Ambassador Karl Eikenberry spoke for all Americans, hawks and doves, in publicly slamming President Karzai last weekend. Soon to depart Kabul, the ambassador couldn’t stand another minute of Karzai’s gratuitous attacks on an America that is bleeding itself in lives and dollars for Afghanistan’s freedom. So, he had a few undiplomatic words for the Afghan leader he has long despised in private. Eikenberry’s unmistakable point was this: If Karzai persists in trashing the United States, he will succeed only in convincing more and more Americans to say “enough,” let’s get out of Karzai’s hell hole as...]]> Mon, 09 May 2011 00:00:00 -0500 Afghanistan is no longer a war about vital American security interests. It is about the failure of America's political elites to face two plain facts: The al Qaeda terrorist threat is no longer centered in that ancient battleground, and the battle against the Taliban is mainly for Afghans themselves.

With Osama bin Laden now swimming with the fishes, the U.S. has but one sensible path: to draw down U.S. forces to 15,000-25,000 by the end of 2013, try cutting a deal with the Taliban, and refocus American power in the region on containment, deterrence and diplomacy.

“So, what do you think?” The brief email from a key White House official greeted me Monday morning, along with Osama bin Laden’s death notices. “It’s the best I’ve felt about my country since 9/11,” I responded. He shot back: “It’s a whole new world.”

He wasn’t far off. Of course, the tremulous world hasn’t changed. But the mood in America—and the confidence levels at the White House—have zoomed skyward. The skilled killing of bin Laden has united the nation behind Obama.

First, most of the American talkocracy is now so utterly intoxicated with protestocracy, which they call democracy, that they outright neglect the enormous trials of getting from the streets to a real democracy. It's hard as hell, and the process lends itself to hijacking by extremists.

So, President Obama decided that U.S. forces would continue to bear the brunt of the fighting for four more years and gradually turn over the battles to Afghan forces. In effect, he reaffirmed last month’s NATO communiqué wherein this approach was labeled a “transition” policy. Perhaps this was the most he could get from General David Petraeus, the U.S./NATO commander in...]]> Mon, 26 Jul 2010 00:00:00 -0500 What do the secret documents released by WikiLeaks tell us about U.S. policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan? It has to be said right off that they don’t tell us anything important we didn’t already know. There have been “informed” stories for years detailing how Pakistani military intelligence has been providing arms, money, and intelligence to the Afghan Taliban, who in turn have been killing American soldiers.

So, why are these leaked military and intelligence documents now threatening to shake the very foundations of U.S. policy toward Afghanistan and Pakistan? Because it’s now much more difficult to deny or dodge the truths that we’ve all...]]> Mon, 19 Jul 2010 00:00:00 -0500 It was inauguration day for the nation’s most modern facility for the treatment of active-duty soldiers and veterans suffering from brain injuries and psychological disorders—5,000 of them with families on hand. At the podium in Bethesda, Maryland, stood Arnold Fisher, the chief fundraiser for this precious center that may need to care for hundreds of thousands of victims, searching in vain for one White House official, one Cabinet officer, one member of the Joint Chiefs, one senator. He found none. And he asked again and again, “Where are they?”

Where were they? President Obama was in meetings and having a hamburger lunch with Russian President...]]> Thu, 17 Jun 2010 00:00:00 -0500 The United States will be trapped in Afghanistan for many costly years to come. It is a good bet that President Obama will have most of the 105,000 U.S. troops expected there by the end of summer, still in that sorry country by the next presidential election, and probably even five years from now. By that time, whoever is president will face such public demands for withdrawal that the fiasco will end, finally—for Americans at least. It’s not at all clear whether President Obama fathoms this nightmare or is cynically sidestepping the issue through November 2012.

Sure, I want to be wrong, and I want our efforts to succeed. The Taliban and al Qaeda Muslim...]]> Fri, 28 May 2010 00:00:00 -0500 Just about every senior Obama official is fanning out around Washington to brief the cognoscenti and the media on the president’s new national security strategy. These officials are so excited about the document released on Thursday you’d think they had discovered bubble gum. Actually, their 52-page document (mandated by law as a yearly exercise for presidents) displays a pretty intelligent list of all the things the United States needs to do to protect its security in the 21st century. And when I say “all” the things, I mean virtually every last deed and thought of goodness and good sense any Progressive (what liberals now call themselves) could possibly imagine....]]> Fri, 21 May 2010 00:00:00 -0500 In recent days, we have seen the future of diplomatic machinations with Iran, and it is messier and more alarming than before. Its challenges are rooted as much in America's peculiarities as Iran's, and now, as well, in the newfound muscle and assertiveness of new major powers. These realities won't evaporate and will increasingly frustrate Americans above all.

The Obama team was right to preempt the Brazil/Turkish pact on nuclear exchanges with Iran. It was basically an Iranian scam to circumvent new United Nations sanctions and other limitations on its nuclear programs. But Brazil and Turkey were also right to pursue their separate diplomatic track and solution.

Enter the recipients' email addresses, separated by commas:

Message:

AP Photo (2) A slap in the face to Biden on settlements, and now a new insult: Israel is playing a dangerous game with America. Leslie H. Gelb on how the dispute badly damages U.S. power.

Israel’s right-wingers are congratulating themselves on their announcement of new construction in East Jerusalem during Vice President Biden’s visit last week. They think this stance, so unwelcome in Washington, this public and gratuitous insult to...]]> Mon, 01 Mar 2010 00:00:00 -0600 Enter your email address:

Enter the recipients' email addresses, separated by commas:

Message:

To the extent that anyone within the administration is challenging the conventional or consensual wisdom on any major policy, it seems to be Biden himself. Probably the only real strategist among Obama’s senior advisers, he fought hard to keep the number of new troops heading to Afghanistan well below the 30,000 level Obama finally approved. Biden also wanted more attention paid to al Qaeda terrorists and less to somewhat more traditional Taliban Islamists. Biden also opposed a runaway hard line on Iran—without...]]> Tue, 23 Feb 2010 00:00:00 -0600 Enter your email address:

Enter the recipients' email addresses, separated by commas:

Message:

Alex Brandon / AP Photo Leslie H. Gelb's call for White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to be reassigned spurred a circle-the-wagons reaction from pro- (or perhaps even anti-) Rahm forces. Gelb sifts the fallout for clues.

When you write that the president of the United States should replace his chief of staff, someone will fire back. So it was that Rahm Emanuel apparently struck back at my piece last week on The Daily Beast  through a column in...]]> Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:00:00 -0600