Afghan War Debate Now Leans to Focus on Al Qaeda

[Pirate Smile]

Source: New York Times


American Marines rested at a makeshift patrol base in southern Afghanistan on Wednesday.

By PETER BAKER and ERIC SCHMITT
Published: October 7, 2009

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s national security team is moving to reframe its war strategy by emphasizing the campaign against Al Qaeda in Pakistan while arguing that the Taliban in Afghanistan do not pose a direct threat to the United States, officials said Wednesday.
As Mr. Obama met with advisers for three hours to discuss Pakistan, the White House said he had not decided whether to approve a proposed troop buildup in Afghanistan. But the shift in thinking, outlined by senior administration officials on Wednesday, suggests that the president has been presented with an approach that would not require all of the additional troops that his commanding general in the region has requested.

-snip-
The White House appears to be trying to prepare the ground to counter that by focusing attention on recent successes against Qaeda cells in Pakistan. The approach described by administration officials on Wednesday amounted to an alternative to the analysis presented by General McChrystal. If, as the White House has asserted in recent weeks, it has improved the ability of the United States to reduce the threat from Al Qaeda, then the war in Afghanistan is less central to American security.

In reviewing General McChrystal’s request, the White House is rethinking what was, just six months ago, a strategy that viewed Pakistan and Afghanistan as a single integrated problem. Now the discussions in the White House Situation Room, according to several administration officials and outsiders who have spoken with them, are focusing on related but separate strategies for fighting Al Qaeda and the Taliban.

“Clearly, Al Qaeda is a threat not only to the U.S. homeland and American interests abroad, but it has a murderous agenda,” one senior administration official said in an interview initiated by the White House on Wednesday on the condition of anonymity because the strategy review has not been finished. “We want to destroy its leadership, its infrastructure and its capability.”
The official contrasted that with the Afghan Taliban, which the administration has begun to define as an indigenous group that aspires to reclaim territory and rule the country but does not express ambitions of attacking the United States. “When the two are aligned, it’s mainly on the tactical front,” the official said, noting that Al Qaeda has fewer than 100 fighters in Afghanistan.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/08/world/asia/08prexy.html?hp

---

This is good news IMO. Narrowing the scope instead of expanding it.

[EFerrari]

1. The torture president collapsed the distinction between al Qaida and the Taliban

and now Obama has to put that distinction back into the public's frame of reference. It won't be easy.

[spaten]

2. sounds great except

1. pakistani sunni militants are not necessarily "al qaeda" and do not have the means to threaten the united states.
2. If the first statement can be PROVEN wrong, then get a declaration of war.
3. If it is really about the nuclear weapons, Special Forces can take care of it in 24 hours, without flushing trillions more down the toilet.

It is highly disturbing to see bush's lies repeated as justification.

[No Elephants]

3. The AfghanTaliban and the Administration issue statements in the same week, stating that the Taliban

agenda does not include attacking the US. The Taliban added, though, that they will do so if the occupation of Afghanistan continues. What a wild coincidence!

[YouTakeTheSkyway]

4. Interesting

It will be interesting to see if the United States opens the door to segments of the Taliban on the stipulation that they remain hostile to al-Qaeda.

[madrchsod]

5. the taliban were our friends until they turned down dick`s pipeline deal

after that they were our enemy. the taliban were never bosom buddies with bin boys arabs.today the leadership of the al queda has moved into yemen and is creating mischief there.

it is time to leave.

[PATRICK]

6. A good sign

and at least consistent with Dem positions from Kerry on. The inherent logic that there are more Al Q in IRAQ from which we are withdrawing than any sustainable members(with little local support at all) in Afghanistan has in effect moved the ball to a real threat in Pakistan, SUPPORTING their government not occupying a shaky fraud in keeping the radicals from getting a viable chance at attaining nukes- and the only vestige of actual direct revenge against the original perpetrating Al Q franchise- or what's left of it.

Retaining that focus is the real story of the Afghan policy as it moves from a disastrous Bushtrap afterthought to center stage. Where no Al Q justifies any escalation at all compared to Iraq.

Nobody should be elated much while people die during this "process" and the push for peace by the people is more pure and correct than cautious groping for the impure American role in world affairs.