President Barack Obama says he will announce his highly anticipated decision on US strategy in Afghanistan over the next several weeks. The president says the decision will put the United States and its NATO allies on a path toward winning the war. During his visit to Beijing Wednesday, President Obama told NBC television his long-awaited decision on Afghanistan will address every aspect of US strategy in the war. "I am confident that at the end of this process I am going to be able to present to the American people, in very clear terms, what exactly is at stake, what we intend to do, how we are going to succeed, how much it is going to cost, how long it is going to take," he said.

-- Voice of America

AFGHANISTAN / PAKISTAN

Karzai Sworn In for Second Term as President - Alissa J. Rubin and Mark Landler, New York Times. Tainted by a flawed election and allegations of festering corruption in his government, President Hamid Karzai was inaugurated Thursday for a second term, promising to remedy the country’s problems and to have the Afghan Army assume full control of security within five years. Speaking in Dari and Pashto, Mr. Karzai reached out to the country’s two largest ethnic groups as well as to his defeated political rivals in a speech at a midday ceremony at the presidential palace. Above all, his address seemed aimed at the United States and other Western allies, whose representatives, including Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, were among an audience of about 800 that also included government officials, military officers and tribal leaders. Seeking to placate his international backers, Mr. Karzai touched on almost every major point that the Americans and other Western countries have pressed him to address in recent months. He received applause on only three occasions: when he pledged to create a transparent and accountable government; when he promised to fight corruption; and when he thanked the United States and other allies for their help.

Karzai Sets Key Goals in Inaugural Address - Joshua Partlow, Washington Post. President Hamid Karzai set two ambitious goals in his inauguration speech Thursday: to have Afghan soldiers and police take full responsibility for security within the next five years and to root out the pervasive corruption that hobbled his first administration. In many ways, Karzai's words dovetailed precisely with the aims of the Obama administration. Both Afghanistan and the United States want to reduce the presence of foreign troops on the battlefield and in the prison system. And both now concede that bribery and misspent funding are among the most serious obstacles to progress in Afghanistan. But many here doubt whether such goals can be achieved as the Taliban gains strength, and there has been little action to date in stemming corruption. The electoral process itself left little reason for optimism. Karzai initially had a majority of the votes in the Aug. 20 election, but widespread ballot-stuffing erased his lead and set up a second round. His challenger, former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah, dropped out of the race in protest, saying the system that allowed the initial fraud had not been reformed. In a 30-minute speech in the presidential palace, Karzai repeated many of his themes from the campaign. He said reconciliation with the Taliban would be his top priority. He invited fighters to lay down their arms and said he would convene a council of Afghan leaders to try to reach peace through negotiation.

Karzai Has Plenty of Promises for the West - Alan Cullison and Anand Gopal, Wall Street Journal. President Hamid Karzai used his inauguration address Thursday to try to reassure the West that he will cleanse his government of corruption and buttress Afghan security forces so they can take charge of the nation's security within five years. Mr. Karzai's speech was a virtual laundry list of promises that the increasingly disenchanted international backers of the Afghan president had hoped to hear. At the inaugural ceremony that began his second five-year term, Mr. Karzai pledged to require senior government officials to declare their assets, to reinvigorate the court system, and to fire senior officials engaged in the drug trade. Promising an exit strategy for the US-led coalition just as President Barack Obama is mulling his Afghan commander's request for 40,000 additional American troops, Mr. Karzai stressed that he wants an invigorated Afghan army to begin taking over oversight of parts of the country in the near future. President Obama, who said this week he wants to end the Afghan war before the end of his presidency, and other Western leaders are pressing Mr. Karzai for a strategy that would eventually allow the 100,000 foreign troops here - and any others the US adds - to go home. The Afghan army and police, however, are still badly lacking in men, equipment and training, and are rarely able to stand up on their own against the hardened Taliban-led insurgency.

A Softer Approach to Karzai - Rajiv Chandrasekaran, Washington Post. When a team of senior US officials led by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton entered the presidential palace in Kabul on Wednesday for a dinner meeting, they had little indication of what Afghan President Hamid Karzai planned to discuss, or whether questions about corruption and governance would pitch their host into a foul mood. But instead of revisiting old disputes, Karzai brought in several cabinet ministers to talk about development and security. He explained details of a new effort to address graft. And halfway through a meal of lamb stew, chicken and rice, he looked across the table and said he had decided that the United States would be a "critical partner" in his second term, according to a senior US official familiar with the meeting. The Americans also turned on the charm. Clinton, wearing an embroidered floral coat she had purchased on an earlier trip to Afghanistan, told stories of her time in Arkansas and in the Senate, and listened with interest as the Afghans detailed how they recently exported 12 tons of apples to India by air. As President Obama nears a decision on how many more troops he will dispatch to Afghanistan, his top diplomats and generals are abandoning for now their get-tough tactics with Karzai and attempting to forge a far warmer relationship. They recognize that their initial strategy may have done more harm than good, fueling stress and anger in a beleaguered, conspiracy-minded leader whom the US government needs as a partner.

US Aims to Hold Afghanistan's Karzai to His Pledges of Reform - Paul Richter and Laura King, Los Angeles Times. The United States is developing a set of benchmarks to ensure that Afghan President Hamid Karzai keeps a promise delivered at his inauguration to fight corruption and inefficiency, US officials said. Taking the oath of office Thursday, Karzai, whose reputation has been battered by corruption allegations against close associates, pledged to fire any official connected to drug trafficking and "end the culture of impunity and violation of the law." To hold him to his word, the Obama administration is instituting a "monitoring and verification" system to judge whether the central government's ministries and agencies are worthy of receiving direct US aid. If the organizations don't measure up, they won't receive any US money, administration officials said. The Afghan leader also set an implicit timeline for a massive drawdown of the more than 110,000 foreign troops in his country, saying he wanted Afghanistan to be able to handle its own security by the time he leaves office in 2014. US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton traveled to the Afghan capital of Kabul for the inauguration, one of hundreds of dignitaries at the swearing-in. Her trip apparently was meant to both support and admonish Karzai at a time when the Obama administration is not only formulating its overall war strategy but carefully calibrating its dealings with the sometimes-unpredictable 51-year-old leader.

White House Aides: No Afghan Decision Before Thanksgiving - Anne E. Kornblut, Washington Post. President Obama will not announce his decision on sending more troops to Afghanistan before the Thanksgiving holiday, senior aides said Thursday. The news came as the president greeted 1,500 troops at Osan Air Base in South Korea, just before boarding Air Force One and heading back to Washington after an eight-day trip to Asia. Obama and his top military and diplomatic aides have been deliberating for months over how to proceed in Afghanistan, where the United States and its partners have sought for eight years to defeat the Taliban and deny al-Qaeda a safe haven from which it can plan and launch attacks. Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has stated that without the deployment of up to 40,000 additional troops within the next year, the mission "will likely result in failure." But some aides are arguing for a much smaller troop increase, and the US ambassador in Kabul, Karl W. Eikenberry, has questioned whether the Afghan government can be a reliable partner. Obama said in interviews Wednesday that he would reveal his decision within the next several weeks. On Thursday, aides clarified that there would be no announcement before Thanksgiving, one week away. Senior administration officials said Obama intends to meet with his national security team again before going public with his plans.

US Defense Secretary Urges Against Afghan Withdrawal Timeline - Al Pessin, Voice of America. US Defense Secretary Robert Gates is urging caution on those who are calling for a timetable for an allied withdrawal from Afghanistan. Among those who have spoken about a "timetable" or an "endgame" in recent days are British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and US President Barack Obama. It was during a CNN interview this week that President Obama said his eagerly-awaited new Afghanistan strategy will include an "endgame." He said without the "discipline" a plan for ending the conflict would impose, the United States could find itself in "a multi-year occupation" that is not in its interests. A day earlier, while emphasizing Britain's commitment to preventing the return of militant rule in Afghanistan, Prime Minister Brown said he wants an international conference in London next year designed in part to set a timetable for transferring security responsibility to the country's new forces. "It should identify a process for transferring, district by district, to full Afghan control," he said. "And if at all possible we should set a timetable for transferring districts to Afghan control starting next year, in 2010." But at a news conference Thursday, Secretary Gates urged caution. Gates specifically argued against setting a timeline, although he indicated it might be possible to at least begin to fulfill Prime Minister Brown's desire for a security handover soon.

