Hanky Panky

According to senior administration officials, the Afghan war plan that President Barack Obama announced in March -- which called for a comprehensive and manpower-intensive counterinsurgency strategy -- was built around the assumption that Mr. Karzai would emerge from last month's elections with new legitimacy
<...>
"Forget even the McChrystal report," said a senior administration official, referring to the grim assessment of the war effort submitted three weeks ago by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in Afghanistan. "Every counterinsurgency is built on one credible partner." [Link]

Foreign policy evolution, or revolution?

Dining on platters of rice and lamb at the heavily fortified presidential palace in Kabul, Biden and his colleagues grilled Karzai about reports of corruption and the growing opium trade in the country, which the president disingenuously denied. An increasingly impatient Biden challenged Karzai's assertions until he lost his temper. Biden finally stood up and threw down his napkin, declaring, "This meeting is over," before he marched out of the room with Hagel and Kerry.

It was a similar story nearly a year later. As Obama prepared to assume the presidency in January, he dispatched Biden on a regional fact-finding trip. Again Biden dined with Karzai, and, again, the meeting was contentious. Reiterating his prior complaints about corruption, Biden warned Karzai that the Bush administration's kid-glove treatment was over; the new team would demand more of him.

Fair enough. We won, as the saying goes, and you better get used to a new sheriff in town - one who knows what fancy napkins are for.

So what, exactly, has been done beyond napkin toss and stompaway? Let's move a few weeks forward to February, for Karzai's point of view:

Kabul: Afghanistani President Hamid Karzai admitted on Friday that he had not spoken to Barack Obama since the new US president assumed office last month and conceded that he had become increasingly isolated as American support drained away.

Quite a sad story for Valentines Day. But if the President was otherwise engaged, other specialists were available:

MUNICH -- The war in Afghanistan will be "much tougher than Iraq," President Obama's special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan said at a security conference here on Sunday.
<...>
Mr. Holbrooke was part of a high-level American delegation at the annual Munich Security Conference over the weekend. The group, led by Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. and including Gen. James L. Jones, the national security adviser, and Gen. David H. Petraeus, the head of the United States Central Command, did not paint a rosy picture of the situation in Afghanistan.

The American view of Afghanistan's problems differed from that of the country's president, Hamid Karzai, who also spoke Sunday.

While Mr. Karzai acknowledged the security problems, he said that great progress had been made, from roads to schools to health services. In an address that at times sounded defensive, he said Afghanistan was neither a "narco-state" nor a "failed state," as critics have labeled it.

Who's "right"? Well certainly some corruption is present in any government - this is no excuse for whatever level may exist anywhere - but certainly one measure of excess is the opinion of the governed. That said, these February, 2009 poll results ("jointly commissioned by the BBC, ABC News of America and ARD of Germany") from Afghanistan are worth a look:

In your view, what is the biggest problem facing Afghanistan as a whole? And after that, what is the next biggest problem?

How much progress do you think ____ is making in providing a better life for Afghans in the future?

How would you rate the work of:

Obviously different answers could be found in different areas (what government? in some) but it's worth noting that efforts to "connect the people to the government" - difficult as those may be when pursued by those viewed slightly less favorably - wouldn't be starting from zero.

Days later, the Times unveiled the year-old napkin story:

Between platters of lamb and rice, Mr. Biden and two other American senators questioned Mr. Karzai about corruption in his government, which, by many estimates, is among the worst in the world...

In spite of the hanky throwing, stomping, claims, counter claims, finger pointing, accusations, denials, and other diplomatic niceties - within days President Obama announced his "Afghan troops surge":

A new national poll indicates that a majority of Americans support President Barack Obama's plan to send 17,000 more U.S. troops to the war in Afghanistan.

Sixty-three percent of those questioned in the poll say they support Obama's plan to beef up U.S. troops in Afghanistan, with 36 percent opposing the move.
<...>
"Obama's plan for more troops wins twice as much support as the surge in troop levels in Iraq won when George W. Bush first unveiled that plan in 2007," CNN Polling Director Keating Holland said. "The Afghanistan plan is more popular than the Iraq surge because the war in Afghanistan is more popular."

The move made good on a long-time campaign promise:

"Yes, I think we need more troops. I've been saying that for over a year now. And I think that we have to do it as quickly as possible, because it's been acknowledged by the commanders on the ground the situation is getting worse, not better." - October, 2008

And, the White House added, the "17,000 troops would deploy to Afghanistan ahead of the Afghan national elections scheduled for August 20, significantly building up the 38,000 US force battling the spreading insurgency" even though "US intelligence has warned that endemic corruption and the government's inability to deliver services and protect the populace has eroded its legitimacy."

MSNBC:

The new troops could be a down payment on an even larger influx of U.S. forces that has been widely expected this year, and it will get forces in place in time for the increase in fighting that usually comes with warmer weather and ahead of national midyear elections.

The troops will also train Afghan army units.

The military operations will set up a string of bases and smaller combat outposts, allowing the troops to move around and engage in counterterrorism against foreign fighters and counterinsurgency operations against the Taliban and other local enemies, the official said.

The goal is to have enough troops to "seize and hold" territory and maintain basic security, which hasn't been possible under current troop levels, the official said. The Taliban continues to maintain at least half a dozen safe areas inside Afghanistan, which are prime targets for the U.S. military.
<...>
The increased troop levels are expected to last three to four years, the military official said.

Obama last week ordered a strategic review of U.S. policy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, headed by former CIA officer Bruce Riedel, Richard Holbrooke, Obama's special representative for the two countries, and Michele Flournoy, the undersecretary of defense for policy.

Meanwhile, back in Afghanistan:

Stepping up a confrontation with his political opponents, President Hamid Karzai agreed Saturday to an August date for presidential elections but said he'll stay in office until then and not resign in favor of an interim administration.

The man widely expected to be tapped as the main opposition party's presidential candidate accused Karzai of trying to extend his term so that he could use his authority over the government to "rig the election."
<...>
Karzai said he accepted the "national consensus" on the Aug. 20 date. But he rejected an opposition demand that an interim administration run the country between May 21 and the election, saying there is no such provision in the Constitution.

He said if the deadline for holding the vote is to be extended by four months, so too should his term in office.

"We have agreed on the Constitution and the Constitution says clearly that there should be a presidential election 30 days to 60 days before the ending of the president's working period," said Karzai, wearing a long black coat and a grey wool hat. "The president stays until the election date."
<...>
Abdullah, a leader of the opposition National Front, told McClatchy the opposition will continue insisting that Karzai step aside in favor of a "transitional mechanism" because he will try to use his office and the perks that go with it to fix the election.

"He thinks this is the only way for him to have an advantage, by using his authority over the process and over the institutions," said Abdullah, who served as foreign minister from 2001 to 2006. "If he is talking about a national consensus, does he think there is a national consensus for him to stay and rig the election?"

That was the first week of March. By the end of that month, the strategic review was complete.