Friday, September 25, 2009

Afghanistan, in Today's News 09.24.09

Afghanistan. The cryptocracy has decided that the Karzai regime in Afghanistan, which the United States installed in office, is not up to the task of winning the war with the Taliban.

As the Afghan situation deteriorates, Obama is faced with a crucial decision: to send in more troops, to stand and fight to the end, or to pull out. Obama chose none of the above. He decided to do another review of the American war strategy.

The first step in this review, it seems, is to change the administration in Afghanistan. The Wall Street Journal today has a major article (page A11) on Obama's new course. A key quote: "Senior administration officials said they had viewed the [national Afghan] elections [held a few weeks ago] as the first step in rebuilding Afghanistan, but that Mr. Karzai squandered the opportunity."

"U.S. officials have also tried to support members of the Afghan cabinet they believe are clean and effective, such as Agricultural Minister Mohammed Asif Rahimi."

"After [American commander] Gen. McChrystal's team took over in June, its members were stunned by the extent of corruption they found..."

So, if you are President Karzai, it probably would be a good idea to be aware of who is standing behind you.

Needless to say, Obama's decision to switch 'partners' in Afghanistan is a futile one. The switch is simply a way of looking like something is being done, but the underlying reality stays the same: US prestige is at a low point, the government is discredited, and the Taliban are making significant advances.

The key decisions regarding Afghanistan still sit there awaiting resolution. All Obama is doing is gaining a little time by strategizing and switching regimes. But the more time goes by, the more difficult will be the solution. Obama faces a situation where no matter what he decides, he will face opposition.

******

A note to Karzai and others who makes deals with the cryptocracy: By no means does the crytpocracy view a deal as establishing a partnership. No, the deal is solely one of the cryptocracy's using someone for temporary purposes. As soon as the purposes are over or as soon as the dealmaker does something the cryptocracy doesn't like, the cryptocracy will turn on the dealmaker like a mad dog. And with no qualms of conscience and without any thank-yous for services rendered, they will dispose of the dealmaker.

No comments:

Post a Comment