It’s beginning to look like Obama has a problem in Afghanistan.

On one side, he has the military, which is pushing for an escalation, because too many of the senior officers are too invested in their theories of irregular warfare, and have lost sight of the regional goal, and so are looking for “victory” (McChrystal, Petraeus).

On the other side, which also includes military personnel, you have people see the real goals of Afghanistan as simply insuring that al Qaeda does not create another safe-haven there, and this side includes much of the state department, most of our European allies, and now, it appears, Karl Eikenberry, the US ambassador to Afghanistan, who has sent memos saying that an escalation would make things worse.

Note that Eikenberry is a retired general, and he commanded US forces there in 2007 and 2007, but until now he has scrupulously avoided comment on the military end of things:

Although Eikenberry’s extensive military experience and previous command in Afghanistan were the key reasons Obama chose him for the top diplomatic job there, the former general had been reluctant as ambassador to weigh in on military issues. Some officials who favor an increase in troops said they were surprised by the last-minute nature of his strongly worded cables.

In these and other communications with Washington, Eikenberry has expressed deep reservations about Karzai’s erratic behavior and corruption within his government, said U.S. officials familiar with the cables. Since Karzai was officially declared reelected last week, U.S. diplomats have seen little sign that the Afghan president plans to address the problems they have raised repeatedly with him.

When I made comparisons to the mistakes made following the assassination of Diem in Vietnam, I had no idea that people who have Obama’s ear were of like mind.

Karzai is there because the US installed him, and could only gain legitimacy through the quality of his governance, hence he has no legitimacy in Afghanistan.

With all that is going on, and there are now official statements from the White House saying that, “Our commitment is not open-ended,” which implies people are starting to get a clue, and aren’t being hawkish because they think that it will help in 2012.