Improvements in Afghan Governance Will Take Time, Gates Says - Gerry J. Gilmore, American Forces Press Service. Improving the quality and professionalism of Afghanistan’s central government will not be accomplished quickly, and will involve continued discussion between US and Afghan officials, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said here today. “My view on all this is that improvements in governance in Afghanistan will be evolutionary,” said Gates, in response to a Pentagon reporter’s question on the possibility the United States could link the amount of assistance it provides the Afghan government through its performance in rooting out alleged corruption. Newly re-elected Afghan President Hamid Karzai has pledged that he will fight government corruption. “Those who spread corruption should be tried and prosecuted,” Karzai said yesterday during his inauguration in Kabul. Karzai is embarking on his second five-year term as Afghanistan’s chief of state. However, achieving governmental reform in Afghanistan will take some time, Gates told reporters. “We are not going to go from a situation where we have a fair amount of dissatisfaction now, to believing that these problems have been solved in two weeks or a month, or on the basis of a single speech,” Gates said. The United States wants Afghanistan to achieve stability and prosperity, Gates said, but that endeavor would be crippled if the Afghan central government is managed in an unprofessional manner. “We're there to help them,” Gates said of the US effort in Afghanistan. “But corruption and a lack of good government … are real impediments to the success of both the Afghan government and our own efforts.” Another concern, Gates said, involves the type of metrics applied to measure and track improvements in Afghan governance, and “whether that's applied on a province-by-province level, district-by-district, ministry-by-ministry.” Nonetheless, reform of Afghanistan’s government, Gates said, will involve “a continuing dialogue between ourselves and the Afghans.”

Mullen: Talks Favor Broad Afghanistan Solution - Donna Miles, American Forces Press Service. President Barack Obama’s security team recognizes troops alone aren’t the answer as it begins wrapping up strategy deliberations about the way ahead in Afghanistan, the top military officer said today. Navy Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the talks are nearing their conclusion, predicting that Obama will announce his decision “in the near future.” Mullen told participants in the National Guard Bureau’s Joint Senior Leadership Conference that he’s satisfied by the depth and breadth of the discussions as the team addresses the challenges in Afghanistan and makes recommendations to the president. “It’s been a … very healthy discussion, very open to different views, and that really has been, from a process standpoint, very good,” Mullen told the group. The chairman said he’s particularly gratified by the clear recognition that the best solution goes beyond military might. “This isn’t all just about the military. This isn’t all just about the number of troops, because we can’t do it alone,” he said. “We have to have the security side of this - that is the necessary side. But … you have to have a development plan. You have to have a governance plan that goes hand-in-glove [with the security effort] as we move forward.” Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates noted the role the National Guard plays and will continue to play in Afghanistan and other anti-terrorism operations around the world.

Italy Remains a 'Determined' Ally - Helene Franchineau, Washington Times. Giulio Terzi di Sant'Agata, the newly appointed Italian ambassador to the United States, objected to the term "war" to describe the conflict in Afghanistan, but he said Italy had dropped restrictions that had kept its troops away from the fighting. In an interview with editors and reporters at The Washington Times Thursday, Mr. Terzi said that Afghanistan is a key component of Italian foreign policy. He said Western involvement in Afghanistan could best be described as "peacekeeping" instead of war, because it has been mandated by the UN Security Council. "It is not a war in its typical sense. There has been no declaration of war in the terms of international law," Mr. Terzi said. "It has many characteristics of a true war, an asymmetric war." Italy is the fourth largest contributor of troops, with a contingent of about 2,795.

Afghan Bomber on Motorcycle Kills 13 - Associated Press. A suicide bomber riding a motorcycle killed 13 people, including a police officer, and wounded 30 others Friday in a busy city square in western Afghanistan. Several children were among those wounded in the morning explosion, said a doctor at the hospital in Farah city, Shir Agh Asas. Afghan police shouted ''Stop! Stop!'' at the motorcyclist before he detonated the explosives, provincial police chief Gen. Mohammad Faqir Askar said. Provincial Governor Rohul Amin said the blast occurred about 55 yards (50 meters) from his compound in a crowded square in Farah. ''These days Taliban are causing high casualties because the foreign forces and Afghan forces have been conducting operations against the insurgency in the region,'' Askar said. An operation three days ago in another part of the province killed five insurgents, including a Taliban commander and a bomb-maker, Askar said. The violence comes a day after Afghan President Hamid Karzai, in his second inaugural address, said he has placed national reconciliation with insurgents at the top of his peace-building agenda. ''We invite dissatisfied compatriots, who are not directly linked to international terrorism, to return to their homeland,'' he said. Karzai also set a five-year timetable for the Afghan security forces to take the lead in defending the nation, a goal that would allow international forces to take on more of a support role.

Taliban Chief Hides Among Pakistan Populace - Eli Lake, Sara A. Carter and Barbara Slavin, Washington Times. Mullah Mohammed Omar, the one-eyed leader of the Afghan Taliban, has fled a Pakistani city on the border with Afghanistan and found refuge from potential US attacks in the teeming Pakistani port city of Karachi with the assistance of Pakistan's intelligence service, three current and former US intelligence officials said. Mullah Omar, who hosted Osama bin Laden and other al Qaeda leaders when they plotted the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, had been residing in Quetta, where the Afghan Taliban shura - or council - had moved from Kandahar after the US invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. Two senior US intelligence officials and one former senior CIA officer told The Washington Times that Mullah Omar traveled to Karachi last month after the end of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. He inaugurated a new senior leadership council in Karachi, a city that so far has escaped US and Pakistani counterterrorism campaigns, the officials said. The officials, two of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the topic, said Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency, the ISI, helped the Taliban leaders move from Quetta, where they were exposed to attacks by unmanned US drones.

Pakistani Politics Take on a Nationalist Tone - Sabrina Tavernese, New York Times. These days, politics here look more and more like a movie Pakistanis have seen before. Anti-Americanism is peaking. Enemies of the state lurk around every corner, if the nationalist media is to be believed. President Asif Ali Zardari could hardly be more unpopular. Political insiders make a sport of handicapping how long it will be before he falls. It is a familiar plot line. The question on Pakistani minds now is whether the movie will end differently this time. It is an increasingly urgent concern in a country where no elected civilian government - undone by its own vices and undercut by a powerful military and intelligence establishment - has ever survived a full term. The last time Pakistan was in this situation was in the early 1990s, when the United States was fighting a war in the Persian Gulf and Nawaz Sharif, then the prime minister, and Benazir Bhutto, the opposition leader, were accused of corruption and traitorous sellouts to Pakistan’s archenemy, India. What followed is history: a decade of weak civilian governments that changed almost with the seasons and, in 1999, a coup by Pervez Musharraf, a general, whose rule lasted for nine years. The events were part of the pattern of weak civilian governments punctuated by military coups that Pakistan has lived through for nearly all of its 62 years. This time it is President Zardari who is in the hot seat. Many blame him for creating his troubles. Corruption cases, which he says are politically motivated, dog him from past and present. He has needlessly antagonized his political opponents. He has linked himself to the Americans in ways that the military establishment has found both threatening and humiliating.

