U. S. Involvement in the Afghanistan War Expands into Pakistan

Don't anyone look, but the Afghan War that NATO (i.e., the U. S.) is waging is spilling over into Pakistan with U. S. boots on the ground. From an editorial in the Nation online (a leading English language Pakistani newspaper) today:

America’s covert operation in Pakistan, through the ill-famed Blackwater and DynCorp surrogates and its own soldiers, is no secret from the world that is watching Washington’s game plan, the “war on terror”, unfolding in the region. The people of Pakistan, particularly of Islamabad and Lahore, have had the first-hand, bitter experience of their presence when they had to face the brutish behaviour of these armed men roaming around their towns. . .

It is time that Islamabad comprehended the fearful consequences of US intrusive policies that are threatening to weaken and destabilise the country. The unwise support we have been extending to its military and NATO forces in combating militancy has landed us in trouble. The US must listen to its own Congressmen and end its covert operation in Pakistan and read the writing on the wall in Afghanistan that is staring its armed forces in the face and beat a retreat. The will and doggedness of the Afghan resistance is putting the mightiest power on earth to shame!

So that's the Nation's editorial point of view. From its news reporting:

At least four people were killed and five others injured in a U.S. drone attack launched Sunday in South Waziristan. . .

Since August 2008, the U.S. air force launched an estimated 221 drone attacks in Pakistan's northwest tribal areas bordering Afghanistan, reportedly killing nearly 950 people while injuring hundreds of others.

The U.S. drone strikes are considered as a serious violation of Pakistan's territorial air space right and they are an important factor contributing to the anti-American sentiment prevailing across the country as most of the killed and injured in the drone attacks are reportedly innocent civilians.

The nearby picture is one the Nation generally shows when it reports on drone attacks.

Is the U. S. popular in Pakistan?

Pew looked into this recently, and found 68% percent of those polled in Pakistan viewed the U. S. unfavorably, as against 17% that gave a favorable rating. Pew also had this to say:

The U.S. also continues to face image challenges in predominantly Muslim nations. Roughly one year since Obama’s Cairo address, America’s image shows few signs of improving in the Muslim world, where opposition to key elements of U.S. foreign policy remains pervasive and many continue to perceive the U.S. as a potential military threat to their countries.

Meanwhile, while the expansion of the war from Viet Nam into Cambodia bestirred great protest, now the most we have is two powerless "maverick" Representatives (Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich) protesting this expansion of the Afghan War into Pakistan, as has been widely reported, such as by AFP:

Two US lawmakers -- a Republican and a Democrat -- proposed a bill this week demanding the withdrawal of all US troops in Pakistan, where they are conducting covert operations against militants.

"We have known that US forces have been operating in secret inside the territories of Pakistan without congressional approval," Democratic Representative Dennis Kucinich said Friday, pointing to reports the United States was stepping up its presence there. . .

Kucinich said the covert operations were a "violation of the 1973 War Powers Resolution introduced after the Vietnam War that only allows the president to send US armed forces into military operations abroad if Congress approves the decision or if the United States is under a serious threat or attack."

"It is our constitutional responsibility as members of Congress to act," Kucinich added.

You can be certain that the House will ignore this line of argumentation. The war must go on, our leaders say (when they bother to talk to us about it).

As with the unending housing and other bailouts, Washington just perpetuates one mistake after another. There is no input from the public, no real debate, and no obvious point to policy after policy.

Of course Americans hope for the best, but given the ongoing depression in business activity and human costs, it is unclear why the wiser policy toward the region is not a more peaceful engagement that can over time win hearts and minds rather than hardening them.

Copyright (C) Long Lake LLC 2010

Despite the President's Confidence, Talk About a Bad News Cycle!

Increasing evidence is that Barack Obama has suffered two body blows within a week-- and the stock market is rallying on the news. First is of course the off-year election defeats in states in which he campaigned--especially New Jersey, where he personally campaigned often. Nonetheless, despite his pre-election weekend personal appearance, the ending trend went against him.

More important from a policy standpoint is this report dated today from ABC News, Top Dems: No Health Care Bill in 2009 which begins:

Senior Congressional Democrats say reform before end of year is highly unlikely.

Senior Congressional Democrats told ABC News today it is highly unlikely that a health care reform bill will be completed this year, just a week after President Barack Obama declared he was "absolutely confident" he'll be able to sign one by then.

"Getting this done by the by the end of the year is a no-go," a senior Democratic leadership aide told ABC News. Two other key Congressional Democrats also told ABC News the same thing.

This may come as an unwelcome surprise for the White House, where officials from the president on down have repeatedly said the health care bill would be signed into law by the end of the year.

