What's Nice About October

For cyclists who like summer, not seasons, September is a bad month. First you hang on to summer for dear life, but it slips away gradually but surely. You may be able to put off wearing tights, but it's rarely warm any more, just adequate. Certainly on top you have to start messing with multiple layers again. The daylight at the end of the day especially gets ever shorter, and the anxiety goes up: in a few weeks it will be fall and all hell will have broken loose: rain, wind, cold, dark--and snow and ice won't be far behind. But then October comes, and even though there are those wet, windy days, it really can be quite nice still also. Yesterday and today we had temperatures close to 60 (15 celsius), and it was calm and only partly cloudy. I could not take advantage yesterday, but this morning I had an absolutely lovely commute. Nothing remarkable happened, just the realization that while it's really fall now, almost November even, and even though I was wearing tights and two long-sleeve jerseys on top, the riding was easy, smooth even. It helped that I was passing a major traffic jam on the freeway leading to Amsterdam, but the main thing was the calm weather. Of course I took the long way in (18 as opposed to 16 miles)--in these circumstances it hardly took any extra time. There will be plenty of other days between now and next May, but they can't take today away from me.

Figuring Out Afghanistan

The president has stated that there's little point in deepening the U.S. commitment to Afghanistan while it remains unclear whether there will be a credible local partner. At the risk of defending once more a president many people would like to see bomb something other than the moon, that is a significant step. There will now be a second round to the Afghan presidential election, on November 7, although rumors that there may be a power-sharing deal between president Karzai and challenger Abdullah also persist. We'll have to see how this goes, but at least the fatally flawed first election round will not directly lead to a new Karzai term. It is still questionable if the West should even try to address the Afghan political situation through a central government, and last week there was a forceful, though not entirely persuasive, case that the presence of Western troops (regardless of what they do, or do not do) fuels Taliban terrorism. But once again I like Roger Cohen's take, today, who argues that even though the West has been in the country for eight years, a comprehensive approach to the Taliban-Al Qaeda challenge has only just begun, and that what's needed most now (not next month) is a clear statement from the president of U.S. "endurance" there. Early last spring, the new administration did announce a new regional strategy which it called "AfPak," because one can't really separate the predicaments of Afghanistan and Pakistan. It would certainly not help matters in Pakistan if the Taliban, following a U.S. withdrawal, took control of Afghanistan, again, and it would not help Western interests either. It would be weird if, after having put his own man, General McChrystal, in charge earlier this year, the president would now turn down his recommendation for a better counterinsurgency strategy. In a way, NATO allies like the Netherlands (in spite of the government's efforts to stave this off) have done just that: they're out of there, regardless of what Washington decides, regardless of what they're leaving behind, regardless of what will happen to the people who have come to depend on NATO protection. But I think the president is smarter and tougher than that. I think he'll give General McChrystal most of the things he needs. I just hope that together, the president and the general be utterly pragmatic. If a central government, if national institutions can be made to work effectively and with credibility--then, fine. But otherwise, we should help local people protect themselves, reconcile with outsiders where possible, and run their own lives.

Gloves

I needed them, this morning. There was ice on the roofs of the bike sheds in our neighborhood, and the forecast had warned of maybe minus 3 degrees Celsius locally. Yesterday morning had been cool too. I had been rubbing my hands while riding, thinking that gloves would not be out of place. So today I grabbed a pair walking out the door. I also wore three long-sleeved layers on top, and my thickish, woolen Cannondale socks. And I was fine, though not warm the first half hour (and my toes were a little cold at the end of the ride). Getting the gloves out pretty much completes the transition to fall, which doesn't mean that it's all bad. The last three morning commutes, for example, have all been cool, crisp, and sunny affairs. Both yesterday and today I could see the sun climb out from behind our lake, the Spiegelplas, and the Ankeveense Plassen. A big, orange ball for about fifteen minutes before you can't look at it without blinding yourself. It's also the time when the summer bike commuters are disappearing, either because they don't like the cooler weather or because they don't like messing with lights. There's another step I'll have to take soon: clipping on the headlight and flashers. Then, it might as well be winter.

