iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

White House Attacks New York Times For Critical Afghanistan Report

First Posted: 06/13/10 12:43 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 05:45 PM ET

Hamid Karzai

A dramatic New York Times report detailing doubts among Afghan leadership that U.S. forces can beat back the Taliban had its credibility attacked on Sunday by two high-ranking officials in the Obama White House.

The story published on Friday raised serious concerns about the efficacy of the U.S. military mission in Afghanistan, quoting former aides to president Hamid Karzai saying the president "had lost faith in the Americans and NATO to prevail" in that theater.

Hours after its publication, however, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, was calling the information inaccurate "if not fallacious."

"We don't have any basis for seeing it as the New York Times portrays it," Rice said on "Fox News Sunday." "We have every confidence that the U.S. and NATO, working with our Afghan partners, will defeat the Taliban. Hamid Karzai remains an important partner in the Afghan government."

Rice's rebuke of the Times was notably tough-worded and suggested that the White House is very sensitive to the delicate situation in Afghanistan and fraying relations between Afghan leadership and U.S. officials. Another top White House aide -- David Axelrod -- was even more direct than Rice in his critique of the piece, arguing that the reporters had relied on a biased source for their information.

"As to this issue, understand that Mr. Saleh [formerly director of the Afghan intelligence service] was fired by president Karzai so that may help color some of his interpretations," said Axelrod. "And Mr. Karzai rejected his interpretation of this, at the end of the day, however we have always said the future of Afghanistan will involve a political solutions, just as it did in Iraq, and ultimately if the Taliban is wiling to lay down arms... that would be part of the solution. Meanwhile we are putting pressure on them everyday."

Questions over whether U.S. forces could fully and sufficiently quell the insurgency in Afghanistan have existed well before this weekend. Karzai himself spurred discussion on the topic when he flirted with actually switching allegiances to the Taliban. The Times report, however, brought the concerns to a more dire level -- in which close Karzai aides, and Karzai himself, where resigned to the hopelessness of it all.

Domestically, the report has spurred more debate about how strategically smart it is to have a deadline for U.S. troops to leave Afghanistan. But Axelrod insisted that the president would not scrap his deadline, nor would he remove troops immediately.

"We can't make an open-ended commitment that the Afghan government and the Afghan people have to take responsibility themselves," he said. "Their economy, their security and their civil institutions have to take responsibility. He is committed to begin that process of withdrawal in July of next year and that continues to be the plan and we will pursue that on that schedule."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
A dramatic New York Times report detailing doubts among Afghan leadership that U.S. forces can beat back the Taliban had its credibility attacked on Sunday by two high-ranking officials in the Obama W...
A dramatic New York Times report detailing doubts among Afghan leadership that U.S. forces can beat back the Taliban had its credibility attacked on Sunday by two high-ranking officials in the Obama W...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 699
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (15 total)
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:28 PM on 06/14/2010
Double-Agent Rahm Emanuel will have to face it someday.
09:57 PM on 06/14/2010
Oh my, I heard he had dual Israeli citizenship, are you saying he is an Afghan also?
07:27 PM on 06/14/2010
The intensity of the White House's criticism of the New York Times story on conditions in Afghanistan says more about our Afghanistan policy than it does about the credibility of the Times' piece. The President is continuing a fool's mission and the Administration's refusal to honestly respond to legitimate policy questions suggests real fears that the mission will ultimately be a failure. Our war policy continues to rely upon the same false premises and outright lies that characterized the Bush/Cheney years, and will bear the same results. Whether he leaves office after one or two terms, the Afghanistan debacle will define his foreign policy reputation regardless of whatever triumphs he may enjoy elsewhere in the world.
02:03 PM on 06/14/2010
why can't we just leave other people alone. nation-building as euphemism for empire? i've just given up on the whole thing. withdraw won't be a reality until we've ravaged the place for everything we could get our hands on.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
03:48 PM on 06/14/2010
I agree, nation-building is folley. Democracy cannot be imposed. It must, by definition, arise from those who would be governed democratically, something with which Afghanistan has no experience. But...

