The inside story of how the White House let diplomacy fail in Afghanistan
But my time in the Obama administration turned out to be a deeply disillusioning experience. The truth is that his administration made it extremely difficult for its own foreign-policy experts to be heard. Both Clinton and Holbrooke, two incredibly dedicated and talented people, had to fight to have their voices count on major foreign-policy initiatives.
Holbrooke never succeeded. Clinton did — but it was often a battle. It usually happened only when it finally became clear to a White House that jealously guarded all foreign policymaking — and then relied heavily on the military and intelligence agencies to guide its decisions — that these agencies’ solutions were no substitute for the type of patient, credible diplomacy that garners the respect and support of allies. Time and again, when things seemed to be falling apart, the administration finally turned to Clinton because it knew she was the only person who could save the situation.
One could argue that in most administrations, an inevitable imbalance exists between the military-intelligence complex, with its offerings of swift, dynamic, camera-ready action, and the foreign-policy establishment, with its seemingly ponderous, deliberative style. But this administration advertised itself as something different. On the campaign trail, Obama repeatedly stressed that he wanted to get things right in the broader Middle East, reversing the damage that had resulted from the previous administration’s reliance on faulty intelligence and its willingness to apply military solutions to problems it barely understood.
Not only did that not happen, but the president had a truly disturbing habit of funneling major foreign-policy decisions through a small cabal of relatively inexperienced White House advisors whose turf was strictly politics. Their primary concern was how any action in Afghanistan or the Middle East would play on the nightly news, or which talking point it would give the Republicans.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
And boy did she ever save things in Benghazi.
////////////////////////////////
Bitter Clinger on March 4, 2013 at 12:43 PM
Notice how this stuff didn’t come out pre-election…
Oil Can on March 4, 2013 at 12:44 PM
Obama is the leader of the muzzie world. All else is bs talk.
The muzzie brotherhood succeeds apace under Obama, everywhere, not only in Afcrapistan. So do the thugs. They all, with Obama most, get very rich in the process.
Schadenfreude on March 4, 2013 at 12:50 PM
THAT is the primary problem with this administration. EVERYTHING is political. They make economic decisions for political reasons, not economics reasons. Same with military decisions. These people are idiots. They have a bunch of political propellerheads running around who have never done anything in their lives and have no global experience yet think they know everything making decisions way outside their competency.
But they believe they have to be right because of their ideology. Everything is ideology driven and yet they don’t understand that people in the rest of the world don’t give a pinch of scat about their ideology.
crosspatch on March 4, 2013 at 12:52 PM
LOL
That politics was more important than the lives of US soldiers and Marines became obvious when Comrade O dithered and procrastinated for five months in the fall of 2009 over McChrystal’s troop increase requests, finally giving him only 75% of the min he said was required, while announcing to the enemy his unilaterally dictated pullout timetable.
As for “Their primary concern was how any action in Afghanistan… would play on the nightly news”… Mission accomplished. The MSM is ignoring the body count that is piling up. A body count which is approaching the one in Iraq, 80% of it on Comrade O’s watch. Contrast with the weekly death tolls we received during the Iraq conflict.
farsighted on March 4, 2013 at 1:03 PM
Sure, there’s always an inside story, but the essentials were right there in the open for even the casual observer. Obama sharply ramped up drone strikes almost immediately after his first inauguration (GITMO still open? Whatevs), and it was clear that he wanted America’s efforts in AfPak to fail because Dems weren’t able to turn Iraq into another Vietnam.
Christien on March 4, 2013 at 1:06 PM
Smart Power!
BigGator5 on March 4, 2013 at 1:12 PM
such a dubious statement. our state department folks are not necessarily the tallest trees in the forest, so to speak.
Steven McGregor on March 4, 2013 at 1:15 PM
i suspect the long knives are out prior to HILLARY 2016
Steven McGregor on March 4, 2013 at 1:16 PM
true
Steven McGregor on March 4, 2013 at 1:17 PM
Yeah. This is the post-Behghazi, pre-election campaign rehabilitation of Clinton, Act 1.
Tell us nothing we didn’t already know about Obama, cast Hillary as the tenacious outsider fighting for rational diplomacy against an intractable opponent.
TexasDan on March 4, 2013 at 1:24 PM
Please refresh my memory. Exactly what foreign policy experience did Mrs. Clinton bring to the table that would lead one to think she was an “expert”?
Mitoch55 on March 4, 2013 at 1:25 PM
If Hillary Clinton is your last, best hope for anything in life, you are truly FUBAR.
Christien on March 4, 2013 at 1:53 PM
.
1960s radicalism. To the Boomers this is as true as the sun rising, and they act accordingly.
LincolntheHun on March 4, 2013 at 2:13 PM