Just heard an early morning speech by former National Security Adviser turned foreign policy wiseman Zbigniew Brzezinski on what to do in Afghanistan. Most interestingly, Brzezinski, generally considered a realist, said the U.S. "should not Americanize the counterinsurgency" in Afghanistan, echoing many recent critiques of American military force in the region when he said, "Afghans do not like foreign soldiers with guns in their villages, solving their problems." At the same time, he seemed to endorse an "enclave" style solution in Afghanistan, saying the U.S. forces should concentrate on building capacity in urban areas so that Afghans could take the lead on counterinsurgency in an "inkblot" fashion. Some of his ideas were the typical pipe-dreams, like involving substantial numbers of troops from Muslim countries or substantial amounts of money from European allies. More interestingly, though, he seemed to strike back against the idea of focusing on a centralized Afghan Army or police force, suggesting that these institutions would be seen as interlopers in the various ethnic regions of the country. He expressly said that nation-building or a democratic government were not appropriate objectives of American strategy. He closed by warning that, unless "clever" decisions were made, Afghanistan could act as as a serious drain on American resources for a decade to come.It's a strong critique, and you almost wish Brzezinski had gone further -- he remained, for instance, agnostic on whether more or fewer troops were needed for the mission he outlined. But Brzezinski's warnings -- delivered to audience that included many congressional staffers -- is another sign of growing support for a middle-ground strategy and concerns about what counterinsurgency can do, and whether it is appropriate for the U.S. mission in Afghanistan.-- Tim Fernholz
