As President Barack Obama struggles over a new military strategy for Afghanistan, his advisers are grappling to satisfy sharply divergent demands: assuring Americans that any military buildup will be limited while convincing Pakistan and other wary allies that the U.S. presence is substantial and there to stay.
The stakes are large. On the domestic front, Obama risks alienating a political base that has become increasingly impatient with the eight-year war.
At the same time, the president faces potentially serious setbacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan if the heads of those governments — not to mention the leaders of the Taliban insurgency — see any indication of wavering U.S. commitment to the war.
“This is precisely what muddles their strategic discussion,” said Juan Zarate, who served as deputy national security adviser in the Bush administration. “They have to thread a needle here. (Obama) can’t be seen domestically to be articulating a 20-year commitment to Afghanistan, while at the same time, he can’t be signaling a quick exit to our allies and enemies on the ground and in the region.”
Pakistan is key to the debate because of concerns that its powerful intelligence service would ramp up support for Taliban militants as part of a hedge strategy aimed at preserving Pakistani influence next door in the event of a U.S. exit from the region.
U.S. hesitation could embolden Taliban leaders who have gained control of large swaths of territory through a campaign of intimidation that has convinced many locals that the Islamic insurgents will remain long after U.S. forces have left.
White House officials have said that Obama may still be weeks away from reaching a decision on Afghanistan and whether to grant the request of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. commander in the country, for 40,000 additional troops. Republicans have demanded Obama agree to McChrystal’s request.
The competing impulses within the administration have been on display in a series of recent public exchanges.
During her trip to Pakistan last week, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was asked by a Pakistani journalist when administration officials would “make up your minds about what to do in Afghanistan” and reminded that a decision not to send troops “will be seen as defeat in this country.” Clinton replied: “The president is well aware that it’s important that he show resolve, that he show a commitment to seeing this effort through.”
More Top Picks Best High Contrast Computer Mice For Seniors
But on Sunday, one of Obama’s top domestic policy advisers, Valerie Jarrett, sent a different signal when she said in a television interview that the United States would work with Afghan President Hamid Karzai to improve conditions in the country “as we try to bring this war to a close.”
Obama is crafting his new policy at a time of falling public support and growing confusion about whether the United States even has a chance of winning. Public support for maintaining troops in Afghanistan fell to 50 percent in September, compared with 57 percent last June, according to Pew Research Center polling.
U.N. pulls out staff
The United Nations is sending about 600 foreign staff out of the country or into secure compounds because of the deadly Taliban attack on U.N. workers, warning the Afghan government Thursday that international support will wane unless it cracks down on corruption fueling the insurgency.
The decision follows a drawdown of U.N. operations in Pakistan, casting doubt on whether the world body can operate effectively in this region with war raging on both sides of the border.
The U.N. insists the staff relocations — which affect more than half its foreign contingent in Afghanistan and a modest number in Pakistan — are temporary.
— Associated Press
———