[Peace-discuss] Obama and the Great Game

Fri Feb 13 16:40:58 CST 2009

Newsweek is "liberal" like the Washington Post and CNN, imperialist/ 
nationalist outposts. I would describe the The Nation as 'liberal",  
quite a difference. But language being infinitely flexible, easily  
lends itself as a hammer for those with noxious intent.

--mkb

On Feb 13, 2009, at 3:56 PM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:

> [A paleo-conservative analysis of the US war in Afghanistan.  It  
> doesn't go far enough -- it ignores, e.g., the primary US war aim,  
> the control of Mideast energy resources -- but it's better that  
> anything I've seen in the liberal press, like the recent Newsweek  
> account.  Has anybody got a counter example?]
> 	
> 	Obama and the Great Game
> 	02/13/2009
>
> The day before Richard Holbrooke arrived in Kabul, eight suicide  
> bombers and gunmen attacked the Justice and Education ministries,  
> killing 26 and wounding 57.
>
> Kabul was paralyzed, as the Taliban displayed an ability to wreak  
> havoc within a hundred yards of the presidential palace.
>
> The assault came as President Obama is both conducting a strategic  
> review and deciding how many additional U.S. troops to send.
>
> Earlier, there was talk of 30,000, bringing the U.S. total to  
> 63,000. Now, there are reports Obama may commit no more than the  
> three brigades promised in 2008, and only one brigade now.
>
> Clearly, the United States is checking its hole card. Can we draw to  
> a winning hand? Or is this hand an inevitable loser -- and we must  
> cut our losses and cede the pot? No longer, anywhere, is there talk  
> of "victory."
>
> Nor is the diplomatic news good.
>
> Last week, Kyrgyzstan gave us six months to vacate Manas, the air  
> base used to resupply U.S. forces. A week before, guerrillas blew up  
> a bridge in the Khyber, cutting the 1,000-mile supply line from  
> Karachi to Kabul. Before that, guerrillas bombed U.S. truck parks in  
> Pakistan.
>
> While in Pakistan, Holbrooke was told by all to whom he spoke that,  
> while U.S. Predator strikes may be killing Taliban and al-Qaida, the  
> deaths among tribal peoples are turning Pakistan against us.
>
> What would winning Afghanistan for democracy profit us, if the price  
> were losing a nuclear-armed Pakistan to Islamism?
>
> The expulsion from Manas, after Kyrgyzstan received a reported $2  
> billion in aid from Moscow, raises a question.
>
> Is Russia restarting "The Great Game" she played against Victoria's  
> Empire in Central Asia, which ended in 1907 with a British-Russian  
> entente, dividing Iran into spheres of influence, with both sides  
> agreeing to keep hands off Afghanistan?
>
> As Russia has as great an interest in preventing an Islamist Kabul,  
> and has assisted NATO's resupply of its forces, why would Moscow  
> seek to expel us from a base vital to the war effort?
>
> Does Russia simply seek to be recognized by the United States as the  
> hegemon of Central Asia, the sole great power that decides who can  
> and who cannot use former Soviet bases?
>
> For if Manas is closed and the Karachi-Khyber-Kabul supply line is  
> compromised or cut, Obama would seem to have but three options.
>
> First would be to go back, hat-in-hand, to Islam Karimov, the Uzbek  
> ruler charged with grave human rights violations, and ask him to  
> reopen the Karshi-Khanabad (K2) air base, from which we were  
> expelled in 2005. And what would be Karimov's asking price?
>
> Second is the Russia option. If Moscow now holds the whip hand in  
> the old Soviet republics, what is Moscow's price to let us remain in  
> Manas or use other Soviet bases over which it wields veto power?
>
> The answer is obvious. Neither Georgia nor Ukraine is to be brought  
> into NATO. The independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, won in  
> the August war with Georgia, is not to be challenged. The U.S anti- 
> missile missiles planned for Poland are not to be deployed.
>
> In turn, Russia will cancel any missile deployment in Kaliningrad,  
> recommits to the terms of all conventional forces agreements in  
> Europe and assist in the effort in Afghanistan. Russia rejoins the  
> West, and the West stays off Russia's front porch.
>
> Be not surprised if the Russians come trolling before an  
> overextended American empire an end to the Great Game in Central  
> Asia like the one the ministers of Nicholas II offered the ministers  
> of Edward VII.
>
> And the third option? It is Iran.
>
> Before 9-11, Iran was more hostile to the anti-Shia Taliban than we,  
> and it has no desire to see them return. Indeed, Tehran was a  
> supporter of the U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as both were  
> ruled by mortal enemies.
>
> The long way for U.S. and NATO war materiel to reach Kabul via Iran  
> would be through a Turkey-Kurdistan-Iran supply line. The shorter  
> would be from Iranian ports straight into Afghanistan.
>
> Price of an entente? An end to the 30-year U.S.-Iranian cold war and  
> a strategic bargain whereby Iran is allowed to develop peaceful  
> nuclear power, under supervision, the United States lifts its  
> embargo, and regime change is left to the Iranian people.
>
> President Ahmadinejad, no fool, and facing an uncertain election  
> this year, is already signaling interest in negotiations with Obama.
>
> A complication. How would "Bibi" Netanyahu and Avigdor Lieberman  
> regard a U.S.-Iran rapprochement -- to prevent a Taliban triumph in  
> Kabul?
>
> Yet, if the Taliban's enemies in Russia, Iran, Pakistan and Central  
> Asia will not assist us, this war cannot end well. And if they will  
> not help, Obama should cut America's losses, come home and let their  
> neighbors deal with a triumphant Taliban.
>
> --Patrick J. Buchanan
>
> Mr. Buchanan is a nationally syndicated columnist and author of  
> Churchill, Hitler, and "The Unnecessary War": How Britain Lost Its  
> Empire and the West Lost the World, "The Death of the West,", "The  
> Great Betrayal," "A Republic, Not an Empire" and "Where the Right  
> Went Wrong."
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss