As a result I am re-watching it now. Kerry referred to the progress as mixed, and then spoke of all the problems with governance - and listed NO positives. He specifically said that this is the time to reassess the strategy. He referred to his criteria from last fall - and spoke of how there have been changes - not for the positive since last year. Given that he wary of the path Obama took last year then - these comments are very significant.
The committee will put out a report on corruption in Afghanistan.
His conclusion is extremely strong - and it sounded stronger hearing it versus reading it. Lugar's statement as you mention was also strong and he had warnings as well. Saying there is "no definition of success" is pretty strong - especially when he then detailed the extremes of what the policy seems to be at different times.
After those statements, I think my brain went to sleep - I was listening, but my brain was unengaged. (which is why I am rewatching it.) Holbrooke praised the SFRC as the most i mportant committee on National security. He praised Kerry's role with Karzai and Kerry/Lugar/Berman.
Spoke of the black cloud that the elections had for the first year he was in Afghanistan. Holbrooke introduced his team as a devise to show that they are involving many government agencies. He mentioned that this war (unlike Vietnam) affects our national security. He spoke of new program led by Japan and Britain to bring in moderate elements of the Taliban. He spoke of Hillary planning to attend the Kabul conference (
http://www.dnaindia.com/world/report_hillary-clinton-to-visit-pakistan-for-security-talks-richard-holbrooke_1410041 ) He says he will read the SFRC report on corruption - and they share his concern.
Spoke of work to improve relationship between Afghanistan and Pakistan - he denied reports of secret deals. He said that he could not overstate importance of K/L/B and with Kerry's personal role in dealing with initial negative response.
Questions:
Kerry - on Majah - asked hurdles and accomplishments - answer impediments extraordinary - hard to get qualified Afghans after 30 years of war. Diaspora not there because it is dangerous and there is enormous corruption, immense poverty. For 7 years we trained police with 88% illiteracy. Now a mandatory issue. Majah - targeted assassination - increased American presence. Best civilian/military support that he has seen. The elders said they were glad that US back (referring to Ike/JFK time)
Kerry If Marjah hard, will Kandahar be easier - Holbrooke - Yes
Kerry spoke of no assinations before we were in Marjah and they exist now in Khandhar answer: says Khandhar not Fallujah. He is aware of Kerry's perception and it has value, but he didn't want to speak of it before meeting with Petraeous. He said he recognizes that it is a national security issue for Pakistan in having an unfixed border. Mullen going there as well. (Kerry praised Holbroke for the attempts to bring in the civilians. Spoke of complication of India/Pakistan/Afghanistan - possible avenue of non -military solution.
(Over all - Kerry was even stronger in his questions, than he was in his opening statement) on the possibility that the policy is not right.
Answers to Lugar -
- Said re-integration of Taliban key thing in Kabul conference
- Said they are not waiting till December to re-evaluate
- said looking continually on the timelines for withdrawing
- continued economic/development funding and training of Afghan military after we leave. Afghanistan can not go forward without help and getting police and millitary is key. referenced "lesson of history" of leaving in 1989 - which led directly to 911.
Feingold
- defended Eikenberry, who told the truth of what happened on the ground
- flexible time table
Answers: not surprised at questions. He respectfully things a date certain makes him wary - Feingold pushes back that he said FLEXIBLE - said he wants OBAMA to state a vision with some time frame. Holbrooke then speaks of Afghanistan as remote, landlocked etc - doesn't think they can set end date. No endless, unlimited Vietnam like war -- it's about our national security ... time square bombing ... He is completely filibustering on this. Asked how peace jurka (sp?) - Holbrooke - it hasn't happened yet.
Outside the hearing, there is some sign that the SFRC is not completely in tune with the Department of State. They blocked Crocker coming at the same time - for the pretty lame reason that Holbrooke appearing with Crocker could undermine Eikenberry. Having two experts (and Crocker is a one) together has an interaction term that could have been interesting.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkpoint-washington/2010/07/why_crocker_is_a_no-show_at_se.html