Round two (part two)

(Part one here)

As the scheduled November 7 second round election date draws near, last minute efforts to replace the Karzai government in Afghanistan are moving into high gear.

From London:

Dr Abdullah Abdullah is meeting his main allies in Kabul today and tomorrow to discuss his options after failing to strike a power-sharing deal with Mr Karzai in talks this week, according to sources in both camps and Western officials.

They said that it seemed increasingly unlikely that Dr Abdullah would stand in the run-off, because his staff were not even campaigning, and that without a power-sharing deal he was more likely to boycott in anger than withdraw gracefully.

The Times report acknowledges that Dr Abdullah's decision "will also dictate to a large extent whether President Obama decides in the next few days that he has a credible enough partner to send more troops to Afghanistan as part of a new counter-insurgency strategy." For their part, the Obama administration has taken several steps this week to increase pressure on Karzai, and today's stateside reports claim Abdullah's decision to withdraw is all but made.

Earlier this week former U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Zalmay Khalilzad indicated a power sharing deal would be struck, adding that Abdullah's chance for a favorable result in a run-off were slim.

"Both want power-sharing. The difference is that Karzai wanted to be first declared the winner or win the election and then offer something from a position of strength, while Abdullah Abdullah wanted to go to a second round, but have a power-sharing agreement without the vote."

"First, he doesn't have much money left," he said. "Second, I think that he thinks that, given the situation, he's likely to lose, and maybe he'll get less votes than he did in the first round, so that would be embarrassing."

The Times reported Abdullah "is much more likely to boycott, analysts say, to deny Mr Karzai the legitimate victory that he craves, especially in the Tajik-dominated north where most people support Dr Abdullah."

In an election marred by fraud on all sides, Abdullah received over 200,000 votes later ruled fraudulent, the majority from the northern sector of the country - a point that has all but vanished from American reporting on the topic since the Obama administration linked the American future in Afghanistan to Abdullah's place in a future government there.

Abdullah proved himself a well-prepared and adept politician by any standards during his cable television American debut last weekend. In responding to questions regarding President Obama's troop build-up plans during separate same-day appearances on CNN and Fox he assured CNN viewers that

"I think it's perhaps right for the president of the United States to see what is, what is then -- that is which is undertaken. That by no chance means that hesitance in the decision. That's, I think, studying the situation in a critical time, so I think the president of the United States is doing the right thing."

There is a need for more troops. There is no doubt about it. There are need in Afghanistan. And that's based on military analysis and especially by General McChrystal.
<...>
The need for more troops is there in order to reverse the situation. If the situation is not reversed from deteriorating further the security situation, so the future of this country will be at risk, and the future of the engagement of the international community will be at risk.

The Washington Post/Associated Press, on developments in the week since:

In private discussions, Abdullah also pressed Karzai for a power-sharing agreement instead of a vote, but Karzai refused, insisting instead on a vote and then a power-sharing agreement, the Westerner close to the talks told The Associated Press.

Despite the massive fraud and rejected ballots, Karzai's vote in the first round was far higher than Abdullah's and he is widely expected to win the runoff.

WASHINGTON, Oct 30 (Reuters) - CNN, quoting an unidentified Western source, said on Friday election talks between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his rival Abdullah Abdullah had broken down and that Abdullah would likely announce he will boycott the Nov. 7 run-off vote.

A boycott would severely undermine a vote intended to affirm the Afghan government's credibility. However, an Abdullah spokesman said no final decision had been made on the candidate's pullout, and that Abdullah will announce his decision Sunday morning. It was possible that word of the boycott was a negotiating tactic by the Abdullah camp.

In Washington, the Obama administration maintained pressure on Karzai as an ongoing (and seemingly endless) flood of "leaks" from "officials" continued unabated. After opening the week by declaring (via the New York Times) his brother was actually a CIA agent, a series of "insider" reports followed.

