Afghanistan Corrected: US Officials "Did We Say Victory? We May Have Exaggerated."

Was it really only 11 days ago that Carlotta Gall of The New York Times, fed the line by the US military, was declaring that the Taliban had been "routed" and that high-profile pundits like Slate's Fred Kaplan were effusive about the superiority of US intelligence and rockets?

Was it only this past weekend that General David Petraeus, the US commander in Afghanistan, was proclaiming a key victory in southern Afghanistan?

Oops.

This from Greg Miller in today's Washington Post:

An intense military campaign aimed at crippling the Taliban has so far failed to inflict more than fleeting setbacks on the insurgency or put meaningful pressure on its leaders to seek peace, according to U.S. military and intelligence officials citing the latest assessments of the war in Afghanistan.

Escalated airstrikes and special operations raids have disrupted Taliban movements and damaged local cells. But officials said that insurgents have been adept at absorbing the blows and that they appear confident that they can outlast an American troop buildup set to subside beginning next July.

Click to read more ...

Iran Feature: Oil Squeeze May Ground Tehran's Airplanes in Europe

Thomas Erdbrink, writing in The Washington Post, claims that the cut-off of oil exports by four of Europe's five largest companies is having an effect: Iran Air is unable to refuel its planes in most of Europe.

Note also the US Government's public-relations line: the sanctions are going to hurt Iranian people but their anger should be directed at their government, not Washington.

This summer Iran Air planes briefly faced problems with fuelling in Europe. If true, this story indicates that the problem is now far more serious and will be long-term.

Click to read more ...

Afghanistan: Taliban & Karzai Government in "High-Level Talks" (DeYoung/Finn/Whitlock)

In The Washington Post, Karen DeYoung, Peter Finn, and Craig Whitlock report that the Taliban and the Afghan Government have begun discussions for an end to conflict.

Not all observers find this dramatic or promising. In response to the question of Times of London reporter Jerome Starkey, "Did we know this already or did I dream it?", an aid worker in Afghanistan responded, "I don't think you were dreaming. It's lather, rinse, repeat."

---

Taliban representatives and the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai have begun secret, high-level talks over a negotiated end to the war, according to Afghan and Arab sources.

The talks follow inconclusive meetings, hosted by Saudi Arabia, that ended more than a year ago. While emphasizing the preliminary nature of the current discussions, the sources said that for the first time they believe that Taliban representatives are fully authorized to speak for the Quetta Shura, the Afghan Taliban organization based inPakistan, and its leader, Mohammad Omar.

"They are very, very serious about finding a way out," one source close to the talks said of the Taliban.

Click to read more ...

Pakistan: Tankers Burn While Petraeus and Washington Fiddle and Fret

The News in Pakistan reports, "Six people were killed and dozens sustained critical injuries [late Sunday night] when a group of bike-riding terrorists sprayed bullets at 28 Nato oil tankers and set them ablaze by throwing chemicals at them."

The Express Tribune is more conservative in its estimate, "At least 11 oil tankers carrying supplies for Nato forces stationed in Afghanistan were gutted and four people were killed when gunmen mounted a late night attack on a filling station in Islamabad."

Whatever the numbers, Sunday's attack is merely the latest development in an episode stemming not only from "terrorism" but from a dispute between US military commanders and the Pakistani Government. Upset at American bombings and raids that killed Pakistani troops as well as civilians and insurgents, Islamabad suspended permission for NATO tankers to cross the border and supply forces in Afghanistan. And sitting tankers make pretty attractive targets.

Steve Hynd calls out the US military and, specifically, American commander David Petraeus for the escalation in violence:

Click to read more ...

Pakistan: As Military Threatens Move, The Tension Rises for Washington (DeYoung)

Karen DeYoung's article for The Washington Post is a must-read. Work through the detail and analysis and the following is on the table.

1: Pakistan's military is threatening a takeover if the Zardari Government does not carry out sweeping action against its own officials;

2. The US Government, while not happy with a coup, is looking to a "best-case scenario" of those Government changes;

3. At least one key Administration officials says that changes from military pressure are preferable to Pakistan's constitutional process, carried out through the courts, concerning President Zardari:

Click to read more ...

Iraq: Is This Really A US "Handover"? (Zacharia)

At a time when Washington policymakers would prefer to put the Iraq war behind them, the American mission in Baghdad is becoming more complicated as U.S. officials embark on one of the most complex power transfers in American history.

Many aspects of that handoff - to be completed in just 15 months, when all American troops are due to leave Iraq - have not yet begun or been decided upon, military officials and diplomats in Baghdad acknowledge.

Since the launch of New Dawn, as the military mission was re-branded on Sept. 1, the United States has entered a gray zone that has left many Iraqis --- and Americans --- puzzled about the U.S. role.

Click to read more ...

US Policy on Afghanistan: The Obama Administration's PR Offensive, "We Must, We Must Stay the Course"

For some time, we have been noting the US military's bureaucratic triumph over the President in the escalation of and persistence with the American campaign in Afghanistan, even beyond Barack Obama's nominal withdrawal date of July 2011.

Now the other shoe drops, courtesy of an article by Karen DeYoung in The Washington Post. This time it is the White House putting out the message: despite the growing doubts over the US intervention, despite the rising costs in money and lives, despite the complications of corruption, despite the inconclusive outcome of this week's Parliamentary elections, Washington will --- it must --- carry on.

Click to read more ...

A US Deal for Iran & Ahmadinejad: How Twitter Revealed the Plan on Afghanistan

We're working on a major analysis of the Obama Administration's approach to Iran --- think the pressure of sanctions linked to hopes for talks with Tehran on not only the nuclear issue but other regional matters --- but in the meantime, let's turn it over to Vali Nasr to give a sneak peek on Twitter.

For some in the Administration, this is the deal for Mahmoud in New York (and for the Supreme Leader in Tehran?): Give us the public appearance of coming back to the nuclear talks --- without insisting at this point on unilateral enrichment of uranium inside Iran --- and we can work together for mutual benefits in Afghanistan.

Click to read more ...