Obama the Undecider - Michael Gerson, Washington Post opinion. In the beginning, the Obama administration directed a spotlight toward its careful, thoughtful decision-making process on Afghanistan. National security meetings were announced, photographed and highlighted in background briefings to the media. President Obama would apply the methods of the academy to the art of war - the University of Chicago meets West Point - thus assuring a skittish public that deliberation had preceded decision. Now the president and Defense Secretary Robert Gates are desperately trying to jerk the spotlight away from a dysfunctional Afghan decision-making process in which chaos has preceded choice, complicating every possible outcome. Gates said he is "appalled by the amount of leaking that has been going on," which would be, if the culprits are discovered, "a career-ender." Obama recently added, "I think I am angrier than Bob Gates about it." They should be appalled and angry at the process they created - as should the rest of the country. Sometimes government leaks are self-serving, reflecting the powerful passion of midlevel functionaries to appear in the know. But leaks in this process have been attempts to rig the outcome of a national security decision.

Afghans Want Obama to Hold Karzai's Feet to the Fire - Pashtoon Atif, Los Angeles Times opinion. On Afghanistan's independence day in August, my friends in Kandahar were puzzled. Why was the government bothering to celebrate the holiday? With 100,000 or so foreign troops occupying our country, how could we consider ourselves independent? When my American friends and professors ask me if I think the United States should send additional troops to Afghanistan, I tell them yes, but only if the resources are distributed on the condition that the Afghan government cleans up its act. This often causes bewilderment on their part. "But Afghanistan is a sovereign state," they invariably reply. "How can the United States interfere in Afghanistan's domestic politics?" In fact, as my friends noted on "independence" day, Afghanistan is not at this point a sovereign state. Two essential aspects of a sovereign state are holding a monopoly on the legitimate use of force and maintaining full control of territory. Afghanistan does not meet either of those criteria. It does not have a sufficient, capable force to protect itself against the Taliban and Al Qaeda and to control its territory, which is why the United States and NATO forces have been deployed there for the last eight years. That deployment means those governments have the right - and even the responsibility - to hold my government accountable.

To Succeed in Afghanistan, We Must Fail - Gerard Russell, Los Angeles Times opinion. Afghan President Hamid Karzai's inauguration today will be a somber affair. Gray storm clouds are slowly replacing the blue skies, and the sour tang of charcoal smoke hangs in the air. The mood among the internationals here is similarly gloomy. So many conversations end with the scratching of heads, with the tacit admission that no idea that has come forward has been big enough to reverse the Afghan government's steady loss of control. This is not because of the flawed elections or the ghastly killing of foreigners. That's all bad, but it's not doomsday. Nearly two years ago, I heard the distant rumbles, like thunder, of the attack on the Serena Hotel in Kabul, which killed seven people. The Afghan government's legitimacy was being questioned then too, and urgent reforms demanded - without practical result. Two elections had already happened and were marred by fraud. We have been here before, and survived. No, what is depressing about the situation in Afghanistan is not that it has suddenly gotten much worse but that it steadily fails to get better. By the time US forces left Vietnam, the South Vietnamese army had at least proved itself capable of holding ground against its enemy, albeit with massive US air support. In Afghanistan, by contrast, district after district in the country's troubled south is falling, in effect, under Taliban control. Meanwhile, in the Western nations with troops here, public support for the war is waning.

IRAQ

Iraq Sentences Sunni Leader to Death - John Leland, New York Times. A leader of a Sunni Awakening Council was sentenced to death for kidnapping and murder on Thursday, setting off charges that the Shiite-dominated Iraqi government was trying to weaken the Sunni movement, which is credited with much of the reduction of sectarian violence here since 2006. The Sunni leader, Adil al-Mashhadani, who led the Awakening militia in the impoverished Fadhil neighborhood of Baghdad, was arrested in March on charges of terrorism. His arrest set off 24 hours of fighting between Awakening members and American and Iraqi security forces, after which the government dissolved the Fadhil council. A spokesman for the Justice Ministry, Abdul-Sattar Bayrkdar, provided no further details about the crime. The Awakening Councils, also known as the Sons of Iraq, are local groups, including former insurgents and Baathists, who turned against the insurgency and received pay, first from the Americans and now from the Iraqis. Under their agreement with the government, they have tacit amnesty for past acts of sectarian violence but not for crimes like murder. Other Awakening leaders had mixed reactions to Mr. Mashhadani’s sentencing. “Nobody is above the law,” said Nabil Ahmed, an Awakening leader in the Adhamiya neighborhood.

Iraq’s Election Law Morass - New York Times editorial. Iraqis have quickly learned to play hardball politics. That was evident on Wednesday when one of Iraq’s two vice presidents, Tariq al-Hashimi, who is a Sunni, vetoed an important election law at the last minute. He demanded a change that would allocate more parliamentary seats for Iraqi Sunnis living abroad. It is unquestionably better for Iraq’s political leaders to wage their battles through legislative maneuvering than in the streets. But their repeated delays in completing the election law (there have been nearly a dozen attempts) threatens their fragile constitutional system as well as the American military withdrawal. And it could provoke new violence. The law must be finalized as soon as possible. The Constitution requires the election by the end of January. Election officials had said that the law needed to be done by Oct. 15 to allow enough time to prepare for the voting. Even though Iraq’s Parliament overshot that deadline when it approved compromise legislation, the election was expected to take place between Jan. 18 and Jan. 23. But the Presidency Council (composed of the president, a Kurd, and two vice presidents, a Sunni and a Shiite) has the final say. And Mr. Hashimi chose to exercise his veto power and put in doubt Iraq’s second national election, a critical test of whether democracy can endure as the United States withdraws its troops.

IRAN

US Talks Tougher on Dealing With Iran - Jay Solomon, Wall Street Journal. The international spokesman for Iran's main opposition movement called for President Barack Obama to increase his public support for Iranian democrats and significantly intensify financial pressure on Tehran's elite military unit, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps. Mohsen Makhmalbaf, during an unofficial visit to Washington, also said Thursday that Iranian opposition leaders supported US efforts to use diplomacy to contain the nuclear ambitions of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's government. Mr. Makhmalbaf's remarks came just hours after President Obama expressed growing doubt Thursday during the final day of his Asian tour about his administration's ability to engage Mr. Ahmadinejad's government on the nuclear issue. Mr. Obama emphasized in Seoul that the window for diplomacy was closing and that the US and its allies would begin developing a new set of sanctions against Iran. "Iran has taken weeks now and has not shown its willingness to say yes to this proposal...and so as a consequence we have begun discussions with our international partners about the importance of having consequences," Mr. Obama said at a joint news conference with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak. Mr. Makhmalbaf, who was the campaign spokesman for Iranian presidential challenger Mir Hossein Mousavi, said he believes the current Iranian leadership is incapable of cutting a deal with the West, because the nuclear program is now fundamental to its political survival.

US, Allies Discuss Iran Nuclear Stance and Consequences - Voice of America. US President Barack Obama says the United States has begun talks with its international partners on the consequences of Iran's failure to respond to a proposed nuclear deal. Speaking in South Korea Thursday, Mr. Obama said a package of potential steps will be developed over several weeks, with the aim of sending a clear message to Iran. He said he continues to hold out hope that Iran will decide to accept the United Nations-brokered plan, which involves sending its uranium abroad for further enrichment. Russia's Foreign Ministry Thursday said it is too early to discuss new sanctions, saying Iran still has not given its official answer to the proposal. Iran's foreign minister dismissed the latest threats of consequences, saying he thinks Western nations are wise enough not to repeat what he said were "failed experiences" with sanctions in the past. Iran's ISNA news agency quoted Manouchehr Mottaki Wednesday as saying his country does not accept the latest international proposal and will only consider a uranium-for-fuel swap inside Iran. US State Department spokesman Ian Kelly said Mottaki's comments do not inspire confidence that Iran will accept the International Atomic Energy Agency plan.

Get Ready to Bomb Iran - Washington Times editorial. Representatives from the United States, Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia are scheduled to meet today in Brussels to discuss future steps to dissuade Iran from developing the capacity to build nuclear weapons. Our message to the world leaders: If you want peace, prepare for war. President Obama said yesterday that the international community intends to send a "clear message" to Iran. Unfortunately, Iran has clearly gotten the message already: It has nothing to fear. The United States has shown no desire to take serious steps to confront Tehran on the nuclear issue. It's doubtful that anything will come out of Brussels to change the substance of that message.

