"You" Are Corrupt, "We" Just Misplace Things (Like Top-Secret Laptops)0

Update: U.S. officials looking into irregularities in the early portion of the $125 billion U.S.-led effort to rebuild Iraq have expanded the inquiry to include senior U.S. military officers who oversaw the program....Officials told the [New York] Times several criminal cases in recent years pointed to widespread corruption within the operation run by the men being investigated."


Amidst the growing Washington campaign against Afghan President Hamid Karzai over corruption, you can classify this story from Thursday under I for Irony:

The Pentagon has lost track of some 87,000 weapons handed out without proper accounting to Afghan army and police units, federal investigators reported today. The weapons included rifles, pistols, machine guns, grenade launchers, shotguns, mortars and other weapons, the Government Accountability Office said.

OK, maybe you can pin that one of the Afghans as well: just can't trust the locals, can you? (N.B. Surprisingly, nowhere in the story do the words "black market" occur.) It's harder, however, to pass the blame in this incident in Peshawar, Pakistan, reported by Shahan Mufti of GlobalPost:

I was recently able to purchase a U.S. military laptop for $650 from a small kiosk, which is known as the “Sitara Market,” on the western edge of the sprawling open-air markets on the edge of Peshawar. The laptop, which has clear U.S. military markings and serial numbers, contained restricted U.S. military information, as well as software for military platforms, the identities of numerous military personnel and information about weaknesses and flaws in American military vehicles being employed in the war in Afghanistan.

Longtime observers of the region and military experts say the open market on U.S. military hardware and technology is increasingly compromising the American military supply route that runs from the Pakistani seaport in Karachi through the Khyber Pass and into neighboring Afghanistan.

"This kind of trade has been happening in the past, but not so openly," said Rahimullah Yusufzai, a Peshawar-based journalist who has reported from Afghanistan and Pakistan for several decades. "In the past few months this has started in a big way," he added.

(Hat-tip to reader Beth)

Obama v. The Military (Part 39): The Latest on the Afghanistan "Surge"

The military's effort, supported by some officials in the Pentagon, to bounce President Obama into an immediate troop increase in Afghanistan is now approaching soap-opera status. Obama discussed the situation with Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on Wednesday but no decisions were announced.



So in today's episode, "defence officials" have told The New York Times that Obama is "facing a choice on whether to grant commanders' requests" for up to 25,000 more soldiers and support units. They then offer the President a compromise: "Mr. Obama could choose a middle ground, deploying several thousand more troops there in the coming months but postponing a more difficult judgment on a much larger increase in personnel until after the administration completes a review of Afghanistan policy".

The compromise would be "one or two additional brigades", with 3500 in each brigade, rather than the three requested by the military. This would be in addition to a brigade which was deployed in eastern Afghanistan in January.

The Pentagon's campaign is now so blatant that its press secretary even went public with it yesterday. Geoff Morrell said Obama "“could make a decision about none, one, two or all of the brigades....However, there does need to be a decision made about a couple of brigades sooner rather than later if you want them on the ground in time to make a difference in the security situation for the national election in late August.”

The White House response to the military's latest push? Stonewall. Just as Obama has spun out the process with an inter-agency review to be headed by Bruce Riedel (the Obama Presidential campaign's advisor on South Asia), so his unnamed spokesmen are ruling nothing in, ruling nothing out:

Several administration officials said it was also possible — though less likely — that [Obama] could postpone any deployments until after his review was complete....It is also possible that Mr. Obama will fill the request for all three brigades, administration officials said.

Mr Obama's World: The Latest in US Foreign Policy (11 February)

Latest Post: US Engagement with Iran: Transcript of President Ahmadinejad’s Speech
Breaking News: Attacks in Afghanistan

Mr Obama's World Today: Uncertain

Evening Update (8:45 p.m.): The US Government will send a delegation next week to the six-party talks in Moscow on North Korean disarmament.

4:40 p.m. Marc Lynch of Foreign Policy notes the story that almost all media have missed today:  the visit by Chinese President Hu Jintao to Saudi Arabia

4:25 p.m. The Pakistani Foreign Ministry has said that President Obama and Pakistani President Asif Zardari have spoken by phone, ageeing to start addressing problems in the region with a "holistic strategy".

