To Go, Or Not To Go - Is That The Question?

U.S. President Barack Obama as Commander in Chief of his country's armed forces, felt that the casual disregard of his authority and that of his civilian advisers had suffered an unforgivable slight by Gen. Stanley McChrystal, formerly chief of the U.S. military situation in Afghanistan. Gen. McChrystal's military confidantes and supporters were publicly dismissive of interference on the part of the executive branch of government in the war against Afghan 'insurgents'.

Out with the old, in with the new-old. And the trusted and admired General David Petraeus, the hero of the hugely successful Iraq 'surge', which succeeded in turning Iraqi Sunnis away from support of al-Qaeda in Iraq, to fight alongside the Americans to defeat the foreign Arab-Islamist fighters who had, in any event, outraged the Iraqi Sunnis by their brutality toward even their Sunni brethren.

The reward for the "Awakening" Sunni militia with the withdrawal of U.S. troops in Iraq has been to be handed over to the majority Shia - and distrust reigns supreme. But previously, their having agreed to fighting the al-Qaeda factions alongside American troops was deemed a huge success in turning the tide in Iraq. A tide which has slowly re-surged and appears to be turning the other way.

For with Ramadan, the most sacred month in the pantheon of Islamic religious traditions, has come increased violent attacks, suicide bombings and mass murder successfully mounted by al-Qaeda in Iraq. The fierceness of the determination of fanatical Islamists spilling blood to inspire the country to become fully Islamicized under Sharia is only matched by the lethal antipathy between Iraqi Sunni and Shia factions.

But this is Afghanistan, in somewhat similar circumstances, with the government of President Hamid Karzai, having failed to build confidence among the population, because of failure to build government infrastructure and to maintain it across the width and breadth of the country, hampered hugely by graft and corruption throughout the administration, pondering acceding to some of the demands of the Taliban.

Which would certainly occur, if a deal is eventually struck between the 'democratic' government of Afghanistan and some elements of the Taliban. Meanwhile, the direct issue is the stand-off between coalition forces in Afghanistan and the fundamentalist leaders of the Taliban who have increasingly targeted Afghan civilians, causing death and disruption, imperilling the lives of girls and women within the country with their brutal application of Sharia law.

The Taliban have successfully regrouped, thanks hugely to the Pakistan national army and the ISI and their trained, equipped-and-supported Taliban contingents. Al-Qaeda remains elusive in the border regions, and General Petraeus, now in command of 140,000 coalition troops, does not think too highly of his government's advising the Taliban that they will be free to take back the country with U.S. withdrawal projected for 2011.

He has admiringly referenced former president George W. Bush for the "tough call" and "very courageous decisions" with respect to the Iraq troop surge, obviously contrasting unfavourably with President Obama's decisive instruction to the international community, the corruptly-ineffective Afghan government and incidentally the Taliban and al-Qaeda that they will shortly have free rein.

The reality "on the ground" in Afghanistan would, in the final analysis, determine whether President Obama's 2011 departure decision would be feasible. "Certainly I am aware of the context within which I offer that advice. But that just informs the advice, it doesn't drive it. The situation on the ground drives it." Take that, Commander in Chief. And hand over the time and necessary material to prevail.

"My marching orders", he stressed from NATO headquarters in Kabul, in an NBC Meet the Press interview, "are to do all that is humanly possible to help us achieve our objectives." It may be necessary, in other words, to convince President Obama that withdrawal plans for next year would not be advisable.

The president required, once again, to backtrack from his rash statements of administrative intent, looking rather indecisive in the process. "Clearly the enemy is fighting back, sees this as a very pivotal moment, believes that all he has to do is outlast us through this fighting season. That is just not the case."

Clearly they do. Is that not the case?