WASHINGTON — The increasing static in the air between Kabul and
the White House brings to mind other dicey episodes in American
diplomacy. Even dealing with allies can be tricky. Recall de
Gaulle. He was heartburn for five American presidents. Even
Churchill could be difficult, and he was half-American. Yet for
Roosevelt and Truman he could be a trial, particularly when the
question of the British Empire was on the table and the future of
its colonies.
President Barack Obama’s rows with President Hamid Karzai
may not put you in mind of de Gaulle or the passing of the
British Empire, but there is a troubling analogy, to wit: the
Kennedys’ treatment of the President of South Vietnam, Ngo Dinh
Diem. It did not end prettily. In the early days of the Vietnam
conflict President John F. Kennedy was increasingly critical of
Diem for his apparent ineptitude, corruption, and brutality. Our
Ambassador to Saigon, Henry Cabot Lodge, snubbed the South
Vietnamese president. When word reached Washington that officers
in the South Vietnamese army were going to overthrow Diem, the
Kennedys pointedly looked the other way. The coup took place, and
to the administration’s embarrassment President Diem was not left
an exile but a well-photographed corpse. His was to be the last
stable South Vietnamese government. Sometimes foreigners know
more about the governance of their countries than Americans
do.
Is the Diem scenario to be the scenario for Afghanistan?
The country is probably even more ungovernable than South
Vietnam. It has never in modern times had a strong central
government. There have always been rivalries and by our standards
much corruption. From this backward country has emerged President
Hamid Karzai, another difficult ally. It is not too soon to ask
whether President Obama will handle him as his White House
predecessors handled de Gaulle or as Diem was handled.
For several months the Obama administration has made it
clear through leaks and public statements that it does not
approve of Karzai’s fraught election and his laxness in dealing
with corruption. The consequence has been a growing hostility
between Kabul and Washington that may now be reaching a
crisis.
Though not very well reported, the crisis appears to have
begun in early March when President Obama refused Karzai’s
request for a meeting in Washington. Karzai’s response was to
invite Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to visit Kabul. There
the Iranian in his trademark dirty windbreaker delivered a series
of snipes at President Obama. Late in the month when President
Obama visited Kabul on his whirlwind trip to visit our troops he
did sit down with Karzai but then allowed it to be leaked
worldwide that at his sententious best he treated Karzai to a
lecture on the essentials of Good Government.
That indignity apparently provoked Karzai to let it be
leaked that he has told Afghan colleagues that if the static
continues between Washington and Kabul he might consider joining
the Taliban! Not to be outdone, the administration through its
spokesman Robert Gibbs has now let it be known that when Karzai
arrives in Washington for a May 12 meeting he may not get to see
President Obama. “We certainly would evaluate whatever continued
or further remarks President Karzai makes,” said Gibbs, “as to
whether it is constructive to have that meeting.”
Readers of this column may recall that I had a little fun
at Karzai’s expense in February when I took exception to his
demagoguery in parliament over the issue of Afghan civilians
being killed by our troops. Usually they were put in harm’s way
by the Taliban. I also joked about an election monitoring board
that Karzai packed with allies. “Hamid Karzai (D-Chicago)” I
called him to make an obvious point.
After the column appeared I got a sobering call from a
friend who had played a significant role in the Bush
administration’s conduct of war in Afghanistan and Iraq. During
the call he/she reminded me that a change in leadership in those
faraway parts does not necessarily end in improved leadership.
Moreover, Karzai has achieved more than any of his rivals is
likely to achieve towards peace and security in the region and
with no evidence that he is himself corrupt.
Lay off, said my friend, and so I have. That picture I once
beheld of Diem sobered me up too. I wonder if President Obama has
seen it.
