AN open secret among US officials in Kabul is that Afghanistan was the Bush administration's secondary war. After years of neglect, Taleban violence skyrocketed, prompting President Barack Obama to boost the American commitment – in guns and gold. Now, both the winner of Thursday's presidential election and his international partners face a daunting game of catch-up if they are to turn the tide of the Taleban insurgency. They will all confront the added challenge of growing war-weariness among Afghans, Americans and other nations that provide troops. Resources are tight among coalition members facing their own domestic economic problems. The international community is desperate for an Afghan president seen as capable of tackling the problems of insurgency, narcotics and government corruption. Obama and other world leaders need such a colleague to give hope to their own constituents as casualty figures rise. President Hamid Karzai leads in the polls. Most analysts believe he will win a second five-year term, barring a surge in support for his top competitor, former Foreign Minister Abdullah Abdullah. The two could also find themselves in an October runoff if Karzai doesn't get more than 50 percent of the votes this week. The articulate, multilingual Karzai was once seen as a dynamic leader. Years of corruption, ineffectual government and rising violence have tarnished that image. To hold on to power, Karzai has again surrounded himself with tainted warlord power brokers, raising the question of whether Afghanistan was moving backward. The Obama administration has declared itself neutral in the contest, representing a step away from the warm embrace that the Bush leadership once held for Karzai. US officials have made clear that although they would work with Karzai, they won't accept business as usual during a second term. “If you get a new government in place that is more of the same, you fail to satisfy expectations of the people, and that would not advance the national process in the way that is so sorely needed,” said Timothy Michael Carney, a former US ambassador who heads the US electoral support team in Kabul. For the Obama administration, the stakes are high. With troops moving out of Iraq, Afghanistan has become Obama's war, and his administration has spent political capital to increase troop levels and financial resources for the country at a time when many of the president's supporters want an end to the conflicts of his predecessor. The US hopes the election will give Afghanistan's leader a broad mandate allowing the president to carry out reform and reach out to supposed moderates in the Taleban – if any are willing to break ranks with the hard-liners. However, it is unlikely that significant elements in the Taleban would agree to talks without a timetable for the withdrawal of foreign forces. For now, however, the focus is not on withdrawal timetables but adding more troops. US troop numbers have soared. Just three years ago, the US had only about 20,000 forces in the country. Today, it has more than triple that, on its way to 68,000 by year's end. US deaths in Afghanistan will set a record in 2009. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top US and NATO commander in the country, is carrying out a 60-day review of Afghanistan, and some of the members of his panel have recommended a substantial increase in American troops, even as the US reduces its numbers in Iraq. Sen. John McCain, the former presidential candidate, called Tuesday for troop levels to be “significantly increased,” including an additional three Marine battalions in the most violent province – Helmand. No matter the number of troops, reform after the election will still be slow.