Afternoon Update (3:30 p.m.): A spike in violence from bombings and attacks today. In addition to the deaths in Afghanistan, a provincial minister has been killed by a roadside bomb in northwest Pakistan. Bombs in Iraq have killed at least eight people, while gunmen have slain several others, including a senior engineer and a prominent local football player.

US envoy Richard Holbrooke has visited northwest Pakistan to view a Pakistani military installation. As with his talks with political leaders on Tuesday, Holbrooke would say no more than that he was on a "listening" tour.



11:35 a.m. The Russians really are playing this hand well on Afghanistan. Offering co-operation but also ensuring control and thus oversight of Moscow's interest, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, amidst meetings with a senior US diplomat, that Russian military aircraft could assist with the supply effort.

11:25 a.m. During a trip to Iraq on Wednesday, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said, ""We look positively on the slogan that Obama raised in the elections. The world has really changed. If the American administration wants to keep up with the changes, this will be happy news." (cross-posted from US Engagement with Iran thread)

9:30 a.m. A revealing bit of information that did not make it into the morning papers: "A senior American diplomat will hold talks with Russian officials on Tuesday about opening new supply routes across Russian territory to NATO forces in Afghanistan, the U.S. embassy said."

The news indicates how serious the supply situation for Afghanistan has become, with the closure of the Pakistan routes and the threatened shutdown of the US airbase in Kyrgyzstan. And it shows how dependent Washington has become on Moscow's goodwill for a solution, which in turn has shaped the encouragement of President Obama and Vice President Biden for closer co-operation with the Russians.

8:45 a.m. Meanwhile in Pakistan.... In another sign that the Obama Administration is reviewing its options carefully before making any strategic decisions, envoy Richard Holbrooke limited his comments after meetings with Pakistani officials to, "[I was here] to listen and learn the ground realities of this critically important country".

In contrast, the priority of President Asif Zardari and Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gillani was clear: Give Us Money. Their recogition of "the importance of enhanced cooperation in defense and intelligence sharing" was followed by a request to Washington to "expedite" billions of dollars in aid.

7:55 a.m. The New York Times also has a shrewd reading of Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's criticism of Vice President Joe Biden,  which we noted yesterday. Al-Maliki's response to Biden's complaints about the lack of Iraqi political and economic reform were offered during a visit to Baghdad by French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

The French, as all 2003 critics of "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" will recall, have had extensive economic interests in Iraq. Al-Maliki's comments, however, are not just a reach-out for investment for Paris; they signal Iraq's wish to move away from perceived political dependence on, even subservience to, Washington.

7:35 a.m. On the eve of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's trip to Asia, an interesting insight into Administration strategy on China in The New York Times.

"Senior Administration officials", probably from the State Department, tell the Times, "The Obama administration plans to realign the United States’ relationship with China by putting more emphasis on climate change, energy and human rights, widening the focus beyond the economic concerns of the Bush years." By going for environmental issues rather than risking economic confrontation, the US can then seek leverage on political concerns: "A broader relationship with the Chinese could create opportunities for collaboration — not only on a response to the global economic crisis, but also on the environment and on security issues like the North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs."

You may have noticed, however, the troublesome phrase in the spin. "Human rights"? Is Washington really going to press issues such as Chinese control of Tibet and jailing of dissidents?

The balancing act was demonstrated on Tuesday when State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid told CNN, ""We are disturbed that prominent Chinese human rights activist Huang Qi remains in detention. We call on the Chinese government to release Mr. Huang as soon as possible."

7 a.m. Repeating the latest in the battle within the Obama Administration over Afghanistan strategy. Countering President Obama's attempt to take more time through an inter-agency review, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates has declared, ""I think that there is a realization that some decisions have to be made ... before the strategic review is completed. [Obama] has several options in front of him."

The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Admiral Mike Mullen, joined in the pressure on Obama. US military commanders "had this request out for many months and those working through the request recognize that the sooner the better with respect to this. I'm hopeful that we can get them there as soon as absolutely possible, but, again, that's a decision for the president of the United States, not for me."

Meanwhile, the US and Canada kept up the pressure on Afghan President Hamid Karzai. Mullen said in Ottawa on Tuesday, "As we look at the challenges that we have in 2009-2010 ... I think the lack of governance tied to the corruption that exists (in Afghanistan), is going to be the number one challenge that we have."

Morning Update (6:45 a.m. GMT; 1:45 a.m. Washington): Another day focused on the economy. President Obama's economic stimulus package moves from the Senate, where it passed yesterday, to the House of Representatives.

