Even David Ignatius Is "Anxious" About Afghanistan

By Steve Hynd

The Washington Post's David Ignatius, who I refer to as Agent Ignatius due to his being the greatest living apologist for the CIA as well as stenographer to the spies and spooks of all nations,admits to being "anxious" about Afghanistan.

Actually, more than just anxious. He writes:

The Obama administration's strategy for Afghanistan is to gradually transfer responsibility to the Afghans, starting in July 2011. But on the eve of President Hamid Karzai's visit to Washington, there's little evidence so far to demonstrate that this transfer process will actually work.

The much-touted offensive in Marja in Helmand province in February succeeded in clearing that rural area temporarily of Taliban insurgents, at least by day. But plans for the Afghans to provide more security and better governance there are off to a shaky start, officials at the State Department and Pentagon say.

Gen. Stanley McChrystal's boast in February that "We've got a government in a box, ready to roll in" to Marja now sounds wildly over-optimistic. A senior military official concedes that this phrase "created an expectation of rapidity and efficiency that doesn't exist now."

The official Pentagon line, after a White House review Thursday, is that there's "slow but steady progress" in Afghanistan. But the senior military official cautions that 90 days after the offensive, "Marja is a mixed bag," with parts of the area still controlled by the Taliban and Afghan government performance spotty. A top State Department official agrees: "Transfer is not happening" in Marja.

Marjah isn't a "key town", McChrystal was over-optimistic and transfer isn't happening but the Pentagon is talking progress? Ignatius has just pretty much accused senior officers and officials of lying through their teeth to spin disaster into happy-talk. Michele Flournoy, book into that rehab program now!

And it gets worse:

If Afghanistan's strategy for reconciliation is fuzzy, the Obama administration's is nonexistent, at least publicly. "We don't have a plan yet," worries the senior military official. The White House believes that while the administration has policy outlines on reconciliation, it must leave some flexibility for Karzai. "To be durable, this has to be an Afghan plan," stresses the senior administration official.

One big problem with framing a reconciliation strategy now is that U.S. officials want to bargain from a position of strength. "We aren't there yet," the senior military official says bluntly.

And it doesn't look like they'll ever get there. Marjah's a damp squib at best and the military is bending over itself to rebrand the much-touted Kandahar offensive scheduled for this Summer as more of a "process". Shades of Eddie Izzard. Meanwhile, now that the poppie harvest is over, the Taliban are kicking their own offensive into high gear.

But before we all start thinking Agent Ignatius has gone DFH on us, what's his response to this mess?

The Obama administration has just over a year to make the kind of progress in Afghanistan that would provide a political rationale for staying awhile longer.

Hang on a mo'. We're already almost nine months into the 12 month period that McChrystal said was crucial for Afghan "success", whatever that might look like, back when he was hustling Obama for extra troops. Yet in the face of his own admission of zero progress, Ignatius wants to hand McChrystal and Obama another 12 months of slack. Does he not realize that the term "Friedman Unit" is meant to be one of derision?