Afghanistan

By Peter Bergen

Since he left office former Vice President Dick Cheney has been waging a lonesome jihad to defend the practices of the Bush administration's during the ‘war on terror', saying in an emblematic interview in February: "If it hadn't been for what we did -- with respect to the terrorist surveillance program, or enhanced interrogation techniques for high-value detainees, the Patriot Act, and so forth -- then we would have been attacked again. Those policies we put in place, in my opinion, were absolutely crucial to getting us through the last seven-plus years without a major-casualty attack on the U.S."...

On the eve of the Afghan presidential election, there are very few public polls on which analysts and commentators can base their forecasts. So it's worth taking a moment to evaluate how useful these are and consider some of the biases that confound accurate polling.

First, polling will suffer from tremendous sampling bias, in which the sample is not representative of the national population. Afghanistan is still one of the poorest countries in the world with an extremely low telecommunications penetration rate. According to the International Telecommunication Union, there is less than one fixed phone line per thousand people. The world average is about nineteen per thousand...

I’m very, very worried about where the conversation is going on Afghanistan. Andrew Sullivan is characterizing Christian Brose as a voice of the neoconservative right for the following:

What I heard again and again is that we may have to settle for a counterterrorism-focused mission, but that should be an unfortunate option of last resort, not our going-in policy. Furthermore, we should not allow resources to determine strategy, as this study suggests, which was one interpretation I heard for the administration’s recent statements walking back U.S. goals: The economy’s bad, and we have to do what we can. This gets it backwards. We should determine the optimal outcome we are confident we can accomplish, and then pay for it. After all, we still have a GDP of, what, $12 trillion? If our conception of strategic success is achievable, let’s not hide behind tightening budgets.

If I recall correctly, this was, until very recently, a consensus view held by people on the center-left and the center-right, not a maximalist view embraced only by a right-wing fringe. And I’m pretty sure this remains a widely held view...

One of my colleagues here in Think Tanksville pointed out the other day that President Obama used the phrase “hard-earned peace” in his Inaugural Address to describe his goals in Afghanistan. It is not hard to imagine the marginalia that produced this slightly odd language. “To Speechwriting: No more ‘victories,’ please.”

Also, “peace” has a pleasing relationship with “stability,” which is emerging as the realist, scaled-down, but nonetheless daunting goal in Afghanistan among many foreign-policy types who, for one reason or another, believe that the United States ought to trim its ambitions in that country to match our resources and abilities...

iStockAnalyst (08/01) features Steve Clemons discussing Obama's need for a degree of moral flexibility.
Washington Independent (07/30) quotes Peter Bergen on the need for more troops in Afghanistan.
Foreign Policy (07/30) cites Daniel Levy on potential candidates to lead Kadima after Olmert's resignation.
The Window (07/19) talks with Parag Khanna on the U.S.' relationship with the Kurdish Regional Government.

Christian Science Monitor (07/28) quotes Peter Bergen on the global elite's evolving views on Al Qaeda.
Daily News Egypt (07/28) features Daniel Levy explaining Israel's reasoning behind the prisoner transfer.
Wall Street Journal (07/28) quotes Daniel Levy on Obama avoiding the Palestinian issue on his trip abroad.
UN Dispatch (07/27) features Peter Bergen arguing a need for additional soldiers in Afghanistan.
New York Times (07/25) posts Michael A. Cohen's examination of Obama's Berlin symbolism.

Washington Post (07/20) quotes Flynt Leverett on the Bush Administration's softening foreign policy stance.
CNN Morning News (07/19) interviews Peter Bergen from Kabul on progress in Afghanistan.
The Daily Intel (07/18) quotes Steve Clemons on Obama's problematic outlook on Europe.
Spiegel (07/14) cites Peter Bergen on Al Qaeda's declining support in the Muslim world.

A few hours ago I hosted the release of the Terror Free Tomorrow/New America Foundation public attitude survey of Pakistan. The whole event can be viewed here. The report is here.

The poll goes into depth in many areas, with some striking results: more than 50% of Pakistanis support negotiations with the Taliban and al-Qaeda. The United States is more feared as a threat to individual security than India. China is loved with an 82% favorable rating. Nawaz Sharif has an 86% approval rating. Musharraf is down to 23%.

Ken Ballen, president of Terror Free Tomorrow, summed up the findings well. View his comments here. Ken said the poll really strikes at the heart of three myths: that anti-American feelings do not matter; that we cannot change attitudes toward the U.S. anyway; and that they hate us for our freedoms. According to this polling, anti-americanism is driving political preferences, there are clear things the U.S. can do to improve our standing, and its the policies we pursue, not our passport, that piss people off.

U.S.-Iran cooperation? Neo-Taliban? For those of you wanting to go deeper on Afghanistan/Pakistan issues than the campaign soundbytes, here's New America's Nick Schmidle debating Amin Tarzi of the Center for Advanced Defense Studies on Bloggingheads.tv.

The term "October surprise" used to refer to an international event that caused a major turn in a U.S. presidential campaign. Steve Coll, New America's president and CEO, thinks that this year's October surprise may be from Osama bin Laden, perhaps at home. Der Spiegel interviews Coll on this and other insights into Osama bin Laden and his large family from his new book, The Bin Ladens.

'Osama bin Laden is Planning Something for the US Election'

Der Spiegel | April 2, 2008

US author Steve Coll spent years looking into Osama bin Laden's family. Now, his new book provides a unique insight into the clan. SPIEGEL spoke with him about where the terrorist might be hiding, how his father got his start, and the unique romantic liasons pursued by one of his brothers.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Coll, Osama bin Laden recently broke a long silence. He threatened Europe and called for the "liberation" of the Gaza Strip. How seriously should we take these missives? Do they tell us anything about him or about where he might be?