THE PROGRESS REPORT September 22, 2009 by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, and Zaid Jilani

AFGHANISTAN
Debating The Strategy

Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who replaced Gen. David McKiernan last fall as the top U.S. and NATO commander for Afghanistan, has delivered his long-awaited assessment of the conflict to President Obama. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said that the President has read McChrystal's report, but noted that the general isn't likely to make any sort of formal request for more troops in Afghanistan for "a little bit longer." As The Washington Post's Bob Woodward writes, the report states that without the addition of more U.S. forces into the Afghan theater within the next year, the conflict will "likely result in failure." The debate over sending additional troops to Afghanistan is further complicated by the political situation following the country's "marred elections," with allegations of rampant fraud resulting in a likely runoff between the two leading contenders. McChrystal's report comes at a time when polls show Americans are increasingly opposed to sending more U.S. troops into the conflict.

MCCHRYSTAL'S ASSESSMENT: The Washington Post recently obtained and yesterday published an article on McChrystal's report, titled "Commander's Initial Assessment." The "stakes in Afghanistan are high," McChrystal says at the report's outset. "Stability in Afghanistan is an imperative," he continues, "if the Afghan government falls to the Taliban. ... Afghanistan could again become a base for terrorism, with obvious implications for regional stability." The general notes that a "failure to...reverse insurgent momentum in the near-term (next 12 months)...risks an outcome where defeating the insurgency is no longer possible." McChrystal recommends that there be a change in the "operational culture" of NATO forces in Afghanistan, noting that "we have operated in a manner that distances us -- physically and psychologically -- from the people we seek to protect. In addition, we run the risk of strategic defeat by pursuing tactical wins that cause civilian casualties or unnecessary collateral damage. The insurgents cannot defeat us military; but we can defeat ourselves." The commander suggests that we "redefine" the war with a "focus on the [Afghan] population" and win them over to the side of NATO forces. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told CNN that he would like to see McChrystal come before Congress and testify on what he's recommending, adding that he thinks that if more troops are needed, he will enjoy "a lot of support among Senate Republicans." Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Carl Levin (D-MI) said that hearings will be held after "a recommendation is made to the president and when the president makes his decision."

A 'MARRED' ELECTION: The political crisis in Afghanistan that followed the country's "marred" election last month has complicated the Obama administration's search for the proper strategy there. While the preliminary results of the election give incumbent president Hamid Karzai 54.6 percent of the vote -- versus only 27.8 percent for his chief rival, Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah -- watchdog groups warn that there are enough questionable votes to bring Karzai's share of the vote to below a majority, which would trigger a runoff. President Carter, who has led election-monitoring activities across the globe, told a group of donors at his Carter Center for Human Rights that incumbent president Hamid Karzai has "stolen the election" and that the question now is "whether he gets away with it." The serious allegations of ballot-stuffing and other forms of fraud originally led election authorities to order an examination of ballot boxes in 10 percent of polling places; the U.N.-backed Electoral Complaints Commission has now decided to instead rely on using statistical sampling to investigate electoral irregularities. McChrystal's report notes that the "credibility of the election results remains an open question" and calls for "an improvement in governance that addresses the worst of today's high level of abuse of power, low-level corruption, and bureaucratic incapacity" within the Afghan government.

OBAMA'S VIEW: Obama appeared on five morning talk shows on Sunday and fielded numerous questions about the war in Afghanistan. While he noted that he doesn't support a timeline for withdrawal, he said he's "certainly not someone who believes in indefinite occupations of other countries." Obama, who previously approved the deployment of 21,000 additional troops to Afghanistan earlier this year, has left the door open to a request for more forces. He told ABC, "I just want to make sure that everybody understands that you don't make decisions about resources before you have the strategy ready." As the Post reports, McChrystal's assessment is simply "one input," and the President has "embarked on a very, very serious review of all options." National Security Adviser Gen. Jim Jones told the press earlier this month that he sees his role as ensuring that dissidents to the current policies get to voice their views to the President. Meanwhile, there are reports that Richard Holbrooke, Obama's Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, is "shooting to get into a situation where neg otiations" between factions in Afghanistan will lead to a "political settlement." Led by the new neoconservative think tank Foreign Policy Initiative (FPI), a group of prominent conservatives -- including Bill Kristol, Karl Rove, and Sarah Palin -- wrote an open letter to the president this month urging him to "fully resource" the war in Afghanistan. FPI is enthusiastically dedicating its efforts to build support for a U.S. troop surge in Afghanistan.

SKEPTICISM ABOUT TROOP ESCALATION: While FPI and other conservatives advocate for a troop surge, there is increasing opposition among the American public, legislators, and Afghans to sending more troops to Afghanistan. According to a Washington Post-ABC News poll released last month, 51 percent of Americans now say the war is not worth fighting, with 70 percent of Democrats holding that opinion; only a quarter of those polled said that they support an increase in troop levels. Late last month, Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) called for a "flexible timetable" for removing U.S. troops from Afghanistan, and a few days later, conservative columnist George Will wrote that it was "time to get out of Afghanistan." House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) told the press earlier this month that she sees "little support" for boosting troop levels amongst members of Congress, with Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), co-chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, telling the Hill, "Just because President Obama is our president doesn't mean we don't feel the same outrage we felt regarding Iraq in this same time in the Iraq occupation. Our president doesn't get a pass on this." There is also significant opposition to a troop increase among the Afghan police force. The Associated Press reports that police officials "from some of Afghanistan's most violent regions questioned the need for more American troops, saying...it would increase the perception the U.S. is an occupying power" and undermine local forces.