"President Obama intends to adopt a tougher line toward Hamid Karzai, the Afghan president, as part of a new American approach to Afghanistan that will put more emphasis on waging war than on development, senior administration officials said Tuesday," The New York Times reported.
"'It's not about dumping reconstruction at all,' said a senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the diplomatic delicacy of the subject. 'What we're trying to do is to focus on the al Qa'eda problem. That has to be our first priority.' "
The Pentagon is preparing to send as many as 30,000 additional soldiers to Afghanistan this year, almost doubling the size of America's troop levels there.
The US Defence Secretary, Robert Gates, testified in Congress on Tuesday, laying out the administration's goals in Afghanistan.
"Mr Gates was pressed for details on a recent strike across the border in Pakistan in which a remotely piloted vehicle attacked a suspected insurgent target. The defence secretary said President Obama, like President Bush, was committed to going after al Qa'eda targets 'wherever al Qa'eda is'," The New York Times reported.
"He said that the Obama administration's decision to continue a policy of pursuing al Qa'eda had been communicated to the government of Pakistan.
"In recent public comments, including this testimony, Mr Gates has sought to lower expectations for the mission in Afghanistan, setting standards far below the sweeping desires of regional democratisation that were a foundation of Bush administration national security policy.
"'There is little doubt that our greatest military challenge right now is Afghanistan,' Mr Gates told the Senate Armed Services Committee. 'President Obama has made it clear that the Afghanistan theater should be our top overseas military priority.' "
Although the administration seems sure it needs additional troops, it is not clear about how they will be utilised.
The Baltimore Sun said: "with no overall guiding strategy, top military commanders and civilian officials are in disagreement over what missions the additional troops should be assigned, and how those missions should be coordinated into an overall strategy, officials said.
"Among those uncomfortable with sending more troops without a clear strategy was Sen John McCain, the Arizona Republican who lost his campaign for president last year to Obama.
" 'We need to develop and articulate a clear strategy with measurable performance goals' in Afghanistan, McCain said at today's hearing.
" 'More troops are just a piece of what is required. And we need to address the corruption and narcotics problems much more forthrightly than we have so far,' McCain said.
"Explaining the lack of a strategy, Gates argued that Afghanistan is more complex than Iraq, where Petraeus and US Ambassador Ryan Crocker forged a unified campaign plan that coordinated military action with political pressure and civilian development work. That effort is widely credited with helping quell the violence in Iraq."
Mr Gates acknowledged that civilian casualties resulting from US combat and airstrikes have seriously undermined to progress in Afghanistan and must be avoided.
"My worry is that the Afghans come to see us as part of their problem rather than part of their solution, and then we are lost," he said.
In Asia Times, Syed Saleem Shahzad interviewed a militant, who he referred to as "Mohammad" during a visit to Peshawar, a city that is increasingly coming under the sway of the Taliban.
"I questioned Mohammad on a reported split among militants which has caused Pakistan Taliban leader Baitullah [Mehsud] to remain quiet. Abdul Wali, alias Omar Khalid, Moulvi Faqir and others who were previously with Baitullah, who is ill, have now parted with him. The [American] drone attacks have wiped out sizeable numbers of al Qa'eda members, although the word is the Bin Laden and his deputy Ayman al Zawahiri are alive.
" 'The news of a split is true, but it will never benefit the government,' said Mohammad. 'All it has done is weaken Baitullah's command. Believe you me, it will further sharpen the armed opposition against the government. The militant groups will carry out attacks with multiple strategies. Abdul Wali is still fighting against the government.' (Abdul Wali had earlier been reported killed in Mohmand Agency in a military strike.)
" 'Al Qa'eda members have melted into various like-minded groups. Recently, Qari Ziaur Rahman led a group comprising 600, mostly Afghans and al Qa'eda members, to ransack a Pakistani security post in Mohmand Agency,' Mohammad said."
Iraq has held elections in recent years, but they weren't like these," McClatchy Newspapers reported. "There were legislative elections in 2005, two years after US troops invaded the country and toppled Saddam Hussein, but voters could choose only from 'closed lists' of political parties instead of voting for individual candidates. Sunni Muslim Arabs boycotted the vote, which left them feeling marginalised. "This time, voters will be able pick parties and tick off numbers that correlate with the candidates of their choices. US-backed Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki isn't seeking office because the election is for provincial seats, but his face is on posters promising construction and - this may sound familiar - change. " 'Using his image will push the voters to vote for us,' said Sabah al Atwani, the campaign manager for the State of Law coalition, which is affiliated with Maliki and his Dawa party." Juan Cole said: "These elections will have little direct impact on the Federal parliament or cabinet, since new parliamentary elections won't be held until December. But they will bolster or weaken existing parties at the center by acting as bellwethers of public opinion. They will also provide parties with new sources of patronage or cut them off from existing ones, where they lose. The outcome of the elections will tell us something about how realistic Obama's plans to withdraw from Iraq on a short timetable are." Time magazine noted: "The once fearsome Muqtada al Sadr has been very quiet lately in Iraq. Political analyst Amir Hassan Fayht says the reason the onetime Iraqi militant shows less and less political muscle is simple. 'He gave it up,' says Fayht, dean of the college of political science at Baghdad University, 'just like that'. "Indeed, al Sadr's once formidable movement appears to be at its nadir, with the cleric himself scarcely a presence in Iraqi politics these days and his political bloc pushed to the sidelines of the provincial elections on Jan 31. A series of military defeats at the hands of toughened Iraqi security forces plus political missteps over the past year by al Sadr and his followers have left the future of the mass movement in doubt. And without a solid showing of popular support in the coming vote, the Sadrists appear set to lose what remains of the enormous political power they once held. "Prospects for al Sadr's militia, the Mahdi Army, and the political figures who stood at the edge of it have steadily dimmed since last spring, when government forces of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki emerged as the de facto victors in battles with the Mahdi Army across southern Iraq and Baghdad. Weeks of fighting in the early months of 2008 ended in a stalemate. Since then, Iraqi security forces have rounded up scores of Sadrists with the help of US troops, effectively hollowing out the movement's street power and political influence. Meanwhile, the vast popularity that al Sadr's movement once enjoyed among Iraq's Shi'ites seems to have declined too as Iraqis appear to grow increasingly weary of sectarian politics. A recent poll published by the National Media Center, which is funded by the Iraqi government, said 42 per cent of Iraqis hoped to see secular candidates win in the coming provincial elections (31 per cent said they wanted candidates from religious parties to take seats)."
pwoodward@thenational.ae