Absolutely they are on good terms…

Richard Holbrooke, special U.S. representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, once again declared his respect for Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

In fact, he feels so strongly about reports that the two don’t get along he wrote a letter to The Washington Post.

“I did not, and never have, spoken harshly to Mr. Karzai, ” said Holbrooke in the letter to the editor, which was published on Thursday. He was responding to a story earlier this week in the newspaper which said he had spoken harshly to the re-elected Afghan leader.

“As for my relations with President Karzai, whom I have known for more than five years, they remain cordial, correct and respectful,” added Holbrooke, who is known for his combative style. He said the same last month when he was pressed about his relations with Karzai.

Holbrooke wrote in the letter that he had been in direct contact with Karzai since he was declared the winner of the fraud-plagued Afghan election this week.

Holbrooke is expected to travel to Afghanistan soon. No date yet. Stay tuned.

Holbrooke was last in Afghanistan in August for the election when diplomats said he delivered a strong message to Karzai about corruption, telling him the United States wanted more from the Afghan leader if he won.

But in his letter, Holbrooke said he had also made very clear to Karzai that he “looked forward to continuing our close cooperation” with him and his government.

Look for lots of public smiles and handshakes when Karzai and Holbrooke meet in Kabul. What happens behind closed doors, we’ll tell you later.

Photo credit: Reuters/Omar Sobhani (Karzai and Holbrooke shake hands in Kabul in February)

Former President George W. Bush used to talk about the “soft bigotry of low expectations.” He was talking about education in the United States.

But these days, that phrase could easily refer to the U.S. government’s attitudes towards Afghanistan. Just look at the following phrases from American officials this year.

“We never promised Afghans a perfect democracy,” “Afghans have lower expectations in terms of security,” “we have to recognise Afghanistan will always remain a poor, conservative land with a low-level insurgency,” “our goal in Afghanistan is simply to prevent al Qaeda using its territory to attack us.”

All perfectly reasonable in many ways, but hardly a compelling manifesto to win Afghan hearts and minds.

The concern is that there has been such a concerted effort to lower the bar in Afghanistan this year, and to downplay what is achievable, that failure sometimes seems almost inevitable.

The United States convinced Hamid Karzai to agree to a run-off election, but failed to convince him to clean up the Election Commission that had perpetrated the fraudulent first round. That made more controversy almost inevitable.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs just declared Karzai the “legitimate leader of Afghanistan” and that the world could take heart that the laws of Afghanistan had prevailed.

Abdullah Abdullah and many Afghans would surely take issue with that bold statement. The laws of Afghanistan do not allow for elections to be rigged and for perpetrators to go unpunished.

Anthony Cordesman of the Center for Strategic and International Studies argues that the Afghan decision is the “defining test” of Obama’s leadership.

“President Obama will have to take personal responsibility for the outcome of the war in Afghanistan, betting his historical reputation and second term on the outcome,” Cordesman said.

The United States, some experts argue, needs to show a clear and unwavering commitment to winning the war in Afghanistan — and demand a clear and unwavering commitment from the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the same goal.

Half-measures will never work. Weakness or a lack of commitment will embolden the worst elements of Karzai’s government, encourage the Pakistanis to keep playing both sides, and be exploited ruthlessly by the Taliban.

It isn’t just a question of how many troops are sent, but whether there is a coherent strategy that will leave Afghanistan standing on its own two feet.

If the war, as Obama once said, is one of “necessity,” then it is surely time for what Cordesman calls “real leadership.”

Much as the president likes to find a middle road, there simply does not seem to be one any more in the Hindu Kush.

What do you think is the best route for Obama to take through this potential minefield?

Photo credit: Reuters/Morteza Nikoubazl (Afghan man dances in celebration of Karzai’s victory),  Reuters/Jonathan Ernst (Protest group Code Pink near White House on Halloween)

Elections in the East, elections in the West.

Hot off the wire: Afghan President Hamid Karzai has been declared re-elected.

Afghanistan’s election commission made the declaration after Karzai’s opponent, Abdullah Abdullah, withdrew and a run-off election was canceled. “The Independent Election Commission declares the esteemed Hamid Karzai as the president,” the commission’s chief said.

This will no doubt increase the pressure on President Barack Obama to roll-out his new Afghanistan strategy earlier rather than later, now that he knows who the United States will be dealing with.

