After nine years of war in Afghanistan, some straight talk about that end-of-combat deadline of 2014 from General David Petraeus:
(I)s he confident that the Afghan army can take the lead from U.S. forces by NATO's 2014 deadline?
"I think-no commander ever is going to come out and say, ‘I'm confident that we can do this.’ I think that you say that you assess that this is-- you believe this is, you know, a reasonable prospect and knowing how important it is-- that we have to do everything we can to increase the chances of that prospect," the top commander in Afghanistan told me. "But again, I don't think there are any sure things in this kind of endeavor. And I wouldn't be honest with you and with the viewers if I didn't convey that."
I don't know about you, but to me that sounds like a "no" ... maybe even a "Hell, no!"
Well, if a military conclusion to the conflict doesn't look likely, how about a negotiated settlement of some sort?
In our new ABC News poll, almost three-quarters of the Afghan people say they want their government to reach a negotiated settlement with the Taliban. But when I spoke with Gen. David Petraeus, he tamped down talk of a quick deal....
Gen. David Petraeus:...Well, you know, in-- Iraq, we never reconciled with the top level al-Qaeda in Iraq leaders. What we did is we were able to reconcile with the mid-level leaders and the population that, in some cases, was opposing the new Iraq and either actively or tacitly supporting al-Qaeda in Iraq. So there are different groups that you want to pursue...
Because what everyone has been very clear to say is that whatever is going out there right now, and there are various, as I said, strands of outreach that-- that have-- that are out there. These are all pre-preliminary, or-- that's-- it's arguable that they're even talks about talks, if you will. But there is outreach. There are various efforts from various quarters in this regard.
George Stephanopoulos: But we're not close to a negotiated settlement right now.
Gen. David Petraeus: No. No. I don't think anyone would characterize the situation as that.
So, no progress militarily, in fact, the military situation seems to have deteriorated. And there might be progress toward making progress toward having talks. If they could figure out who the right people are to have talks with.
In a way it's starting to sound like the banking situation. It's a crisis for the people whose lives are being torn apart by it, but for those in charge of dealing with it, they seem more interested in managing the situation, tending it, keeping it from melting down or blowing up. But recognizing the basic insolubility of the problem, or the cost to themselves of actually solving it, they're content to just keep the ball rolling down the road.
They can say the war or the economy didn't blow up on their watch. They staved off failure. The entire economy didn't crash. The banking system didn't fail. The war wasn't lost.
And then they can take their laurels and move on to the next very serious job of managing the world for us.