• Troop levels - Prior to Karzai's announcement that second round runoffs would be held per the Afghan constitution, the administration had hinted that General McChrystal's higher request was actually well in excess of 40,000 troops ("according to a source familiar with the document") and that the 40k number could be presented as a reasonable middle ground. In the wake of Karzai's defiance of the Obama administration the mysterious larger number vanished from reports this week, forgotten as new leaks hinted strongly that significantly fewer than 40,000 troops would be forthcoming. While those troops would be used to bolster a combination of currently ongoing training, counterinsurgency, and counterterror missions, this figure was also described as a "compromise" between that and a "Biden plan" for an exclusive counterterror mission. ("...what one official described as "McChrystal Light.'')
• Bypassing the national government: A "senior administration official who has participated in the Afghanistan policy review and spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss it" told the Washington Post that Obama had requested data on provincial governments. Presumably that's already been done in-country as part of prioritizing where any number of troops could most effectively be deployed, but the Post reports the request for detail "reflects the administration's turn toward Afghanistan's provincial governors, tribal leaders and local militias as potentially more effective partners in the effort than a historically weak central government that is confronting questions of legitimacy after the flawed Aug. 20 presidential election" - a clear message to Karzai (and a reminder to Abdullah, too.)

• An expert witness (and an indication that not all operations are approved at the highest level) - The opportunity to generate and capitalize on publicity over Peter Galbraith's dramatic exit from Afghanistan was terminated abruptly once questions were raised over his participation in efforts to partition Iraq (aka "the Biden plan"). A new expert witness on Afghanistan was needed to fill the void. Enter Matthew Hoh.

  The State Department contractor (Hoh's own description of his status: "Although it is a contract these positions should not be confused with contractors filling various logistics, security and intelligence positions") had resigned from his position after only a few months of service in remote Zabul Province ("one of the five or six provinces always vying for the most difficult and neglected," a State Department official said") on September 10, submitting a dramatic resignation letter supporting the main talking points of the "out of Afghanistan" camp. On Tuesday, a Washington Post story headlined "U.S. official resigns over Afghan war" announced that this week "Hoh is scheduled to meet with Vice President Biden's foreign policy adviser, Antony Blinken, at Blinken's invitation."

  But at the State Department, spokesman Ian Kelly stated "He's [Hoh] not commissioned as a Foreign Service officer" - he was actually "a political officer in a Provincial Reconstruction Team in Afghanistan in Zabul", with a "limited appointment ...to monitor and report on political and economic developments in his province." News coverage, however, would continue to refer to him as a "Foreign Service Officer" and "US Official" - and with no one in the Obama administration willing to accept any by-name responsibility for alternatives to proposed efforts there, Hoh may soon become the public "face" of the opposition rumored (in leaks) to be led by VP Joe Biden. However, Hoh himself claims "I am ready for my 15 minutes to be up".

With the November 7 date drawing ever closer, "sources" had another clarifying message for Karzai: "as of now President Obama will likely announce his decision about a new strategy in Afghanistan at some point between the Afghan run-off election, November 7, and the president's departure for Tokyo, Japan, on Wednesday, November 11."

However,

A diplomat said he was "quietly confident" that a late-night meeting in Kabul's presidential palace could lay the ground for a power-sharing deal in which Abdullah would concede defeat to Karzai, making a second round unnecessary. In exchange, Karzai would guarantee his rival a significant role in promoting his programme of constitutional reform.

If Abdullah carries out threat to boycott he election, it would destroy the credibility of the run-off, which would be unlikely to attract a significant voter turnout and raise serious questions about the legitimacy of Karzai's presidency.

"Whatever happens there will not be a run-off," one diplomat said. "But the last thing anyone wants is an Abdullah boycott - it would open up too many potential questions about Karzai's legitimacy. A deal between the two men that is endorsed by parliament or the supreme court would be the best way forward."

But with a promised dramatic announcement from Abdullah imminent, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested a one-man runoff might still beconsidered "legitimate" after all...

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton downplayed the prospect of an Abdullah withdrawal, saying it would not undermine the legitimacy of the election.

"I don't think it has anything to do with the legitimacy of the election," Clinton told reporters in Abu Dhabi. "It's a personal choice which may or may not be made."

More worryingly, however, a boycott could prompt Dr Abdullah's backers to call their supporters out on to the streets for protests that could easily turn violent in a country awash with weapons.

So on second thought, "It appears increasingly likely that Obama will not announce his new Afghanistan strategy until after returning to the United States on Nov. 20. "

Next: Abdullah Abdullah pulls out - should we?

Previously:

The Plan Unveiled

Hanky panky

Smokescreen

The wicked game (and parts two, three, four and five)