"A senior US official" has told CNN that American satellite photography shows possible preparations for a North Korean missile launch. Telemetry equipment is being assembled at the launch site, although there is no sign yet of a missile being moved. The last launch from the location, in 2006, was of a long-range Taepodong-2 missile, which flew for 40 seconds before crashing.

The US Government's reaction has been measured, focusing on diplomatic engagement with Pyongyang. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said on Tuesday:

Well, since the first time that they launched the missile, it flew for a few minutes before crashing, the range of the Taepodong-2 remains to be seen. So far, it's very short. I'm not going to get into intelligence reports, but it would be nice if North Korea would focus on getting positive messages across to the -- to its negotiating partners about verification and moving forward with the denuclearization.

The Latest on Israel-Gaza-Palestine (10 February)

10 p.m. The Israeli newspaper Ha'aretz is reporting that Benjamin Netanyahu of Likud and Avigdor Lieberman of Israeli-Beitenu have had a phone conversation about a possible coalition government.

9:40 p.m. A Qassam rocket has landed in the southern Negev in Israel.

8 p.m. Voting closes in Israeli election. First exit polls have Kadima (party of Tzipi Livni) at 30 seats; Likud (party of Benjamin Netanyahu) 28; "far-right" Israel-Beitenu (Avigdor Lieberman) 15. Labor (Ehud Barak) on course for worst performance ever.

As there are 120 seats in Knesset, there will have to be a coalition with at least 61 members to form a secure Government. That in turn means that even a Kadima-Likud coalition is not sure of a majority in the new parliament.

11:10 a.m. The New York Times has an article on the detention of student Philip Rizk by Egyptian authorities after his walk with friends to raise money for Gazans.

11 a.m. Hamas official Osama Hamdan says further manoeuvres for an agreement with Israel on Gaza will now depend on  the outcome of today's Israeli election: ""If [Likud leader Benjamin] Netanyahu wins, I don't think that the current government will conclude an agreement. If the current government wins, they could reach an agreement."

10:45 a.m. I'm Still Here. Palestinian Authority head Mahmoud Abbas, trying to assert his leadership as Hamas negotiates an agreement with Israel, has said he is ready to talk to Tel Aviv if "the new Israeli government a halt to new settlements".



Morning Update (9 a.m. GMT; 11 a.m. Israel/Palestine): The headline story is today's Israeli elections, which the media are now projecting as "too close to call" between the Likud Party of Benjamin Netanyahu and the Kadima Party of Tzipi Livni for the largest number of seats. The equally important --- indeed, more important --- issue will be the make-up of the inevitable coalition that has to be formed to govern Israel.

Meanwhile, former United Nations envoy Ian Martin will head a five-member panel investigating last month's Israeli attacks on UN facilities in Gaza.

Failing the Torture Test? Obama Blocks Judicial Review of Bush Rendition Policy

Update: Irony Alert. State Department's DipNotes says, "Acting Spokesman [Robert] Wood states that with this President and this Secretary, human rights is a high priority issue."

As we debated on Enduring America whether President Obama was going to make a meaningful change to the Bush Administration's rendition policy, preventing the despatch of detainees to countries where they might be tortured or denied legal rights, I was waiting for developments in a court case in San Francisco. Five plaintiffs were suing a subsidiary of Boeing, Jeppesen, which carried out rendition flights.

Well, the news is now out that the President's men want to keep the matter behind closed doors:

A source inside of the Ninth U.S. District Court tells ABC News that a representative of the Justice Department stood up to say that its position hasn't changed, that new administration stands behind arguments that previous administration made, with no ambiguity at all. The DOJ lawyer said the entire subject matter remains a state secret.

An American Civil Liberties Union attorney who represented the plaintiffs reacted:

We are shocked and deeply disappointed that the Justice Department has chosen to continue the Bush administration’s practice of dodging judicial scrutiny of extraordinary rendition and torture. This was an opportunity for the new administration to act on its condemnation of torture and rendition, but instead it has chosen to stay the course. Now we must hope that the court will assert its independence by rejecting the government’s false claims of state secrets and allowing the victims of torture and rendition their day in court.

Glenn Greenwald and Andrew Sullivan offer damning indictments of the Obama Administration and the Justice Department, while a New York Times article confirms the original leak of the Government's position.