All Bark and No Bite

Odd though it may sound, I am vaguely heartened by Obama's continued indecision on Afghanistan - not for what it reveals about his foreign policy strategy for the region, but for what it says about the internal decision-making process in the White House. Specifically, what it indicates is that there is a clear policy of review and debate that accompanies major decisions of this nature; moreover, Obama appears to be engaged in fundamentally examining the assumptions on which our current involvement in Afghanistan is based. This may seem only logical -- it is, after all, what presidents are supposed to do -- but there are many examples where prior presidents surrounded themselves with ideologues and yes-men and poor foreign policy blunders were the result. (Anyone in particular coming to mind?)

That said, weeks of discussion with his Cabinet and top military leaders has yet to fully drive home to Obama what he absolutely must understand about our involvement in Afghanistan: that it's Afghan politics that matter more than anything. The American military can't win this fight through guns alone. Oh, Obama's made statements to the effect that Karzai's administration needs to reform itself - but, as a NYT analysis piece notes today, there has been no "or else" threat. In other words, by failing to threaten a withdrawal of American troops -- perhaps the only serious leverage the Obama administration has over Karzai -- we have established no bargaining power for which to affect change.

White House officials acknowledged this week that they were not planning on using the ultimate cudgel: pulling all American troops. Such a step would certainly get Mr. Karzai’s attention — it might lead to his overthrow because his political survival is dependent on the presence of American troops.

...“What if Karzai doesn’t do what we ask and calls our bluff?” asked Richard Fontaine, a former foreign policy adviser to Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona.