Obama on Iraq, Afghanistan

Time magazine’s Joe Klein has the transcript of his new interview with Obama up on the web. Obama gives his description of the meeting he had in Iraq with Petraeus back in August, summing it up with this: “I would say it was between spirited and agreeable.”
Klein asked Obama if he thought that conditions in Iraq today are “good enough” for the US to leave Iraq. Obama replied:

I don’t think it’s quite good enough yet because I think we have to do a little more training. We’ve got to build up the logistical capacity. I think the possibilities of ethnic strife breaking out again are still present, precisely because the political system has not stabilized itself yet. But I do believe that we are at a point now where we can start drawing down troops. I think we can time a process where the drawing down of troops parallel to building up the capacity in Iraq and the Sofa agreement that just, the Sofa that was just put forward I think reflects that reality.

Nothing there about keeping troops in Iraq for “anti-terrorist” ops, which is interesting. But keeping troops there for “training” is still quite different from committing to a full and speedy withdrawal.
I continue to find this idea that the US– under any president– is nowadays in any position to impose its own “conditions” on the government in Baghdad quite hilarious. Of course, Gates continues to try to do that.
Klein asked a slightly inflammatory question about the missions of US troops operating in Afghanistan near Pakistan’s border.
Obama replied:

Here’s my attitude. Number 1 we can’t have our troops remain sitting ducks. We should, under our coalition mandate we are in Afghanistan at the invitation of the afghan government. We’re there legally, under international watch. When those troops are attacked, they have a right to defend themselves. Period. Now I think that the most critical task that we have in Afghanistan is to not only strengthen the Afghan government, it’s military capacity, it’s ability to deliver services to its people, its capacity to work with the agricultural sector there to replace the poppy crop. But it’s to also work through a viable strategy for Pakistan. My sense is that [Zardari] has already been willing to step out and commit himself in a pretty difficult situation to work with the United States to root out militant terrorists.
So, building a different relationship with the Pakistani government, the Pakistani military, the ISI. Working with Pakistan, this government to deliver for its people so it gains legitimacy, in all regions of the country. Working with Pakistan and India to try to resolve, and Kashmir, crisis in a serious way. Those are all critical tasks for the next administration. Kashmir in particular is an interesting situation where that is obviously a potential tar pit diplomatically. But, for us to devote serious diplomatic resources to get a special envoy in there, to figure out a plausible approach, and essentially make the argument to the Indians, you guys are on the brink of being an economic superpower, why do you want to keep on messing with this? To make the argument to the Pakistanis, look at India and what they are doing, why do you want to keep … being bogged down with this particularly at a time where the biggest threat now is coming from the Afghan boarder? I think there is a moment where potentially we could get their attention. It won’t be easy, but it’s important.

I find this interesting because it shows Obama’s trying to think and act like a big-picture geo-strategist rather than a provincial, US-bound politician, even if he does so only highly imperfectly. The main imperfection, throughout the whole discussion of both Iraq and Afghanistan, is that he’s continuing to refer to these challenges as ones that the US alone has to deal with. What a sad– and actually quite counter-productive– mindset!
Klein asked whether “we” should be talking to the Taliban. Obama said the possibility of dealing with some of them “should be explored.” He also seemed to be promising/threatening longer terms of duty for the US troops deployed to Afghanistan:

My impression is that those who have a chance to stay there a little bit longer and develop clear understanding of the formidable complexities are going to achieve a lot more than simply us rotating in folks on a rapid rotation and I think that people on the ground tend to agree with me on that.

Well, the British were on the Northwest Frontier for many long decades– and they still, as Obama noted– failed to “win” in Afghanistan. So I’m unsure how long he wants the US grunts to stay in Afghanistan? And I am completely unconvinced that he has any credible formula for how the US can “win” there.
Memo to Obama: There is no way the US, on its own or with the help of the NATO can “win” in Afghanistan. Bring in the UN!