WaPo article on Sen. Kerry's Afghan diplomacy

[TayTay]

In an http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2009/10/john_kerrys_star_turn.html#more">David Ignatius post that is quite in-depth. Enjoy:

John Kerry's star turn

Doha, Qatar — For Sen. John Kerry, it must be sweet vindication: Frustrated in his hopes of being president or secretary of state, he has found a role as a kind of roving ambassador -- negotiating with foreign leaders who are otherwise at odds with Washington.

Kerry’s star turn as a mediator came this week in Kabul, where his series of meetings with President Hamid Karzai helped produce a breakthrough agreement for a runoff election to resolve allegations of fraud in last August’s balloting. Karzai accepted an international commission’s decision to throw out about one-third of his votes. That pushed his total below 50 percent and triggered the Nov. 7 runoff with Abdullah Abdullah, the former Afghan foreign minister.

Kerry’s diplomatic leverage stems from the fact that he’s at once an insider and an outsider -- close to President Obama but not formally a member of his team. In the discussions with Karzai, Kerry worked closely with Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador in Kabul, and with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. But as chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee, he has more flexibility than he would have as an administration official. And in the case of Afghanistan, he was able to ease some of the tension between Karzai and Richard Holbrooke, the administration’s special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Kerry’s role in the Afghan negotiations was partly an accident of timing. He had arrived Friday on a previously scheduled fact-finding trip geared toward Afghanistan policy more generally, and he met that night with Karzai. The meetings continued through the weekend and resumed this week after a quick visit by Kerry on Monday to Pakistan.

more at the http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2009/10/john_kerrys_star_turn.html#more">WaPo link

That sounds like it was quite involved and a hell of a lot of work and commitment on the part of the good Senator. Kudos to him for this.

[beachmom]

1. Never mind the bullocks, I'm adding that to my diary.

[TayTay]

2. Thought you might like that one.

And it goes into great detail on exactly what Sen. Kerry did and why he does INDEED deserve big props for his time and effort here. (And I stand, or sit as the case may be, a bit corrected. My apologies. JK should get a tad more credit than others. He realy did swoop in and save these negotiations.)

[beachmom]

3. Well, the way my diary is laid out gets it about right.

Of course, others were involved and have worked hard. BUT, there was something about the whole "scene" that made me single out Kerry even before I had all the info. My final update to the diary shows who is responsible.

It really was a crisis where quite literally the right guy walked through the airport in Kabul at the right time.

[karynnj]

6. The attacks on your diary are unfair

I suspect that it is not just that it is Kerry, but the defensiveness about Clinton by some is overwhelming. In addition, there are a huge number of peope who simply want to "get out",

[beachmom]

7. Well, the "get out" part was inevitable. That is the netroots position.

Anti-War Left position. I am sincere that if someone came up with a plan for withdrawal where everything doesn't blow up in our faces, then I might back it. But I haven't seen it yet. The closest has been Andrew Bacevich, but that is not completely fleshed out yet.

Incidentally, this CNN editorial is issuing a warning to Kerry:

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/19/zelizer.kerry.afghan.troops/

I'm fine with that op-ed as well.

But I was a bit infuriated that my BLOG DIARY (as in I am not a journalist) is being criticized because I am highlighting a story that interests me. I am sure if I spent half a day I could piece together what role Hillary Clinton played. But she's not my "beat". I like Kerry, and it ends up this really was his day.

[karynnj]

8. I saw the CNN editorial

I agree with the call that he do the oversight - but note I don't recall them making the same comments to Lugar. In addition, they ignore that Kerry just held 4 hearings - even though Obama clearly is holding the military and his people from testifying. The rw line that Kerry does things for political reasons is annoying. Sure, he is a politician, but here they are simultaneously holding him to a higher standard, which given his history is fair, but ignoring what he's already done and not giving him credit for that same history.

[beachmom]

9. Yeah, there has been some weird attacks on Kerry for being

a "flip flopper" on Afghanistan. Um, no. We already DID send more troops to Afghanistan in the spring!! And when I watched him fully on those Sunday shows, I saw him as still a supporter of the mission in Afghanistan, BUT he is critical of the politics there, and thinks we should not send any more troops there until that is resolved. That seems sensible and is pretty much where Obama is.

The hilarious part is that the neocon Right defended Bush all of those years that nothing was done in Afghanistan on account of Iraq. Talk about flip flopping.

[wisteria]

11. The CNN op-ed is a bit harsh on Kerry

I particularly think this comment is unfair and not true,

"Kerry has often shown a proclivity toward making decisions based on political calculations"

And, I think that when necessary, Senator Kerry will certainly challenge President Obama. He might have even done this already with his views regarding Afghanistan. That he hasn't made everything available to the news media is a good thing. We don't need any more Gates and Mc Chrystal's taking their grievance to the media.

[wisteria]

10. In regards to Clinton, the accounts in the media all say that he was working with Clinton on this

and that she played a part also. For once, Senator Kerry gets decent respectful press coverage and the Clinton people can't stand it because it isn't Clinton. Obviously, as SOS she had an opportunity to be involved in this and she was fine with JK taking on a larger role. Perhaps it had to do with Holbrooke, who is a Clinton person, and someone Karzai did not apparently get along with.

But, as we all knew, he would have been a great SOS, even though in this situation it was probably his inside/outside position that helped to resolve this issue.

[Blaukraut]

4. It's been quite a day for our Senator

And, of course, quite a week leading up to today. I'm really glad to see that his efforts are being recognized by the media. And with surprisingly little snark, no less!

[ProSense]

5. Excellent! Just added this

to the thread in GD-P:

Kerry’s timely intervention sways Karzai

By Edward Luce in Washington

Published: October 20 2009 18:54 | Last updated: October 20 2009 18:54

Given the alleged bad blood between Richard Holbrooke, the Obama administration’s special envoy to Afghanistan, and Hamid Karzai, the country’s embattled president, it was fortuitous that someone of John Kerry’s stature happened to be in Kabul over the last few days.

Mr Kerry’s senatorial field trip, which had been planned before this latest crisis unfolded, proved a useful accident for the White House, which was faced with the spectre that Mr Karzai would refuse to accept the logic of holding a second round run-off in the presidential election.

<...>

But Mr Kerry’s success in persuading Mr Karzai to push ahead with another phase in what Hillary Clinton, US secretary of state, described on Tuesday as a “rough and contentious election” should not mask the huge logistical difficulties of pulling it off.

“Somehow John Kerry managed to put Humpty Dumpty back together again,” said Bruce Riedel, who was Mr Obama’s chief Afghan adviser until March.

nore

[wisteria]

12. "Put Humpty Dumpty back together again", I love it. n/t

[MBS]

13. See my post under other thread for NYT and Globe stories. . .

#16 under "kudos" thread. .
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=273x160215#160281