WASHINGTON -- As the Obama administration reconsiders its Afghanistan policy, White House officials are minimizing warnings from the intelligence community, the military and the State Department about the risks of adopting a limited strategy focused on al Qaeda, U.S. intelligence, diplomatic and military officials told McClatchy.

Recent U.S. intelligence assessments have found that the Taliban and other Pakistan-based groups that are fighting U.S.-led forces have much closer ties to al Qaeda now than they did before Sept. 11, 2001, which would allow the terrorist network to reestablish bases in Afghanistan and would help Osama bin Laden export his radical brand of Islam to Afghanistan's neighbors and beyond, the officials said.

McClatchy interviewed more than 15 senior and mid-level U.S. intelligence, military and diplomatic officials, all of whom said they concurred with the assessments. All of them requested anonymity because the assessments are classified and the officials weren't authorized to speak publicly.

The officials said the White House is searching for an alternative to the broader counterinsurgency strategy favored by Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the U.S. military commander in Afghanistan, and Gen. David Petraeus, the head of the U.S. Central Command.

FOCUS ON OPINION

White House officials, they said, have concluded that McChrystal's approach could be doomed by election fraud, corruption and other problems in Afghanistan; by continued Pakistani covert support for the insurgency; by the strains on the Army, Marine Corps and the federal budget; and by a lack of political and public support at home, which they fear could also undermine the president's domestic priorities.

One phrase that always comes up in the administration's strategy sessions is ``public opinion,'' one participant told McClatchy Newspapers.

However, the officials said, in their effort to muster domestic support for a more limited counterterrorism strategy that would concentrate on disrupting and dismantling al Qaeda, White House officials are neglecting warnings from their own experts about the dangers of a more modest approach.

``McChrystal and Petraeus are ignoring the problems their approach would face in Afghanistan and here at home,'' said one intelligence official with extensive experience in South Asia and counterterrorism. ``We don't have a reliable partner in Afghanistan or Pakistan; doubling the size of the Afghan army is a pipe dream, given the corruption and literacy problems; and neither Congress or the American people are likely to give it the money, the troops or the decade or so it would need to work, if it would work.

`LEVEL' WITH US

``Now the White House is downplaying the dangers of doing the only thing that they think Congress and the public will support -- a limited war against the guys who hit us on 9/11. The truth is, both approaches have huge problems, and neither one's likely to work.''

The White House, as well as Congress and U.S. military, ``have got to level with the American people, and they are not doing it,'' said Marvin Weinbaum, a former State Department intelligence analyst now with the Middle East Institute. ``They are taking the easy way out by focusing on the narrow interest of protecting the homeland'' from al Qaeda.

Some U.S. intelligence and military officials expressed deep frustration with what they see as the administration's single-minded focus on al Qaeda's threat to the U.S., saying it's not discussing publicly other, more serious consequences of a failure in Afghanistan as identified in some assessments.

Join the discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. In order to post comments, you must be a registered user of MiamiHerald.com. Your username will show along with the comments you post. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

     Showing: Oldest first Newest first Most-recommended first Least-recommended first

@Nyx.AuthorDisplayName@ wrote on @Nyx.PostedAtTime@:

@Nyx.repliedToText@

@Nyx.replyAnswerText@

Reply to this Comment @Nyx.Recommender@ @Nyx.AbuseReporter@