Obama has given Karzai a six-month deadline, after which the US will withdraw from Afghanistan. Obama said they don't want soldiers' lives wasted for nothing. They want changes in Cabinet, changes in his personal staff and controlling corruption.

The dimensions of the unfolding disaster in Afghanistan are becoming bigger and more daunting by the day. Once-staunch defenders of the "good war" are starting to break ranks.

Kim Howells, a former Foreign Office minister with responsibility for Afghanistan and current chairman of the parliamentary intelligence and security committee, questions the central tenet of the government's case for fighting in Afghanistan: that it is the frontline of a war that would otherwise be conducted on British streets.

Mr Howells said counter-terrorism would be better served by bringing the majority of servicemen home. Better, he argues, to concentrate on protecting our borders and gathering intelligence at home and abroad.

He is saying publicly what many in government must be thinking privately: that troops are dying needlessly in a war that is unwinnable, with a strategy that is unworkable, and that we should be thinking of the alternative now.

We do not agree with everything Mr Howells says, but at least he is saying it, which puts him in a class above most other politicians. Mr Howells may have cast the first stone, but the current consensus is wearing so thin that it would not take much to shatter.

Afghanistan is a political failure, a fact over which the international community continue to be in denial. If they were not, neither America nor Britain would be toying with the notion that they can pressure Mr Karzai into forming a clean government.

Flanked by two vice-presidents, including a notorious warlord that Mr Karzai accepted as a running mate, Mr Karzai vowed yesterday to tackle corruption.

This was rather like a cat promising abstinence on the subject of mice. The election has been more than just messy – Barack Obama's word. It has been oxymoronic.

A process run by the UN has made a nonsense of the very standard the UN exists to uphold. The result has highlighted just how elusive the dream of a working democratic state is.

It begs a serious question: what does territory cleared, even temporarily, of the Taliban look like? The families of the soldiers fighting for this territory are entitled to an answer.

So are the Afghans, who have suffered disportionately more. They are far from getting one.

Mr Obama is now left clinging to one tarnished man – not an institution or national assembly of tribal chiefs – to deliver the central plank of his fight against the Taliban and al-Qaida.

And while he clings to him, any hope of recentring aid efforts on local communities or on reforming parliament will be subverted just as the election was. Wait for the next announcement on troop levels. It will be groundhog day – all over again.

Does Obama Have an Exit Plan?

Is the White House thinking about getting out of Afghanistan?

Just as Hamlet's mother and his murderous uncle rushed to marry with unseemly haste, even before his slain father's body was cold, the United States is hastily pretending that the Afghan election is over and done with.

It was, President Obama admits, "messy." Now it's time to look ahead, and to deal with the reelected Karzai, warts and all, they say. But the United States, and the world community, is going to have to look past Karzai. And evidence of Obama's thinking is starting to come out.

For example, here is a part of an exchange between George Stephanopoulos of ABC's This Week and Valerie Jarrett, one of Obama's top political advisers, in which Jarrett talks about bringing the war "to a close":

STEPHANOPOULOS: OK. Let's talk about Afghanistan for a second. We see today the opposition candidate to President Karzai, Abdullah Abdullah, has said he's not going to run in the run-off.

Is this a welcome development or is the White House worried the questions about this election will cast a cloud over President Karzai and make it more difficult for the president to implement his strategy?

JARRETT: We don't think that it's going to add a complication to the strategy. It's up to the Afghan people and their authorities to decide how to proceed going forward.

We watched the election very carefully. And we're going to work with the leader of the Afghan government and hopefully that's going to improve the state of conditions for the people in Afghanistan, and also help us as we try to bring this war to a close.

Let's hope that Jarrett is reflecting inside-the-White-House discussions that center not on escalating the war, a la General McChrystal and his COIN cult, but on ending it. If so, and in that limited sense, Karzai might be one piece of the puzzle.

As I wrote in a Nation article last week on "How to Get Out," any solution for Afghanistan will require a wholesale effort to remake the Afghan political compact in order to include lots more Pashtuns, the Taliban, and many other insurgents.

Here’s what I wrote:

"Then comes the tricky part: The president should encourage the convening of an international Bonn II conference involving the UN, the major world powers and Afghanistan's neighbors -- including Iran, India and Pakistan -- to support the renegotiation of the Afghanistan compact.

"At the table must be representatives of all of Afghanistan's stakeholders, including the Taliban and their allies.

"In advance of that, the United States should join other nations and the UN to persuade President Karzai, his main electoral opponents and other Afghan politicians to form a coalition that would create an interim caretaker regime until the establishment of a more broadly based government."

President Karzai, who referred to his "brothers" in the Taliban during his victory speech this week, probably understands that the Taliban has to be included.

But Karzai seems unwilling to give up the privileges and power -- including the power to rake in corrupt profits -- that go along with being Afghanistan's president.

The Washington Post provides a blow-by-blow account of efforts by Karzai and his main challenger, Abdullah Abdullah, to divide up the spoils in the wake of the election.

The article leaves a strong impression that it is unlikely Karzai is going to be the vehicle for any real change.

Meanwhile, the London Times reports that Obama has given Karzai a six-month deadline, after which the United States will withdraw from Afghanistan. Here's the money quote, from an Afghan official close to Karzai:

"If he doesn't meet the conditions within six months, Obama has told him America will pull out. Obama said they don't want their soldiers' lives wasted for nothing. They want changes in Cabinet, and changes in his personal staff."

As Valerie Jarrett hinted (if, indeed, that is what she meant) the Karzai crisis is the key to unlock the Afghan exit door. Politically, it gives Obama the excuse he needs to pack up and leave.

tags: afghanistan  obama  karzai  withdrawal