I don't think Obama's strategy is wiping out the Taliban, but leaving the country with an Afghan government in place to do the job themselves. That may or may not succeed in the long run, but if it succeeds in the short run we can get out honorably. To get out abruptly would earn the U.S. world-wide disdain. It's like the saying goes, "we broke it, we own it." And Obama inherited it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mswyers
01:34 PM on 06/14/2010
God forbid anyone criticize the war, the sacred cow of our foreign policy. Isn't it a coincidence that the $1 trillion + mineral deposit was "discovered" right about the time we doubled down in Afghanistan. The military industrial intelligence complex isn't even pretending anymore to be anything but straight up empire.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:39 PM on 06/14/2010
you got it, hard to find a bright spot in his life career choice but here that beach house he wanted on the gulf coast we the prices are falling.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:47 PM on 06/14/2010
The strategy is to end the war by leaving behind an intact government that can deal with Taliban itself. This plan was initiated in the Bush administration. If Obama were to abruptly end the US involvement in Afghanistan and Pakistan in pursuit of al Qaida and Taliban, which by the way has been more successful under Obama than under Bush, the abrupt end to the effort would likely send the country back into hands of Taliban and tribal war lords, which is where it all started when al Qaida and Taliban were planning, training and executing the 9/11 attack. It would also be a bloody transition for which Obama would be blamed, and restore another known breeding ground for terrorism for which Obama would also be blamed.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
RockyMissouri
'You must be carefully taught to hate'...
02:08 PM on 06/14/2010
ChasG--You do have a valid point....! Thank you.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
duhtruth
02:42 PM on 06/14/2010
The US will have Afghanistan stabilized possibly before the second coming, if that occurs within this century. When the US battles against primitive cultures, they lose. This situation, if it continues, will bankrupt the US and allow the Taliban to cry victory over a BANANA REPUBLIC. By US presence on Mid East soil, the critics of US policy and radical jihadists are having a very successful recruiting campaign. In fact much more so than the US attempts to recruit US soldiers to fight the Taliban. The US is playing right into a Taliban trap.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
davidpkronmiller
01:26 PM on 06/14/2010
To be fair I haven't read the NYT piece - I don't really ever read the NYT anymore - they seem to do speculation more than hard news - you know - trade opinions with sources.

However I don't see how talking to Afghan leaders, at any level, would necessarily be accurate. It is in their interest to perhaps embellish - many of them would like us gone as they will benefit - take Karzai - you think we want him? His brothers a drug lord and I don't think Karzai's that clean either - he's another Saddam put in place by another Republican administration. We tried to defeat him in the last election - remember Carville was over there as Karzai's opponents' campaign manager.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:32 PM on 06/14/2010
Exactly. NYT is funnelling opposition politics from a foreign country. Not exactly news.
photo
kapalabhati
Lokah Samasta Sukhino Bhavantu
12:55 PM on 06/14/2010
Is it me or is his headgear getting more and more bizarre?
12:36 PM on 06/14/2010
WOW! - You got to hand it to those guys!

They lie their butts off about Iran, Iraq, South America, Africa, banks, corruption, deaths so more profit can be made, massacres, torture, - You name it - they lie about it.

And THEY are the ones who tell others their information was inacurate?

How would THEY know?

Nothing they told us since WWI has the remote possibility of meeting truth this side of a black hole.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
BlueCheesehead
12:34 PM on 06/14/2010
Chicken & Egg:

US/NATO won't leave Afghanistan until Taliban lays down arms.

Taliban won't lay down arms to work out resolution until US/NATO are out of Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, 1,000 brave American soldiers are dead.

Wouldn't be for the gold would it? Or is it just fools' gold?
12:48 PM on 06/14/2010
Obama's war for gold?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
01:37 PM on 06/14/2010
Afghanistan will untimately have to deal with Taliban itself. To do that, Afghanistan will need a 20th century economy owned by Afghanistan. I remain sceptical about the nation building part of this mission, so I'd like to see it brought to a close in an orderly manner. Last I heard, this was the Obama administration's plan, with full support of the military.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
JimR
12:23 PM on 06/14/2010
Is anyone buying the "success in Afghanistan" storyline?
12:49 PM on 06/14/2010
Mission accomplished?
11:37 AM on 06/14/2010
Susan Rice, the voice of America..."THINK NOT THE LIES ARE FORTHCOMING".
02:28 AM on 06/15/2010
Susan Rice is a transgender.
11:35 AM on 06/14/2010
Just an aside, but does Huff Post ALWAYS have to use the word "attack.?" It is obviously to get readers, but when you read the story, admin. officials simply question the veracity and accur4acy of the NYT story. That's is not an "attack!"
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RogHol
Unemployed&Proud(again)
02:08 PM on 06/14/2010
Good point. Yes, HP is neither too adherent and loyal to journalistic principles and I must say that those comments above on this page about NYT "speculation" is as well a HP problem.
Most of NYT articles are well researched and worth reading.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheIndependenceParty
Cranky yankee and a rehabilitated ex-Republican
10:44 AM on 06/14/2010
The longest war in American history, ... an illegitimately elected corrupt executive as president, ... large swaths of that nation beyond NATO or Afghan control, ... and Axelrod says that the Times sources were biased.

I'd say "realistic" is more is a more apt description.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
VietVet67
I wore the uni for this?
10:41 AM on 06/14/2010
Are those poppies growing out of Karzai's hat?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
ChasG
Unborn, unchanging, undying Universe
10:31 AM on 06/14/2010
Time to do an honest day's work. Bye for now everyone; great conversation; intelligent debate. Keep on keepin' on...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
RogHol
Unemployed&Proud(again)
10:53 AM on 06/14/2010
Ok, CU ChasG, good comments.