Whatever we may think, there are way too many Afghans who think our partner, Karzai and his team, are downright awful.
That is why it is not enough for us to simply dispatch more troops. If we are going to make a renewed commitment in Afghanistan, we have to visibly display to the Afghan people that we expect a different kind of governance from Karzai, or whoever rules, and refuse to proceed without it. It doesn’t have to be Switzerland, but it does have to be good enough ”” that is, a government Afghans are willing to live under. Without that, more troops will only delay a defeat.
I am not sure Washington fully understands just how much the Taliban-led insurgency is increasingly an insurrection against the behavior of the Karzai government ”” not against the religion or civilization of its international partners. And too many Afghan people now blame us for installing and maintaining this government.
The Taliban warlords who are trying to upend Karzai are even more mafia-like than Karzai. In fact, they make the mafia look tame. So, Friedman is only partly right. And I take no comfort in that. But, as usual, Friedman is only stating the obvious. A really useful column might include other options open to the Obama administration. Do you push for a new election? Do you throw your support behind another candidate? Do you disassociate yourself from the Karzai government? And, when you oppose Karzai, do you make him a local hero when he pushes back? He says we should force him to clean house in ways that would be respected by the Afghan people. Such as?