COUNTERINSURGENCY

Positive Petraeus Lessons - Mary Claire Kendall, Washington Times opinion. The essence of counterinsurgency strategy (COIN), integral to defeating Sept. 11, 2001-type extremists infecting various Middle East countries, is building confidence among the population. The key is working hand-in-glove with the respective military and civilian authorities to help stabilize their combustible nations so they might be free of the specter of extremist violence, thereby enabling the buildup of family, community and nation, according to each culture's unique and beautiful character. This new, irregular warfare is fought largely on human terrain, about which Gen. David H. Petraeus has written in the COIN bible, aka "FM 3-24" - Field Manual 3-24. He recently affirmed for me during the American Veterans Center conference that official Washington - far from bloviating when asserting what they would do to win these wars - "gets it" on the fundamentals of COIN and that it is reflected in Situation Room deliberations on Afghanistan. Fortunately, given the high stakes, especially vis-a-vis nuclear Pakistan, when it comes to executing COIN - not just bloviating, er, talking about it - Gen. Petraeus is an impresario.

THE LONG WAR

Air Defense Push Inspired by 9/11 Gets a 2nd Look - Thom Shanker and Eric Schmitt, New York Times. The commander of military forces protecting North America has ordered a review of the costly air defenses intended to prevent another Sept. 11-style terrorism attack, an assessment aimed at determining whether the commitment of jet fighters, other aircraft and crews remains justified. Senior officers involved in the effort say the assessment is to gauge the likelihood that terrorists may succeed in hijacking an airliner or flying their own smaller craft into the United States or Canada. The study is focused on circumstances in which the attack would be aimed not at a public building or landmark but instead at a power plant or a critical link in the nation’s financial network, like a major electrical grid or a computer network hub. The review, to be completed next spring, is expected to be the military’s most thorough reassessment of the threat of a terrorism attack by air since Al Qaeda’s strikes on Sept. 11, 2001, transformed a Defense Department focused on fighting other militaries and led to the Bush administration’s “global war on terror.”

Army Lacks Guide on Jihadists in Ranks - Audrey Hudson, Washington Times. The Army has guidelines on how to deal with racist views and actions within the ranks, but none on how to deal with Islamic jihadism, a former Army vice chief of staff told Congress on Thursday. Retired Army Gen. John M. Keane said this absence of guidance fostered a politically correct reluctance to investigate the man accused in the Fort Hood shootings, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan. A military pamphlet created after the 1995 racially motivated shootings at Fort Bragg is the intended guidebook on how to deal with extremist activities and prohibited conduct but is mostly focused on white supremacist behavior, Gen. Keane told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee in the first congressional oversight hearing on the Fort Hood shootings. "Clearly we don't have specific guidelines in dealing with jihadist extremists," Gen. Keane told the Senate homeland security committee. Most of the witness panel agreed with Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, when he asked: "Do you think that political correctness may have played some role in the fact" that there was no in-depth investigation of Maj. Hasan? He is charged with murder in the rampage that left 13 people dead and 29 others wounded.

Arrests in Chicago Drive Home Global Nature of Terrorism Threat - Peter Slevin and Spencer S. Hsu, Washington Post. David C. Headley, a peripatetic Chicagoan accused of scouting potential terrorism targets in India and plotting to kill two Danish journalists, was not always David C. Headley. Until 2006, he was Daood Gilani, but he told investigators he had changed his name to raise less suspicion when he traveled abroad. He lived anonymously in an apartment leased in the name of a dead person. He changed e-mail accounts often and spoke in code on the telephone. The strategy worked less than perfectly, according to the FBI, which arrested him on terrorism charges last month at O'Hare International Airport on the first leg of a trip to Pakistan. In his luggage were digital videos he took of a Danish newspaper office and a book titled "How to Pray Like a Jew." Headley and Chicago businessman Tahawwur Hussain Rana are suspected Islamist militants charged not with targeting the United States, but with staging foreign operations from relative anonymity on American soil. Their profile is a fresh one, and it is being viewed by US authorities with alarm. One counterterrorism official described as "eye-opening" an investigation that concluded the two men worked with two Pakistan-based terrorist organizations allied with al-Qaeda, Lashkar-i-Taiba and Harkat-e-Jihad-e-Islami. It is a reminder, others said, that al-Qaeda or its imitators continue to try to build a network of operatives inside the United States.

CIA Detainees Again an Issue in Lithuania - Craig Whitlock, Washington Post. Twice in the past three years, the Lithuanian Parliament investigated reports that the CIA secretly imprisoned al-Qaeda leaders in this Baltic country. Both times, legislators concluded that there was no evidence. Now the Parliament is investigating a third time, and it is looking a little harder. Fresh reports of covert CIA flights carrying prisoners from Afghanistan to Lithuania, as well as the revelation that US contractors built a high-security complex at the edge of a forest near Vilnius, have added to the suspicions. Many Lithuanian officials said they remain unconvinced that their country's secret services allowed the CIA to detain international terrorists. A few legislators blame Russia and other outside interests for inventing the allegations in an attempt to besmirch Lithuania's reputation. But increasingly, after years of issuing denials, Lithuania's leaders are no longer ruling out the possibility that the CIA operated a secret prison in this northern European country of 3.5 million people, and that its government will have to deal with the fallout. The Washington Post first revealed the CIA's overseas prison network's existence in 2005. At the time, it withheld the names of Eastern European countries involved in the covert program at the request of White House officials, who argued that disclosure could subject those countries to retaliation from al-Qaeda.

Travesty in New York - Charles Krauthammer, Washington Post opinion. For late-19th-century anarchists, terrorism was the "propaganda of the deed." And the most successful propaganda-by-deed in history was 9/11 - not just the most destructive, but the most spectacular and telegenic. And now its self-proclaimed architect, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, has been given by the Obama administration a civilian trial in New York. Just as the memory fades, 9/11 has been granted a second life - and KSM, a second act: "9/11, The Director's Cut," narration by KSM. September 11, 2001 had to speak for itself. A decade later, the deed will be given voice. KSM has gratuitously been presented with the greatest propaganda platform imaginable - a civilian trial in the media capital of the world - from which to proclaim the glory of jihad and the criminality of infidel America. So why is Attorney General Eric Holder doing this? Ostensibly, to demonstrate to the world the superiority of our system, where the rule of law and the fair trial reign. Really? What happens if KSM (and his co-defendants) "do not get convicted," asked Senate Judiciary Committee member Herb Kohl.

Holder's Reasonable Decision - Jim Comey and Jack Goldsmith, Washington Post opinion. Reasonable minds can disagree about Attorney General Eric Holder's decision to prosecute Khalid Sheik Mohammed and four other alleged Sept. 11 perpetrators in a Manhattan federal court. But some prominent criticisms are exaggerated, and others place undue faith in military commissions as an alternative to civilian trials. Mohammed is many things: an enemy combatant in a war against the United States whom the government can detain without trial until the conflict ends; a war criminal subject to trial by military commission under the laws of war; and someone answerable in federal court for violations of the US criminal code. Which system he is placed in for purposes of incapacitation and justice involves complex legal and political trade-offs. A trial in Manhattan will bring enormous media attention and require unprecedented security. But it is unlikely to make New York a bigger target than it has been since February 1993, when Mohammed's nephew Ramzi Yousef attacked the World Trade Center.