Update: It turned into a near-symmetrical riding day, because on the way home (no gloves) as I rode into our town, the sun had turned into a big, orange ball again, only now it was about to go down behind the Western horizon. Or rather, the Southwestern horizon--no longer the direction of Abcoude, but more Baambrugge, maybe even Loenersloot. The days are getting short. The only reason it wasn't dark yet at seven was that it was a virtually cloudless sky.

The Nobel Peace Prize Matters ...

I agree with a lot of the reactions to yesterday's news: premature (in his response, the recipient himself implied this too), the third Non-Bush Prize, at least, in less than a decade, a joke that devalues the tradition. A lot of fuss because a bunch of Norwegian politicians happen to sit on a large endowment and like to influence international politics with it. But it occurred to me that the fact that just about everyone, in every part of the world, felt the urge to comment (often quite vehemently) on this award that shows that the Nobel Peace Prize really is a kind of universal award, the property, if you like, of all of us. If people didn't see it that way, didn't think they had a stake in it, they would not respond in this way. The award's long tradition, and its many distinguished winners, has played a big role in this, of course. The committee has made interesting choices in recent years. On the whole, however, I wonder if there hasn't been too much Norwegianism. An eagerness to lead at the expense of being satisfied with sticking to more traditional choices. An eagerness also to try to, shall we say, encourage the United States to be more like the rest of civilization (i.e. Western Europe)? Americans will resist those calls, because they're not, and never will be, West European social democrats. Western Europe's reach in other parts of the world will remain equally limited. So let me correct myself: the Nobel Peace Prize matters, but mostly to Norway, the EU, and UN diplomats and bureaucrats; it is the property of a certain international community, those who subscribe to an internationalist, semi-collectivist, developmental ethos. They're influential, not just because of the Nobel Peace Prize, and they do have some good ideas. But in the grand scheme of things, they're probably a minority. And it remains to be seen to what extent the latest American winner of their award is going to conform to their way of seeing the world. He is, after all, the president of the United States.

Rain

It had to happen, because I can't really remember the last time I really got rained on (except for that late summer coffee ride) on a commute or a training ride. (Can I still call those non-commutes "training rides" now that I never go to a race any more? What would I be training for, exactly?). Last summer, after getting to Holland from Milwaukee, I got the nice bike dirty more than once when the weather was still supposed to be nice. This summer, certainly by late September, however, we began seeing news reports about drought conditions in parts of this swamp-like country. It actually was not coming down when I left the house a little before eight this morning, though the roads were plenty wet. Before I started getting it from above, I had already gotten a little wet (one shoe) from several large puddles I was forced to ride through. Two-thirds of the way the real rain started, and by the time I got to work I was plain wet. The heat hasn't been turned on yet in my building, so at the end of the afternoon I had to put the still damp stuff back on. The socks were the worst, but the conditions outside a pleasant surprise. It didn't really rain at all as I rode out of Amsterdam, and the rest of the way all I had to deal with was a light drizzle. I had checked the radar and hurried over to my bike, because it was clear that at the very end of the day some real rain would be moving through. I was able to watch that from inside the house. Other reason why this wasn't the real thing yet: it was sixties, for crying out loud. That's about ten degrees away from warm rain, the kind it's a privilege and a joy to ride in.

That Unresolved Afghan Election Mess

I have been wondering when he would give his side of things, and the other day American Peter Galbraith (deputy special UN representative in Afghanistan until he got fired last month because he called the fraudulent elections by their full name) did so in the Washington Post. A key passage:

Afghanistan's presidential election, held Aug. 20, should have been a milestone in the country's transition from 30 years of war to stability and democracy. Instead, it was just the opposite. As many as 30 percent of Karzai's votes were fraudulent, and lesser fraud was committed on behalf of other candidates. In several provinces, including Kandahar, four to 10 times as many votes were recorded as voters actually cast. The fraud has handed the Taliban its greatest strategic victory in eight years of fighting the United States and its Afghan partners.