Matthew Hoh, the former State Department employee who quit last month in protest over U.S. policy in Afghanistan, told NBC’s “Today” show that the Karzai news was “disappointing” and despite the investment of  a lot of U.S. resources, “we didn’t get what we put our troops there for.”

Closer to home (just over the bridge from Washington) it’s the day before the election for Virginia governor and (up the highway a bit) the election for New Jersey governor.

Like it or not, Tuesday’s elections will be seen by some as a referendum on the policies of Obama, who has attended campaign events for the Democrats running in the two governor races.

Republican Bob McDonnell is leading in Virginia over Democrat Creigh Deeds. In New Jersey, incumbent Democratic Governor Jon Corzine is in a close race against Republican Chris Christie, with the Independent candidate, Chris Daggett, playing a spoiler role.

What do you think? Should the two governor elections be seen as a judgment on Obama’s policies?

Click here for more Reuters political coverage

Photo credit: Reuters/Ahmad Masood (Karzai in Kabul on Nov. 2), Reuters/Jim Young (Obama at campaign rally for Deeds on Oct. 27)

Since the September 11 attacks, CIA officials have made it clear that to get the intelligence needed to stop terrorism attacks, U.S. intelligence agencies sometimes have to deal with “bad guys.”

The issue is again in the public eye again after The New York Times reported that the CIA has been regularly paying Ahmed Wali Karzai, the brother of Afghan President Hamid Karzai, for at least eight years for services that included helping to recruit an Afghan paramilitary force. The newspaper report says that Ahmed Wali Karzai is a suspected player in the illegal opium trade, which he denies.

Senator John McCain told CBS “Early Show” yesterday: “I’d heard that rumor before. I think it’s wrong. It’s wrong of the CIA to do it and I’m sure our military commanders there would disagree with it.”

Watch CBS News Videos Online

One former intelligence official, who was not commenting specifically on the Karzai brother situation, said in general it would be worrisome if the debate restarts over whether the CIA should or should not do business with “tainted individuals” when trying to prevent harm to U.S. interests.

“I’ve seen that movie too many times before,” the former official said behind a cloak of  anonymity.

People cannot criticize the CIA on the one hand if it fails to get critical information in societies marked by corruption and, on the other, “express shock and dismay that it might deal with less-than-saintly individuals,” the official said.

What do you think? Is it OK for the CIA to deal with unsavory characters if it means U.S. interests are protected? Or is this a slippery slope?

Click here for more Reuters political coverage

The latest violence in Afghanistan may raise the drumbeat in Washington for a decision from President Barack Obama on whether to send more U.S. forces.

He’ll make remarks today at a Congressional Gold Medal Ceremony, and could address the matter there. Plenty of other topics are on the front burner, though, including healthcare reform and overhauling financial regulation, to name just two.

Senator John McCain, Obama’s Republican presidential rival in 2008, said the decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan should come soon. McCain told CBS television’s “Early Show”: “Overwhelmingly the military establishment and those who have had the experience of our success in Iraq know that the people there don’t want the Taliban back … and they want an environment of security. And we watch this situation continue to deteriorate while this long protracted process of decision-making goes on. We’re not operating in a vacuum. The president of the United States needs to make this decision and soon. Our allies are nervous and our military leadership is becoming frustrated.”

Afghanistan is clearly not the only focus of U.S. foreign policy concern. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is in Pakistan, pledging a fresh start in U.S.-Pakistani relations. Clinton’s visit came as a car bomb killed over 80 people in a crowded market.

Back in Washington, the struggle continues to get doses of swine flu vaccine to those most at risk. One top U.S. health official says the government may end up throwing away unused doses of the vaccine if people can’t get it fast enough.

And it’s raining. Again. Still.

One bright note: U.S. consumer confidence is on the rise for the first time since 2007.

Click here for more Reuters political coverage.

Photo credit: REUTERS/Ahmad Masood (Security forces around an international guest-house in Kabul after an attack by Taliban militants, October 28, 2009)

Public support for sending more U.S. troops to Afghanistan is on the rise, according to an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll released on Tuesday. The poll finds 47 percent of Americans favor boosting the troop level in Afghanistan, compared to 43 percent who are opposed to the idea.

An NBC/WSJ poll in September found 51 percent opposed to a troop increase, while 44 percent supported it.

Other recent opinion polls have shown lagging public support for the war and members of President Barack Obama’s own Democratic Party are divided over whether to send more troops.