UNITED STATES

Pentagon Launches Review of Fort Hood Shooting - John J. Kruzel, American Forces Press Service. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates today announced the Defense Department will conduct a broad review of the Nov. 5 Fort Hood, Texas, shooting that left 13 dead and dozens injured. Former Army Secretary Togo West and retired Navy Adm. Vernon Clark, former chief of naval operations, will head the initial 45-day review, which will inform a follow-on investigation expected to last four to six months. “The shootings at Fort Hood raise a number of troubling questions that demand complete but prompt answers,” Gates said during a Pentagon briefing. “It is prudent to determine immediately whether there are internal weaknesses or procedural shortcomings in the department that could make us vulnerable in the future.” The department review is separate from both the criminal investigation of Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan - the soldier charged with 13 counts of premeditated murder - and a review ordered by President Barack Obama to take a governmentwide look at all intelligence related to the incident. Initial findings of the president-mandated review are due Nov. 30. The purpose of the department review is three-fold, Gates said, including targeting possible gaps in procedures for identifying dangerous servicemembers who could pose credible risks to other troops. The review also will assess how “adverse information” about troops is recorded and handled, and will gauge the level of security and emergency response capabilities at Defense Department facilities. As part of the initial review, each military service branch will appoint a senior official to work with Clark and West on service-specific issues, Gates said. “In light of the Fort Hood incident and unique challenges, the Army will conduct a more in-depth, detailed assessment of whether Army programs, policies and procedures reasonably could have prevented the shooting,” he said. The Army’s findings will be submitted as part of the Army's contribution to the departmental review, Gates added.

In Fort Hood Aftermath, Pentagon Opens Two Reviews - Ann Scott Tyson and Ben Pershing, Washington Post. The Pentagon is launching an urgent review of whether military procedures hinder the identification of service members who pose a threat to their fellow troops. As part of the 45-day investigation, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates ordered an examination of whether Army policies and procedures played any role in failing to prevent the Fort Hood shootings. The review will also assess medical screening and discharge policies, programs to assess service members before and after they deploy, as well as procedures for reporting "adverse service member information," he said. Gates also ordered a separate in-depth investigation, lasting four to six months, into potential "systemic institutional shortcomings" in the military services related to care for victims of mass-casualty incidents, the performance of health-care providers and stress on the force. Word of the Pentagon reviews came on the same day that a Senate committee held the first public hearing on the attack that killed 13 people and wounded dozens at the Army post in Texas. Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman (I-Conn.), chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, began the hearing by saying he believed the incident was "a terrorist attack." He added that senators wanted "to determine whether that attack could have been prevented, whether the federal agencies and employees involved missed signals or failed to connect the dots."

First Congressional Hearing on Ft. Hood Shootings Set for Thursday - Dan Robinson, Voice of America. A Senate committee on Thursday is scheduled to convene the first congressional hearing on the shootings at the US Army base at Ft. Hood, Texas, in which a US Army Major, Nidal Malik Hasan, is alleged to have killed 12 fellow soldiers and one civilian. Joseph Lieberman, an Independent senator from Connecticut who heads the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Government Affairs, says Congress cannot wait for inquiries being conducted by the Pentagon and Department of Justice. Confirming that he intends to proceed with the hearing, Lieberman said while he supports current investigations, he considers the Ft. Hood shootings an act of terrorism and Congress has an obligation to carry out its own inquiry. "Our committee in both its traditional governmental oversight jurisdiction and its more recent homeland security jurisdiction, has an important responsibility under the rules of the Senate to determine whether the federal government could have prevented the murders at Ft. Hood," Lieberman said. The remarks came as Lieberman and ranking Republican on the committee, Susan Collins of Maine, continued consultations with key officials, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates, US Attorney General Eric Holder, FBI Director Robert Mueller and Army Secretary John McHugh, himself a former member of Congress.

UNITED NATIONS

Banished at Turtle Bay - Wall Street Journal editorial. As part of our public-service reports on the workings of your favorite world body, allow us to introduce you to Anne Bayefsky. The Toronto native is an expert on human-rights law and an accredited United Nations observer. She is also a friend of Israel, which makes her persona non grata as far as the folks at Turtle Bay are concerned. Ms. Bayefsky's sin was a two-minute talk she delivered at the UN earlier this month after the General Assembly had issued a resolution endorsing the Goldstone Report, which levels war crimes charges at Israel for defending itself in the face of Hamas's rockets. "The resolution doesn't mention the word Hamas," she said. "This is a resolution that purports to be even-handed; it is anything but." Ms. Bayefsky's comments were the only note of criticism on a day otherwise marked by much UN jubilation. Whereupon she was summarily stripped of her UN badge and evicted from the premises. "The Palestinian ambassador is very upset by your statement," Ms. Bayefsky says the UN security chief told her. Journalist Matthew Russell Lee tells us that he heard the ambassador asking whether UN security had "captured" Ms. Bayefsky.

AFRICA

China Helps the Powerful in Namibia - Sharon LaFraniere, New York Times. Like parents everywhere, mothers and fathers in Namibia, an impoverished southern African nation, worry about college costs and opportunities for their children. The Chinese government has stepped forward to help - for a select and powerful few. So far this year, the Beijing government has secretly awarded scholarships to study in China to the offspring of nine top officials, including to the daughter of Namibia’s president, Hifikepunye Pohamba. Two young relatives of Namibia’s former president and national patriarch, Sam Nujoma, also received grants. The disclosure of the scholarships, first revealed by a feisty Namibian newspaper, has unleashed a wave of fury from the nation’s civil society groups and youth organizations. In a country where five in six high school graduates do not go on to college, many find it unconscionable for well-paid government leaders to accept overseas university scholarships for their children. “Only senior people in government knew about the scholarships,” said Norman Tjombe, director of the nonprofit Legal Assistance Center. “No chance was given at all to the general public.” The controversy has reignited a simmering debate in Namibia over deals with the Chinese government, already under scrutiny by Namibian prosecutors. Inquiries there and in other developing countries in Africa and Asia have cast a fresh light on how China sometimes uses its treasure chest of foreign loans and aid to create elite alliances and ease the approval of no-bid contracts.

An Anti-pirate Policy that Works - Washington Times editorial. Merchant ships need guns to fight pirates. Seven months ago, Somali pirates attacked the Maersk Alabama and held its captain hostage. Pirates attacked the Maersk Alabama again this week but were repulsed because the Maersk Shipping Line put armed guards on its ships. Pirates successfully attacked another unarmed ship on Monday, leaving 28 members of its crew dead. On Tuesday, 36 crew members of a Spanish ship were released only after pirates were paid a $3.3 million ransom. But when the pirates got within 300 yards of the Maersk Alabama, the ship tried evasive maneuvers and its security team successfully engaged in small-arms fire. Vice Admiral Bill Gortney of the US Naval Forces Central Command said the actions of the Maersk Alabama were following the maritime industry's "best practices." Things have changed a lot since the first Maersk Alabama attack in April. As late as the beginning of 2009, it was very rare for ships to have armed security guards. Now about 20 percent of the vessels off East Africa are armed, though they are almost exclusively American ships.

AMERICAS

Honduran Leader Says He’ll Briefly Step Down - Marc Lacey and Ginger Thompson, New York Times. As the presidential election draws near in Honduras, the de facto leader, Roberto Micheletti, and the ousted president, Manuel Zelaya, continued their political jockeying on Thursday, with Mr. Micheletti announcing that he would briefly cede power to increase the vote’s legitimacy and Mr. Zelaya insisting that the election be pushed back. In announcing that he would hand over power to his cabinet ministers for a week beginning on Nov. 25, Mr. Micheletti made it clear that he had no plans to cede power to Mr. Zelaya, who was ousted from the presidency on June 28 in what much of the world has branded a coup. “God bless Honduras,” said Mr. Micheletti, portraying the temporary ceding of power as a move to reconcile the divided country. Still, Mr. Micheletti’s move fell short of what he and Mr. Zelaya agreed to in an accord struck in October with the help of the United States. The two leaders were to have set up a national unity government by Nov. 5 to administer the election. Mr. Zelaya has since pulled out of the deal. Hondurans are scheduled to go to the polls on Nov. 29 to choose new leaders, and neither Mr. Micheletti nor Mr. Zelaya is on the ballot. The chief dispute between the men centers on which of them ought to serve as president until the next leader takes over on Jan. 27.