And yet, the UN seems to want to hand President Karzai his victory, and the U.S. may be leaning that way too. His government is corrupt, inept, and disliked by a growing number of people in the country. Should we stick with Karzai; and what would be alternatives?

I recently did a lecture on the early years of South Vietnam, particularly the relationship between the U.S. and South Vietnamese leader Ngo Dinh Diem, and I have to say that the West's problems with Karzai look eerily similar. For one thing, President Obama has called Afghanistan a "war of necessity"--just like Eisenhower believed South Vietnam was a vital U.S. interest. Also just like "Vietnam" wasn't really about that country, it's not about Afghanistan itself today. We're trying to create a viable government there, able to stand on its own feet, able, especially, to keep the enemy at bay, because of a greater cause: the war on Al Qaeda and similar groups. And maybe Karzai is just like Diem: an authentic Afghan leader genuinely hostile to the Taliban and Al Qaeda but also contemptuous of ignorant Westerners trying to impose their vision for his country's future. In that case, working through Karzai really isn't going to work: in addition to being corrupt and ineffective, he would also reject genuine collaboration. The big problem in Vietnam, also for Kennedy, was that there did not seem to be an alternative for Diem, even though Diem himself turned out to be a failure. The South Vietnamese state needed to be built up because South Vietnam was designated a vital domino in the Cold War. In hindsight, however, the flaw seems to have been this designation of (South) Vietnam as a vital battlefield in the global Cold War.

Is there an alternative today for Karzai? Do we have to let him "win" this sham of an election? The answer may have to come from two additional questions: how vital is Afghanistan really to our current transnational concern (internationally operating, fanatically anti-Western terror groups); how vital is it to build a cohesive Afghan state under an effective central government? I'm not prepared yet to argue that we should just let Karzai fend for himself if he wants to rule the country in his own way--that we should basically give up on Afghanistan the country and instead focus on fighting Al Qaeda and similar groups directly. I think the cure there might be much worse ultimately than the remedy, because it might well lead to a re-run of events of the 1990s after the departure of the Soviets from Afghanistan: civil war, Taliban rule, Al Qaeda sancturary. Plus, having been there for almost eight years now, the West owes the people of Afghanistan.

I'm wondering if there might not be a middle way, namely working with local, tribal authorities, few of whom are looking forward to a return of Taliban rule. Bypass the central government, at least until it becomes credible, and direct resources to the regional and local level. One way in which Karzai (or whoever would succeed him) could become credible is to run an honest election and operate an effective, transparent government. It will be a while before that happens. Until then, we'll have to think of something else. President Obama, of course, is in the middle of his second big re-evaluation of Afghanistan policy in less than a year. I haven't seen many indications of where he's leaning with regard to Karzai and the current election mess, but I can't imagine that he and his advisers aren't thinking very hard about alternatives to especially the current political approach to that country. As we've learned in Vietnam, no military effort is going to mean very much in the longer run without a viable political strategy.

Fall's Really Here

How do I know? First day in tights, that's how. It was only supposed to be between 12 and 15 Celsius (50s) today, and I had to be on the road by 8 am. Just getting over a cold, it did not seem necessary to push it. Also wore three layers on top, two with long sleeves, one turtle necked. And riding out I was glad I had put it all on. It's nothing to be particularly mournful about, of course. We've had a very decent spring, summer, and September, and it's not as if winter has suddenly arrived. Plus, there may be no reason any more to take the clippers to the legs--a big time and hassle saver. Also got rained on a little on the way home, a very thin drizzle. To mark the occasion we decided to turn on the heat for the first time since May or so.

Give Obama More Time ...

... the title above my op-ed as it appears today in de Gelderlander (in Dutch). The Washington Post's Richard Cohen takes another position, but then there's also the New York Times's Cohen, Roger. As a column, Richard Cohen's piece is quite good; but as an analysis/policy recommendation, I like Roger Cohen's much better. For one thing, he knows something about Iran, having spent a good deal of time there recently.