This Is Going Well

Karzai just can’t cut a break. He offers his hand as Mayor of Kabul to the Taliban to join in a, um, unity mayoral arrangement. Those ratfinks?

During the past eight years, the Islamic Emirate has not shown any willingness to reach collusion with any party as regards the Jihad, the country and the people, national and Islamic interest,” the Taliban said.

“Now, it is not ready to have any illegitimate, valueless deal about the victory, which is near at hand.”

The statement was entitled “The impracticable decision of the London conference” and addressed to the meeting’s “conveners and donors.”

Gorbachev pauses plugging luxury goods to say ‘told you so’ in the NYT. He rubs in that of Afghanistan’s 34 provinces, the American-propped Mayor of Kabul has lost 12. Gorbachev’s Russian 2010 NYT accent on “Charlie Wilson’s War’s” accepted narrative that the U.S. actually made the Taliban possible nonetheless must infuriate more than a few.

What’s done is done. We must deal with the world as it is, not as we imagine it to be. The Taliban are also not monolithic. Peeling some Taliban off – or energizing intramural debate – still works for percentages. Joe Conason after all says this is what’s going down. McChrystal got his mini-surge. He also at least uttered the words recently Afghanistan’s future won’t come by American force of arms. Encouraging if he (a) believes it; and (b) understands the implications. From the Taliban point of view, too. Is JSOC wise enough to prepare ‘decent interval’ leaflets in Pashtu, Baluchi, etc.? Just in case.

Can McChrystal be trusted? Harvard’s Stephen Walt says no. We disagree with Walt that a foreign-imposed/engineered government in Tehran is a viable soultion to That Problem. Kermit Roosevelt’s zombie should not (could not) parody 1953. Some half-assed Neocon-esque JDAM-led strike also will not spark ‘regime change’. (“Yeah, you and what army?,” as they say). Here? Walt is looking for and at empirical evidence. 2011 is just around the corner for us all.


  1. Dr Leo Strauss says

    @Captain Goto
    Captain, clumsy drafting. Reference was to Walt’s general support elsewhere for Haas’ regime change (but with Haas’ trademark bold equivocation) and contrasting that stance with Walt’s (seemingly) more empirically-based skepticism of McChyrstal ‘here’ (meaning this specific FP item).

  2. Comment says

    We’ve always been a bit skeptical of Flynt Leveritt and his magical faxes – But we see that fraud Jeff Goldberg is now portraying him as a dupe or useful idiot for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards – So if Goldberg is trying to smear him, he must be on to something.

  3. Captain Goto says

    “We disagree with Walt that a foreign-imposed/engineered government in Tehran is a viable soultion to That Problem.”

    Which side of this ‘argument’ is Dr. Strauss on? I couldn’t find any evidence in Walt’s FP stuff that he supports this idea…does that mean Dr. Strauss does?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


CommentLuv badge