Brazil's New Standing Threatened by Ahmadinejad Visit - John Lyons, Wall Street Journal. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's coming trip to Brazil is spurring criticism of the country in Washington, souring a budding US-Brazilian relationship that appeared to promise a period of unprecedented cooperation in Latin America. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's planned reception of Mr. Ahmadinejad on Monday undercuts US and European efforts to pressure Iran to curtail its nuclear program, boosting his stature at a critical moment in the talks, experts say. Mr. Ahmadinejad's denial of the Holocaust, calls for Israel's destruction and repression of post-electoral protests have isolated him from the world's major economies -- with Brazil as a big exception. "Giving Ahmadinejad credibility by welcoming him is a terrible mistake," said Congressman Eliot Engel (D., NY), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee who follows Brazil closely. "It makes you wonder if Brazil is really ready for the new era of global relations it envisions." While Mr. Ahmadinejad has visited other Latin American nations, such as Venezuela, his trip to Brazil is more important. The increasingly global reach of Brazil's economy, now the world's eighth largest, has won the nation increasing clout in global affairs. Brazil has taken a leading role in international groups such as the World Trade Organization.

Uribe's Third Term - Wall Street Journal editorial. A modern, democratic president with a 64% approval rating at the end of his second term has reason to be proud and wonder if he could win again. It's at precisely such a moment, however, when he should also remember that a properly functioning democracy never depends upon one man and requires the peaceful transfer of power. We refer to Colombian President Alvaro Uribe, whose second term expires in August. When he took office in 2002 his country was beset by guerrilla terrorism. Millions of Colombians have benefited from his policy of "democratic security," which has restored order and confidence in government. But now his supporters are trying to win a constitutional amendment that would allow him to run for a third term, and Mr. Uribe has not told them "no." He should. Last week's ruling by a National Electoral Council panel invalidating millions of petition signatures supporting the required referendum on the issue is a perfect opportunity for Mr. Uribe to do so. Some legal analysts dispute the ruling and say the constitutional court is not likely to rely on it when making the final decision about the legality of a referendum. But the decision certainly complicates both the legality and politics of any third-term attempt, and the matter is now unlikely to be resolved for months. Meantime, the May election looms and Mr. Uribe's party has no candidate.

ASIA PACIFIC

N. Korea Among Topics of Discussion as Obama Wraps up Asia Tour - Blaine Harden, Washington Post. With none of the tension presented by a rising China and a willful Japan, President Obama's visit to South Korea on Thursday was short, congenial in substance and splendid in form. Ending a sometimes bumpy week-long tour of East Asia, Obama said the welcoming ceremony in Seoul - a glorious, sun-drenched mingling of music, flags and traditional garb - was the "most spectacular" he has seen in his travels. In his talks with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, whose right-of-center government has embraced political cooperation with the United States, Obama also found much to his liking. The two agreed on a common approach to North Korea, with Obama announcing that his special envoy, Stephen W. Bosworth, will travel to Pyongyang on Dec. 8 to try to persuade Kim Jong Il's government to return to stalled six-party disarmament talks in Beijing. And they played down lingering differences over the US-South Korean free trade agreement, which has not been ratified in either country, primarily because of American objections to South Korean rules that limit US car sales here.

US Has Narrow Agenda for North Korea Talks - David Gollust, Voice of America. The Obama administration is making clear in advance of the Bosworth mission that it is not interested in discussing side issues, and that the US envoy will be seeking a commitment from Pyongyang to return to the Chinese-sponsored six-party talks which have been stalled for more than a year. President Obama announced before ending his Asia trip in Seoul early Thursday that Bosworth will pay a long-anticipated visit to Pyongyang on December 8 in a bid to break the deadlock in the aid-for-disarmament negotiations. At a news briefing, State Department Spokesman Ian Kelly said Bosworth will pursue a reaffirmation of North Korea's September 2005 agreement in principle to scrap its nuclear program in return for aid and diplomatic benefits. He said other matters of concern to Pyongyang can be taken up in working groups, once North Korea returns to the negotiations. "We are going to go into this with our eyes wide open," said Ian Kelly. "We are not interested in being distracted by issues beyond the most important issues facing the region in terms of security, and that's the complete and verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, so that will be the focus of Ambassador Bosworth's trip to Pyongyang." Bosworth, a retired senior US diplomat and academic, has been a frequent visitor to North Korea over the years, but his mission to Pyongyang next month will be his first in the envoy role he assumed in February.

EUROPE

EU Selects New President - Lisa Bryant, Voice of America. The European Union has chosen its first full-time president - Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy. Leaders of the 27-member bloc also chose a woman for the second top job - British commissioner Catherine Ashton, who will be the EU's new foreign policy chief At a press conference in Brussels, the European Union's President-elect Herman Van Rompuy offered a unifying message in English, Flemish and French - vowing to listen and take into account all the diverse views of the 27-member block. "Europe must be in every member state's advantage," said Herman Van Rompuy. "This cardinal principle leds me to a two-track approach. First of all, I will consider everyone's interests and sensitivities. Even if our unity is our strength, our diversity remains our wealth. Every country has its own history, its own culture, its own way of doing things. Our journey may be toward a common destination, but we will all bring along different luggage." Von Rompuy also vowed to ensure that every country in the EU will emerge victorious from any decision taken. He becomes the new EU president January 1. Von Rompuy's selection took place fairly swiftly over a dinner meeting among European leaders, after weeks of divisions over who would get the top job. In selecting the Belgian premier, they opted for a candidate able to cobble unity and compromise, rather than a high profile figure for the job.

EU Picks First Full-time President - Edward Cody, Washington Post. Champions of European unity hoped their new president would be a continental George Washington, a brand name who could pull the European Union closer together and fulfill their dream of a strengthened role for Europe in world affairs. But after weeks of backroom haggling and private international telephone conversations, the presidents and prime ministers of the 27 EU nations on Thursday picked a little-known politician, Belgian Prime Minister Herman Van Rompuy, as the union's first permanent president. The choice of a conciliator, rather than a bold leader, for the new job suggested the European Union was not ready for the dramatic departure advocated by ardent unity advocates, analysts said. As a result, they added, the United States and other EU partners should expect little change in their traditional bilateral dealings with national governments in Europe despite Van Rompuy's addition to the vast Euro-bureaucracy in Brussels. "Europe is not a country," said Nicolas Véron of the Brussels-based Bruegel institute for European and world economic affairs. Notwithstanding lyrical talk of European unity and joint action on the world stage, he added, the continent's elected presidents and prime ministers showed they were not yet prepared to cede significant new powers to an EU figurehead or choose an activist in Brussels likely to vie with national leaders on European policies.

Low Profile Leaders Chosen for Top European Posts - Stephen Castle and Steven Erlanger, New York Times. Leaders of the 27 countries of the European Union on Thursday night chose Herman Van Rompuy, the Belgian prime minister, as the European Union’s first president, and Catherine Ashton of Britain, currently the bloc’s trade commissioner, as its high representative for foreign policy. The vote was unanimous. Both officials are highly respected but little known outside their own countries. After the European Union’s eight-year battle to rewrite its internal rules and to pass the Lisbon Treaty that created these two new jobs, the selection of such low-profile figures seemed to highlight Europe’s problems instead of its readiness to take a more united and forceful place in world affairs. In a sense, Europe seemed to be living down to expectations. Earlier, the foreign minister of Sweden, Carl Bildt, warned against a “minimalist solution” that would reduce the union’s “opportunity to have a clear voice in the world.” “It is quite astounding,” said Olivier Ferrand, president of Terra Nova, a center-left research institute in France. “It is jaw-dropping. It is the end of ambition for the EU - really disappointing.” The deal that produced the two choices emerged as a result of backroom negotiations among leaders jockeying for future and more important economic portfolios that could be more powerful in the enlarged European Union, which is still more of an economic union than a political one and looks to remain so.

