Afghanistan: The US Military to Obama - Make a Decision Now; Obama to Military - No

Throughout yesterday afternoon, the military leaks to the media and the Pentagon public statements began to fill the in-box. Several officials began putting out the story that the Joint Chiefs of Staff would soon give a secret report to President Obama. This would advise the President "to focus on ensuring regional stability and eliminating Taliban and Al Qaida safe havens in Pakistan, rather than on achieving lasting democracy and a thriving Afghan economy".



This recommendation in one respect is a smokescreen. As we noted when Secretary of Defense Robert Gates spoke in the same vein before Congressional committees last week, the US has always sought "regional stability" in Afghanistan, even if it hasn't done very well in achieving it.

Much more important, when you decode, are these demands in the recommendations. Continue the airstrikes in Pakistan, whatever the domestic political cost. Let others worry about Afghan "democracy" and the "economy", i.e., the US will concentrate on military efforts rather than nation-building.

And, Mr President, immediately approve our request in full for more troops to Afghanistan: one brigade already sent, three more in the next weeks, a fifth in the summer.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell wrapped all of this up in a lot of jargon for reporters yesterday:

There needs to be established a baseline of security. We need to reverse the trend that we are seeing in some parts of the country in terms of a deteriorating security situation. That is accepted as the foundation on whatever the president decides to develop in terms of a further strategy.

Meanwhile, the White House is countering the military by leaking its own evaluation. In an article in today's Washington Post, Administration officials set out a 60-day timeframe for a decision, tied to the 3 April NATO summit. And they are making that it is Obama who is the Decider, not the Joint Chiefs of Staff or Secretary of Defense Gates:

The president . . . wants to hear from the uniformed leadership and civilian advisers as to what the situation is and their thoughts as to the way forward. But he has also given pretty direct guidance.

Just in case you missed that signal, the article shouts it out later:

Officials described Obama's overall approach to what the administration calls "Af-Pak" as a refusal to be rushed, using words such as "rigor" and "restraint." "We know we're going to get [criticism] for taking our time," said a senior official.

And there is even a clear hint that Obama is not on the same page as the Gates-military emphasis on Pakistan as a safe haven for Afghan operations:

Senior administration officials described their approach to Pakistan -- as a major U.S. partner under serious threat of internal collapse -- as fundamentally different from the Bush administration's focus on the country as a Taliban and al-Qaeda "platform" for attacks in Afghanistan and beyond.

US-Russia Relations: A Grand Obama Bargain on Nuclear Warheads?

Just to put everything into the US-Russia mix, as we follow the manoeuvres on issues such as Afghanistan and Central Asia. The Times of London is blaring out an exclusive that the Obama Administration is proposing an 80 percent reduction of nuclear warheads by the US and Russia to 1000 each. This is in addition to the Obama decision to delay roll-out of the American missile defence plans.



The Times also features the response of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Ivanov: "We welcome the statements from the new Obama Administration that they are ready to enter into talks and complete within a year, in this very confined timeframe, the signing of a new Russian-US treaty on the limitation of strategic attack weapons. We are also ready for this, undoubtedly."

The story from Washington appears to be based on a single "senior administration source", but it corresponds with other information that has come to the attention of Enduring America. A key unanswered question is whether the Obama Administration will tie this grand initiative to other issues, such as the Russian position on Iran and the competition in Central Asia, or whether it will keep the nuclear issue as a separate, distinct negotiation.

US Foreign Policy Analyses: Latest Issue of Argentia Published

The latest issue of Argentia, the cutting-edge journal of the British International Studies Association, is now out. It features a new project on the influence of conservative faith-based groups on US foreign policy and a roundtable review (with a contribution by Scott Lucas of Enduring America) of the book After Bush by Timothy Lynch and Rob Singh.

Visit our partner site Libertas for access to the journal.

Update: Secret US-Iran Talks This Week?

Last Saturday, we broke the story of possible US-Iran secret talks this week, in connection with the American meeting in Berlin today with Russia, China, and the EU-3 (Britain, France, and Germany).

Over the last few days, news outlets have been catching up with the revelations that US and Iranian representatives, some of whom are now in the Obama and Ahmadinejad Administrations, were involved in non-governmental meetings in 2008. The most significant new name to emerge was Gary Samore, who will soon become President Obama's advisor on non-proliferation.

The question remains, however: will "engagement", especially with the prospect that the US needs Iranian assistance for the "surge" in Afghanistan, lead to a meeting in early 2009? The latest teaser is in an article in The Asia Times:

Eyes...now turn...toward Germany where the 45th Munich Conference on Security Policy is scheduled to take place next weekend. Organizers of the annual event revealed on Thursday that among the 300 prominent figures from the international arena of foreign, security and defense policy will be a "very high-ranking personality" from Tehran.

Other VIPs include US Vice President Joseph Biden, who is expected to make a major foreign and security policy speech.

The question is not whether Biden meets an Iranian official --- that is too high-profile to be a possibility. Instead, will any of the American officials who are in Berlin make the short hop to Munich for a bit of private time with any Iranians who happen to be there?

Israel-Palestine: The Failed Olmert Offer for a Settlement

The Los Angeles Times, reporting on the Israeli election campaign, buries a significant revelation from the Israeli newspaper Yediot Aharonot. It is nothing less than an initiative by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, launched last autumn, to get an agreement with the Palestinian Authority:

Under the proposal, Israel would relinquish any claim to the Gaza Strip, all but a small part of the West Bank and Jerusalem's Arab neighborhoods, a hand-over that would uproot more than 60,000 Jewish settlers from the West Bank.

The Jewish part of Jerusalem and large suburban-style West Bank settlements near the city would remain in Israel's hands. In return for annexed West Bank land, the Palestinians would get a strip of the Negev desert adjacent to Gaza and a tunnel or overpass connecting Gaza and the West Bank. The shortest route linking the territories would run about 30 miles across southern Israel.

An international body representing Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the Palestinian Authority, Israel and the U.S. would administer religious sites in Jerusalem's Old City and holy basin to ensure access for Christian, Muslim and Jewish worshipers. Israel would retain formal sovereignty over those sites.

Palestinians who fled or were forced from Israel around the time of the Jewish state's founding in 1948 would forfeit their right to return, although Olmert offered to accept a limited number -- up to 50,000, according to Israel's Channel 10 television -- under a family reunification program.

The Palestinian Authority was sceptical of the proposal, as it was only verbal and left too many details unsettled. Chief negotiator Saeb Erekat says, "[PA President Mahmoud] Abbas told Olmert that we will not be part of an interim agreement. Either we agree on all issues, or no agreement at all."