Right now, there are  65,000 U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan as part of a 100,000 strong NATO-led force. The size of the U.S. contingent is expected to reach 68,000 later this year.

Obama is considering whether to send up to 40,000 more troops. His decision is expected any day now. Former Vice President Dick Cheney and other critics say he’s taking too long to reach a decision. Cheney accused Obama of “dithering” over a strategy review and said he needed to send more troops right away.

If the poll is accurate,  a majority of Americans don’t mind the time Obama is taking to review the U.S. strategy in the eight-year-old war.  The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll found 58 percent of respondents support delaying a decision until after Afghanistan’s runoff presidential election on Nov. 7, when U.S. officials may have a better handle on  Kabul’s political situation.

The NBC/Wall Street Journal poll of 1,009 adults was conducted Oct. 22-25 and has an overall margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

Click here for more Reuters political news.

Photo Credit: Reuters/ Omar Sobhani (U.S. troops on patrol in Kandahar city 10/26/09)

On Monday, the State Department sent out its no. 2 official to tout how it was managing to get U.S. civilians out into the field in Afghanistan, with nearly 1,000 expected to be in place by year-end.

A day later, it was in damage control mode after the resignation of one of its star employees was plastered on the front page of The Washington Post and on the Internet.

In an emotionally-charged four-page letter dated September 10, Matthew Hoh said he was quitting because he had lost confidence in the war effort and whether it was worth the blood spilled there.

Hoh’s letter is notable  because he was seen as just the kind of person the State Department wants in Afghanistan. A former Marine and then Department of Defense civilian, he served in Iraq from 2004 to 2007. On a one-year contract with the State Department, he was serving as the senior civilian representative in Afghanistan’s Zabul province.

Just as President Barack Obama is reviewing his approach in Afghanistan, Hoh said he had “doubts and reservations” not only about the current but also future strategy in the eight-year war.

“I fail to see the value or the worth in continued U.S. casualties or expenditures of resources in support of the Afghan government in what is, truly, a 35-year old civil war,” said Hoh in his resignation letter to the State Department’s human resources director.

In language that must make the State Department cringe, Hoh said the United States was no more than a “supporting actor” in a tragedy and that the U.S. presence had only served to further destabilize the country as well as its neighbor Pakistan.

“I find specious the reasons we ask for bloodshed and sacrifice from our young men and women in Afghanistan,” he said.

Excusing the “tone” of his letter, he argued that the United States was mortgaging its economy on a war which would drag on for years.

State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said Hoh had been a “valued member” of the team in Afghanistan and that the department respected his opinion.

“We take his opinion seriously but we continue to believe that we are on track to achieve the goals that have been laid out for us. Those are to improve Afghan governance and provide security for the people of Afghanistan and help to rebuild their country and have a future which presents an alternative to the negative vision of the Taliban,” said Kelly.

The White House was noncommittal in its response to the letter. “I think the president has seen the story. I don’t believe the president has seen the letter,” said White House spokesman Robert Gibbs.

State Department officials said there had been a lot of arm-twisting to try and get Hoh to stay and that the special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, had also appealed to him not to quit.

Asked whether there could now be a rush of other resignations — as happened during the Iraq war when disaffected State Department officials quit in protest of U.S. strategy — U.S. officials said they did not think that would happen.

“There is a tendency to conflate this with the resignations during the Iraq invasion, but this is really not the case. Not to diminish this guy’s views, but…I don’t sense a groundswell of resignations. The response to serve in Afghanistan is so much bigger than it was in Iraq,” said one official.

This was certainly the message from Deputy Secretary of State Jacob Lew on Monday who said there were more applications than jobs for posts in Afghanistan.

Well now there is an opening in Zabul province to fill….

UPDATE: A State Department official called to make clear that Hoh was not a career foreign service officer, but was on a limited contract for the department when he resigned.

Photo credit: Reuters/Goran Tomasevic (Afghan policeman patrols village in Zabul province in 2008), Reuters/Jim Young (State Department building in Washington)

President Barack Obama heads to Florida today to thank members of the military for their service — but given the deadly violence in Afghanistan, the commander-in-chief might use the opportunity to reflect on strategy in the region.

Before Obama takes off, he’ll meet with his foreign policy and national security team to discuss the situation and troops on the ground.

Afghanistan will also be on the agenda at the State Department, where Deputy Secretary of State Jack Lew will talk about progress made in hiring civilians there. The topic could come up at the Council on Foreign Relations too; Sen. John Kerry’s speaking there around midday.