MIDDLE EAST

Palestinian Elections Postponed Indefinitely - Robert Berger, Voice of America. Palestinian elections, originally set for early next year, will not take place on schedule. The elections were postponed because of divisions between rival Palestinian factions: the Fatah movement that controls the West Bank and the Islamic militant group Hamas that rules the Gaza Strip. Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah had ordered the Central Election Commission to conduct national elections on schedule in January. But commission chairman Hanna Nasser blamed Hamas for refusing to cooperate and forcing the postponement. "We have found there are obstacles in certain areas. We have made contacts with Hamas in Gaza, [but] we have found that this is not a possibility," he said. Nasser said Hamas would not allow the elections to take place in Gaza. "And therefore, since elections are expected to be executed in all parts of the West Bank, Gaza and Jerusalem, we have therefore taken a decision that the CEC cannot at present execute the decree of the President," he said. Hamas ousted President Abbas and his Fatah forces from Gaza during the Palestinian civil war two years ago and does not recognize his rule in the West Bank. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri says the call for elections was illegitimate.

SOUTH ASIA

Deadly Labor Wars Hinder India's Rise - Peter Wonacott, Wall Street Journal. Battle lines are being drawn in labor actions across India. Factory managers, amid the global economic downturn, want to pare labor costs and remove defiant workers. Unions are attempting to stop them, with slowdowns and strikes that have led at times to bloodshed. The disputes are fueled by the discontent of workers, many of whom say they haven't partaken of the past decade's prosperity. Their passions are being whipped up, companies say, by labor leaders who want to add members to their unions and win votes for left-leaning political parties. Adding to the tensions are the country's decades-old labor codes, which workers and companies alike say require an overhaul. "We can't be a capitalist country that has socialist labor laws," says Jayant Davar, president of the Automotive Component Manufacturers Association of India. The unrest serves as a reminder that India has far to go before it stands alongside the world's other economic powerhouses. With its widening middle class and growing base of rural consumers, India has averaged more than 8% growth for the last half-decade. It is seen as a country that can help lead a global economic recovery.

EVENTS

An Evening of Counterinsurgency at the Pritzker Military Library. Hearts and minds? Overrated. If you want to run a successful counterinsurgency, it all starts with the person at the top. On Thursday, December 3rd, Mark Moyar will appear at the Pritzker Military Library to discuss his new book, A Question of Command: Counterinsurgency from the Civil War to Iraq. This event is free and open to the public. The presentation will begin at 6 p.m., preceded by a reception for Library members at 5 p.m. It will be webcast live on pritzkermilitarylibrary.org and recorded for later broadcast on WYCC-TV/Channel 20. Moyar takes issue with much of the current U.S. Army / Marine Corps Counterinsurgency Field Manual, which guided the “surge” in Iraq. Though its creation was overseen by Gen. David Petraeus, whose leadership he considers a near-perfect model for counterinsurgency, Moyar finds the general’s most important qualities de-valued in the manual, which suffers from what he calls a “population-centric” emphasis toward defeating an insurgency by depriving it of public support. Using case studies from the Philippines, Vietnam, and other conflicts over the last 150 years, Moyar argues instead that counterinsurgencies succeed or fail based on the leaders involved: their ability to inspire subordinates, adapt to complex situations, unify civilian and military efforts, and identify capable sub-commanders, both from their own ranks and the target population. Though A Question of Command describes historical insurgencies around the world, Moyar posits that the American South, after the Civil War, may have been the best model for the situation in Iraq. Whereas Grant and Sherman had led major victories on the battlefield, it was lesser-known leaders like Brig. Gen. Robert F. Catterson and Maj. Lewis Merrill who had the most success against insurgent forces such as the Ku Klux Klan. A Question of Command attempts to capture the qualities and decisions that set those leaders apart, making their successors easier to find. Mark Moyar is Professor of National Security Affairs at the Marine Corps University. He is also the author of Triumph Forsaken: the Vietnam War, 1954-1965 and Phoenix and the Birds of Prey: Counterinsurgency and Counterterrorism in Vietnam. Moyar’s writings have appeared in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Wall Street Journal, and other publications. He received a B.A. summa cum laude from Harvard and a Ph.D. from Cambridge. Seating for this event is limited, so reservations are recommended. Call 312.587.0234 or email events@pritzkermilitarylibrary.net.

BOOKS

Horse Soldiers: The Extraordinary Story of a Band of Soldiers Who Rode to Victory in Afghanistan - Doug Stanton.

Horse Soldiers tells the important story of the Special Forces soldiers who first put American boots on the ground in Afghanistan in 2001. Fighting alongside the Northern Alliance, the troops, often riding on horseback, achieved several important victories against the Taliban.

War 2.0: Irregular Warfare in the Information Age - Thomas Rid and Marc Hecker.

War 2.0: Irregular Warfare in the Information Age argues that two intimately connected trends are putting modern armies under huge pressure to adapt: the rise of insurgencies and the rise of the Web. Both in cyberspace and in warfare, the grassroots public has assumed increasing importance in recent years. After the dot-com bubble burst in 2000, Web 2.0 rose from the ashes. This newly interactive and participatory form of the Web promotes and enables offline action. Similarly, after Rumsfeld's attempt to transform the US military into a lean, lethal, computerized force crashed in Iraq in 2003, counterinsurgency rose from the ashes. Counterinsurgency is a social form of war - indeed, the US Army calls it armed social work - in which the local matrix population becomes the center of strategic gravity and public opinion at home the critical vulnerability.

The New Counterinsurgency Era: Transforming the US Military for Modern Wars - David H. Ucko.

Confronting insurgent violence in Iraq and Afghanistan, the US military has recognized the need to "re-learn" counterinsurgency. But how has the Department of Defense with its mixed efforts responded to this new strategic environment? Has it learned anything from past failures? In The New Counterinsurgency Era, David Ucko examines DoD's institutional obstacles and initially slow response to a changing strategic reality.

Journey into Darkness: Genocide in Rwanda - Thomas P. Odom.

In July 1994, Thomas P. Odom was part of the US Embassy team that responded to the Goma refugee crisis. He witnessed the deaths of 70,000 refugees in a single week. In the previous three months of escalating violence, the Rwandan genocide had claimed 800,000 dead. Now, in this vivid and unsettling new book, Odom offers the first insider look at these devastating events before, during, and after the genocide.

Joker One: A Marine Platoon’s Story of Courage - Donovan Campbell.

Donovan Campbell, first as a Marine and then as a writer, shows us that the dominant emotion in war isn’t hatred or anger or fear. It’s love. His story stands as a poignant tribute to his men–their courage, their dedication, their skill, and their love for one another, even unto death.

The Battle for Peace: A Frontline Vision of America's Power and Purpose - Anthony Zinni and Tony Koltz

The intellectual complement to Zinni and Clancy's bestselling Battle Ready (2004), a narrative memoir salted with specific policy recommendations, this volume provides the former US Central Command chief's analysis of America's current global position. Zinni begins by asserting that America's status as "the most powerful nation in the history of the planet" has created a de facto empire. The US has no choice: if it fails to take the lead, nothing significant happens. At the same time, Americans must recognize that, in a global age, there can be no zero-sum games.

The Unforgiving Minute: A Soldier's Education - Craig Mullaney

The Unforgiving Minute is the ultimate's soldier's book - universal in its raw emotion and its understanding of the larger issues of life and death. Mullaney, a master storyteller, plunges the depths of self-doubt, endurance, and courage. The result: a riveting, suspenseful human story, beautifully told. This is a book written under fire - a lyrical, spellbinding tale of war, love, and courage. The Unforgiving Minute is the Three Cups of Tea of soldiering.

