Afghan embed: The last throw of the dice?
Updated on 03 July 2010
The appointment of General David Petraeus could be the last throw of the dice for NATO's mission in Afghanistan, writes Nick Paton Walsh, embedded with US troops in the country.
It's not clear how many last shots at this NATO thinks it has, but this is definitely the last time these particular dice will hit the table.
Appointing General David Petraeus is not so much of a gamble, more the logical solution to some of the problems General Stanley McChrystal was having. The inelegant broadsides he launched against his civilian masters were perhaps a symptom of the dysfunctional team the Obama administration had put in the job.
An official described it to the New York Times as not so much a Lincoln-esque Team of Rivals, but instead "a bunch of people who don't like each other".
Petraeus's remarks today effectively laid down the law. There was enough mumbling in the White House circles about "house-cleaning" more thoroughly after McChrystal's departure that those remaining must surely be clear that anything short of cohesive unity behind Petraeus, who still basks in the warm glow of the Iraq surge and the Senate's unanimous endorsement, might find them clearing their desks.
His first challenge is to give the unequivocal impression that he is hitting the ground running - that he can actively pick up McChrystal's ball and carry on his tightly time-tabled campaign. There is no real time for learning on the job, unless this politically aware man in a deeply political job wants to lay himself open to accusations that he took too long to get going.
Remember, the clock is ticking. Obama wants to see results by December, and begin withdrawals by July. I remember the phrase "the clock is ticking" from August last year, when McChrystal first came to the job - they said they had 365 days to make a difference. Now, about 330 days in, the clock has a new owner.
The second challenge is Karzai: McChrystal did his best to make him appear the owner of NATO operations here. The logic is that a counterinsurgency plan is only as good as the local government you have to fight it. Karzai's seen as weak and isolated by virtually everyone - NATO, Afghans, the Taliban - but it appears McChrystal felt he had no choice but to bring him onside. It's up to Petraeus to continue and ameloriate that relationship.
This is where Petraeus is best equipped to deal with the third challenge: the need for this to be solved diplomatically and politically, rather than militarily. The insurgency and Afghanistan needs to see the US and NATO proceed with a unified and consistent voice, and Petraeus proved in Iraq he's all about the message.
In Iraq, he was to many the Viceroy. Here, his comments about the civilian and military cooperation not being "optional", suggest he's stepping again into a role as chief emissary.
A military man with an entirely political job to do. Some expressed doubts whether McChrystal, who excelled at special ops in Iraq, had that diplomatic quiver to his bow. Petraeus does, Iraq proved. The question is whether he comes too late to Afghanistan to use it effectively.