But domestic matters could take the top spot, with Senate Democrats reportedly close to securing enough votes to move a national healthcare plan forward. A proposed bill could be sent to the Congressional Budget Office for an official cost estimate. A Thomson Reuters report indicates the U.S. healthcare system is just as wasteful as Obama says it is, but reforms could be paid for by fixing inefficiencies, preventing mistakes and fighting fraud.

In Washington, it’s the day after the Marine Corps Marathon, a massive road race that this year drew more than 20,000 finishers.

Click here for more Reuters political coverage

Photo credit: REUTERS/stringer (U.S. military personnel watch as a U.S. helicopter flies over a military base in Ghazni province, October 26, 2009)

He almost said it, but he didn’t. Vice President Joe Biden, who has a reputation for verbal gaffes, almost asked “Who cares?” but stopped himself, when he weighed in on the White House’s latest war of words with his predecessor, former Vice President Dick Cheney.

Cheney, a repeated critic of the Obama administration’s foreign policy initiatives, this week accused President Barack Obama of “dithering” and being scared to make a decision on whether to send more troops to Afghanistan.

“I think that is absolutely wrong. I think what the administration is doing is exactly what we said it would do.  And what I think it warrants doing. And that is making an informed judgment based upon circumstances that have changed … to come up with a sustainable policy that has more than one dimension,” Biden told pool reporters traveling with him at the U.S. Ambassador’s residence in Prague.

But the Democratic vice president worked hard to keep his foot firmly out of his mouth, after looking piqued when asked about Cheney’s suggestion that Republican former President George W. Bush’s administration had left behind a thorough assessment of the Afghanistan war, according to a pool report.

“Well, look, I don’t …” Biden said, and then paused, the report said.  “Who cares what …” he began again, sounding annoyed. He paused again, looking as though he wanted to stuff the words back in his mouth.

“Well, let me put it maybe,” he said, and he paused a third time, glancing at communications director Jay Carney with a smile, the report said.

“Yeah, yeah, I know. I can see the headline now,” Biden said, shaking his head. “I’m getting better, guys. I’m getting a little bit better, you know what I mean?”

Obama has been holding meetings with top advisers to review a request for 40,000 more troops for Afghanistan from General Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. and NATO commander there. Obama said he wants to make a thorough review of the request before making a decision.

“A whole lot has changed in the last year. A whole lot’s changed,” Biden said. “So the idea – even if they did – let’s assume they left us a review that was absolutely correct, is that review relevant and totally applicable to today in light of the changes that have taken place in the region, in Afghanistan itself? So I think that is sort of irrelevant. Not sort of, I think it’s irrelevant.”

For more Reuters political news, click here.

Photo credit: REUTERS/Larry Downing (Biden gestures during a ceremonial event with Cheney on Capitol Hill, January 6, 2009)

Power plays are always a tricky business in Washington and sometimes it’s better to make a joke out of it. Or not.

Special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, used that tactic on Friday when asked about reports that veteran Senator John Kerry is stealing his limelight.

“I’d like to make a joke and say, ‘I’m always happy to be eclipsed by John Kerry.’ But then you’ll take it seriously and then I’ll cause more problems,” Holbrooke told reporters.

Kerry was in Kabul earlier this week with a mission to convince incumbent President Hamid Karzai to agree to a run-off election after the flawed first round in August. Apparently Holbrooke was also working the phones as was U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

But it was Kerry who grabbed the headlines, prompting journalists to question whether he was the de facto secretary of state and key player when it came to dealing with Karzai.

While Kerry was prodding Karzai in Kabul, Holbrooke said he was in Washington helping Clinton prepare for meetings with President Barack Obama as he reviews U.S. strategy on Afghanistan. Holbrooke’s last visit to Kabul was in August when he met several times with Karzai.  Some of those meetings were said to be heated.

But on Friday, Holbrooke brushed aside talk of strained relations with Karzai, saying they got along just  “fine,” he had “respect” for the Afghan leader and looked forward to seeing him soon.

“I have absolutely no problems with him.  And — and it’s as simple as that.”

Let’s see what the body language is like when Holbrooke next visits Karzai at his palace in Kabul. Will they hold a joint news conference as Karzai did with Kerry this week?

Photo credit: Reuters/Ahmad Masood (Kerry and Karzai at news conference in Kabul in October) Reuters/Omar Sobhani (Holbrooke and Karzai in Kabul in February)