Great Powers: America and the World after Bush - Thomas P.M. Barnett

In civilian and military circles alike, The Pentagon’s New Map became one of the most talked about books of 2004. “A combination of Tom Friedman on globalization and Carl von Clausewitz on war, [it is] the red-hot book among the nation’s admirals and generals,” wrote David Ignatius in The Washington Post. Barnett’s second book, Blueprint for Action, demonstrated how to put the first book’s principles to work. Now, in Great Powers, Barnett delivers his most sweeping - and important - book of all.

The Accidental Guerrilla: Fighting Small Wars in the Midst of a Big One - David Kilcullen

A remarkably fresh perspective on the War on Terror. Kilcullen takes us "on the ground" to uncover the face of modern warfare, illuminating both the big global war (the "War on Terrorism") and its relation to the associated "small wars" across the globe: Iraq, Afghanistan, the Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Chechnya, Pakistan and North Africa.

The Gamble: General David Petraeus and the American Military Adventure in Iraq, 2006-2008 - Thomas Ricks

Thomas E. Ricks uses hundreds of hours of exclusive interviews with top officers in Iraq and extraordinary on-the-ground reportage to document the inside story of the Iraq War since late 2005 as only he can, examining the events that took place as the military was forced to reckon with itself, the surge was launched, and a very different war began.

Why Vietnam Matters: An Eyewitness Account of Lessons Not Learned - Rufus Phillips

Phillips details how the legendary Edward G. Lansdale helped the South Vietnamese gain and consolidate their independence between 1954 and 1956, and how this later changed to a reliance on American conventional warfare with its highly destructive firepower. He reasons that our failure to understand the Communists, our South Vietnamese allies, or even ourselves took us down the wrong road. In summing up US errors in Vietnam, Phillips draws parallels with the American experience in Iraq and Afghanistan and suggests changes in the US approach. Known for his intellectual integrity and firsthand, long-term knowledge of what went on in Vietnam, the author offers lessons for today in this trenchant account.

Baghdad at Sunrise: A Brigade Commander's War in Iraq - Peter Mansoor

This is a unique contribution to the burgeoning literature on the Iraq war, analyzing the day-to-day performance of a US brigade in Baghdad during 2004-2005. Mansoor uses a broad spectrum of sources to address the military, political and cultural aspects of an operation undertaken with almost no relevant preparation, which tested officers and men to their limits and generated mistakes and misjudgments on a daily basis. The critique is balanced, perceptive and merciless - and Mansoor was the brigade commander. Military history is replete with command memoirs. Most are more or less self-exculpatory. Even the honest ones rarely achieve this level of analysis. The effect is like watching a surgeon perform an operation on himself. Mansoor has been simultaneously a soldier and a scholar, able to synergize directly his military and academic experiences.

The Strongest Tribe: War, Politics, and the Endgame in Iraq - Bing West

From a universally respected combat journalist, a gripping history based on five years of front-line reporting about how the war was turned around - and the choice now facing America. We interpret reality through the clouded prism of our own experience, so it is unsurprising that Bing West sees Iraq through the lens of Vietnam. He served as a Marine officer there, and he thinks politicians and the media caused the American public to turn against a war that could have been won. Now a correspondent for the Atlantic, West has made 15 reporting trips to Iraq over the last six years and is almost as personally invested in the current conflict as he was in Vietnam; this book, his third on Iraq, is his attempt to ensure that the "endgame" in Iraq turns out better than in his last war.

Tell Me How This Ends: General David Petraeus and the Search for a Way Out of Iraq - Linda Robinson

After a series of disastrous missteps in its conduct of the war, the White House in 2006 appointed General David Petraeus as the Commanding General of the coalition forces. Tell Me How This Ends is an inside account of his attempt to turn around a failing war. Linda Robinson conducted extensive interviews with Petraeus and his subordinate commanders and spent weeks with key US and Iraqi divisions. The result is the only book that ties together military operations in Iraq and the internecine political drama that is at the heart of the civil war. Replete with dramatic battles, behind-doors confrontations, and astute analysis, the book tells the full story of the Iraq War’s endgame, and lays out the options that will be facing the next president.

The War Within: A Secret White House History 2006-2008 - Bob Woodward

Woodward interviewed key players, obtained dozens of never-before-published documents, and had nearly three hours of exclusive interviews with President Bush. The result is a stunning, firsthand history of the years from mid-2006, when the White House realizes the Iraq strategy is not working, through the decision to surge another 30,000 US troops in 2007, and into mid-2008, when the war becomes a fault line in the presidential election. As violence in Iraq reaches unnerving levels in 2006, a second front in the war rages at the highest levels of the Bush administration. In his fourth book on President George W. Bush, Bob Woodward takes readers deep inside the tensions, secret debates, unofficial backchannels, distrust and determination within the White House, the Pentagon, the State Department, the intelligence agencies and the US military headquarters in Iraq. With unparalleled intimacy and detail, this gripping account of a president at war describes a period of distress and uncertainty within the US government from 2006 through mid-2008. The White House launches a secret strategy review that excludes the military. General George Casey, the commander in Iraq, believes that President Bush does not understand the war and eventually concludes he has lost the president's confidence. The Joint Chiefs of Staff also conduct a secret strategy review that goes nowhere. On the verge of revolt, they worry that the military will be blamed for a failure in Iraq.

We Are Soldiers Still: A Journey Back to the Battlefields of Vietnam - Harold Moore and Joe Galloway

In their stunning follow-up to the classic bestseller We Were Soldiers Once... and Young, Lt. Gen. Hal Moore and Joe Galloway return to Vietnam and reflect on how the war changed them, their men, their enemies, and both countries - often with surprising results. It would be a monumental task for Moore and Galloway to top their classic 1992 memoir. But they come close in this sterling sequel, which tells the backstory of two of the Vietnam War's bloodiest battles (in which Moore participated as a lieutenant colonel), their first book and a 1993 ABC-TV documentary that brought them back to the battlefield. Moore's strong first-person voice reviews the basics of the November 1965 battles, part of the 34-day Battle of the Ia Drang Valley. Among other things, Moore and Galloway (who covered the battle for UPI) offer portraits of two former enemy commanders, generals Nguyen Huu An and Chu Huy Man, whom the authors met - and bonded with - nearly three decades after the battle. This book proves again that Moore is an exceptionally thoughtful, compassionate and courageous leader (he was one of a handful of army officers who studied the history of the Vietnam wars before he arrived) and a strong voice for reconciliation and for honoring the men with whom he served.

In a Time of War: The Proud and Perilous Journey of West Point' Class of 2002 - Bill Murphy

The West Point cadets Murphy follows through their baptism by fire are an admirable sample of young American men and women: intelligent, ambitious and intensely patriotic. Most come from career military families and hold conservative opinions. Murphy describes their four years at West Point with respect even when discussing their love lives and marriages. All yearn for battle, and most get their wish. The book's best passages describe the confusion of moving to Iraq or Afghanistan and fighting insurgents, for which they lack both training and equipment. All feel something is not right but concentrate on the job at hand; some inevitably die or are grievously wounded.

Iraq and the Evolution of American Strategy - Steven Metz

Today the US military is more nimble, mobile, and focused on rapid responses against smaller powers than ever before. One could argue that the Gulf War and the postwar standoff with Saddam Hussein hastened needed military transformation and strategic reassessments in the post–Cold War era. But the preoccupation with Iraq also mired the United States in the Middle East and led to a bloody occupation. What will American strategy look like after US troops leave Iraq? Metz concludes that the United States has a long-standing, continuing problem “developing sound assumptions when the opponent operates within a different psychological and cultural framework.” He sees a pattern of misjudgments about Saddam and Iraq based on Western cultural and historical bias and a pervasive faith in the superiority of America’s worldview and institutions. This myopia contributed to America being caught off guard by Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990, then underestimating his longevity, and finally miscalculating the likelihood of a stable and democratic Iraq after he was toppled. With lessons for all readers concerned about America’s role in the world, Dr. Metz’s important new work will especially appeal to scholars and students of strategy and international security studies, as well as to military professionals and DOD civilians. With a foreword by Colin S. Gray.