"I am absolutely confident that we are going to get health care done by the end of this year, and Nancy Pelosi is just as confident," Obama said Oct. 27 at a fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Along with what Republicans call "dithering" on Afghan policy, there is an increasing perception that Mr. Obama is a weak leader. This blog has criticized him for not proposing a specific healthcare bill. If no bill emerges this year, the idea of having various committees write different drafts of healthcare reform may go down as a major strategic blunder, on par with President Clinton claiming that Hillary was the functional equivalent of a government employee and putting her in charge of his reform effort. The result was a White House healthcare proposal that could not even get a vote on the floor of a House controlled strongly by Democrats.

Health care policy should not be a partisan effort. There should be changes to policy that appeal to the great majority of the people. This should not be a wedge or partisan issue.

Strangely, drug stocks are up sharply today on the above pieces of news, even though Big Pharma was treated well by the administration. I am not sure that this is an appropriate reaction by the market in the short term.
Longer term, they are decent value.

Perhaps 2010 will be a year for bipartisanship on Capitol Hill. You never know.

Copyright (C) Long Lake LLC 2009

Shocked and Law . . . and Gentle Ben

Here are some observations on topics of current interest.

First, the AIG mess.

Congress is shocked; the House passed a punitive tax on these bonuses, even though it authorized them just a month ago.  From the WSJ:

The legislation was rushed to the floor by Democratic leaders amid a storm of protest among rank-and-file lawmakers over AIG's decision to pay bonuses to hundreds of current and former employees, while receiving more than $100 billion in taxpayer assistance. Approved on a 328-93 vote, the measure would impose a 90% surtax on the disputed payments, effective for bonuses made after Dec. 31, 2008.

"These people are getting away with murder," Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D., N.Y.) said Thursday during debate on the House floor. "They're getting paid for the destruction they've caused to our communities."

Comment:  "These people" are not "getting away with murder".  They are just getting paid per contract.  

And Congress should be outraged by the entire bailout of AIG's counterparties, who are getting paid massive amounts of money in full despite entering into agreements with AIG even though they knew, or should have known, that AIG had no reserves for.  It is Congress that is trying to get away with murder by deliberately avoiding the real scandal.

On the appropriateness of this ex post facto punitive measure:

"Bills of attainder, ex post facto laws, and laws impairing the obligations of contracts, are contrary to the first principles of the social compact, and to every principle of sound legislation. ... The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils.  They have seen with regret and indignation that sudden changes and legislative interferences, in cases affecting personal rights, become jobs in the hands of enterprising and influential speculators, and snares to the more-industrious and less-informed part of the community."  James Madison, Federalist Number 44, 1788.

Congress hasn't changed much since 1788, has it?

If they want to save money, how about a real debate about why the Afghan War, now in its eighth year, is worth fighting at this time of economic distress at home?

************************************************************************************

The Bernanke '60 Minutes' interview was summarized by CBS.  Here are some snippets of CBS' commentary:

The interviewer (Pelley) asked:

"You've been printing money?"

"Well, effectively," Bernanke said.  "And we need to do that, because our economy is very weak and inflation is very low."

Comment:  Consumer prices are probably 10% higher than they were 2, or at most 3, years ago.  That's hardly low inflation.  Sure, the worst economy in decades has temporarily caused price declines, but printing money to cure economic slowdowns has never worked.  It has been tried at least since Egypt under the Pharaohs and didn't work then.  It didn't work for the Romans.  It is perhaps even being discarded in Zimbabwe!  It won't work here.

When Mr. Pelley asked, re the TARP bailout plan of last fall:

"Was anyone on Capitol Hill skeptical?",  the Chairman answered:

"Well, I do remember one conversation I had where I was addressing a caucus of congressmen.  And a congressman said to me, 'Mr. Chairman, you know, I'm talking to bankers in my town.  I'm talking to shopkeepers in my town.  And they say things are normal.  Nothing's going on  We don't see any problem.'

And I turned to him and I said, 'You will,'" Bernanke recalled.  

Comment:  So TARP passed, and the congressman saw a mess occur.  

This is reminiscent of the scare tactics used to pass TARP.  It was threatened that if the bill did not pass, the Dow would fall 2000 points (to about 8500).  Well, the bill passed, and the Dow fell as much as 4000 points, industrial production plummeted, etc.  In fact, it wasn't until the passage of TARP that the panic in the financial markets began.  The Lehman bankruptcy was at least a week in hand, without special panic.

What actually happened is that everyone said that if Paulson and Bernanke are panicking and have to save the banks so urgently, we have to panic too- and so they did.

So Chairman Bernanke, who had uttered soothing predictions all throughout 2008, turned on a dime in the fall of 2008 and along with the Bush Administration and a sleepwalking (at best) Congress, helped create the mess that he told the congressmen that TARP was going to avert.

Copyright (C) Long Lake LLC 2009