news will be dominated today by the political embarrassment of the forced withdrawal of Tom Daschle, former Democratic leader in the Senate, as President Obama's nominee as Secretary of Health and Human Services and by the battle over Obama's economic stimulus plan.

Beyond that, however, there are mixed signs on the Central Asian horizon. Kyrgyzstan, and behind it Russia, have posed a challenge for the US with the demand for the closure of the American airbase, which is important for the US effort in Afghanistan.

Speaking of which, the Joint Chiefs of Staff are making another move to get the President to adopt their ideas for the Afghan fight --- we've posted separately on that battle. And more later on a continuing Enduring America exclusive, the possibility of secret US talks with Iran. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke on both Afghanistan and Iran, as well as Israel-Palestine, with British and German Foreign Ministers on Tuesday.