That Other Failed War

"American officials said that intelligence agencies were also working to produce an assessment on Pakistan, and that both were to be completed after next month's elections. They said the draft findings had already begun to influence the recommendations of the White House-led review of Afghanistan policy, which was scheduled to be completed this month but has now been postponed several weeks."

Indeed, Schmitt and Thom Shanker first wrote late last month in the Times that top civilian and military aides were "conducting four major new reviews of the war strategy and overall mission in Afghanistan, which have exposed internal fissures over American troop levels, how billions of aid dollars are spent, and how to cope with a deteriorating security situation in neighboring Pakistan."

Officials had been told to "produce detailed recommendations within about two weeks" -- i.e. by now -- "for Mr. Bush's most senior advisers on a broad range of security, counterterrorism, political and development issues."

Schmitt and Shanker explained that some officials at the time acknowledged "aspects of legacy-building, an effort to make sure the next president, whoever he is, cannot accuse the Bush administration of leaving Afghan policy in disarray."

And Jim Hoagland wrote in his Washington Post opinion column on Sept. 21: "In its final months, the Bush White House -- along with the Pentagon -- is laboring to avoid crippling disruptions during the coming transition by locking in policies for the year to come."

Max Hastings writes in the Daily Mail about his recent trip to Afghanistan: "Everywhere, I heard the same tale of deteriorating security, scepticism about President Karzai's chances of survival, disbelief that even with American reinforcements, the allied campaign can achieve decisive results. . . .

"[T]he chaos of Afghanistan is too great, the country's problems too far-reaching, to be soluble by Western arms alone -- and maybe we should have acknowledged that from the start."

A Big Bush Victory

James Gerstenzang blogs for the Los Angeles Times: "President Bush achieved one of the key foreign policy goals of his second term today: He signed legislation paving the way to a civil nuclear cooperation agreement with India.

"That may sound uncontroversial. But it turns upside down three decades of U.S. efforts to restrict nuclear work in India after it exploded a nuclear weapon. On the other hand, the legislation opens up the prospect of American access to a multibillion-dollar nuclear business in India.

"Bush's success in squeezing the legislation out of Congress in its final days reflected, once again, the ability of a lame-duck president with approval ratings below 30% and facing a hostile House and Senate to nonetheless achieve some top priorities."

Olivier Knox writes for AFP about the "lavish White House signing ceremony. . . .

"Evidently savoring the resulting diplomatic victory in the twilight of his term, the US president welcomed 'the honor of signing legislation that builds on the growing ties between the world's two largest democracies.'"