In a year being described in Western capitals as “turning the tide” against the Taliban there are now destructive currents.
President Karzai’s extraordinary tirade against the West has thrown into doubt key relationships absolutely crucial to the year ahead.
“He has fuelled the doubts of his critics and unsettled those who are trying to make this work,” said one Western diplomat.
But an aide to the president defended his speech, saying “there is a trust deficit on both sides that must be dealt with”.
Karzai’s US trip
It wasn’t just foreigners who were stunned by the president’s angry outburst accusing Western governments, the UN and EU, as well as foreign media of perpetrating fraud in last year’s controversial presidential election.
“Shocking” was the description used by one senior government official.
The New York Times reported that President Karzai spoke by telephone to the US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday evening and tried to clarify he was venting his anger at Western media coverage of his election, not the United States.
In his speech, the president had spoken of “countries like Afghanistan, where there are more than 100,000 foreign troops, they [foreigners] also pursue their own interests a very thin curtain distinguishes between co-operation and assistance with the invasion.” He went on to warn of the possibility of “national resistance”.
Despite the clarity and tone of the president’s remark, an aide denied there was any threat, saying it was a “call for the two sides to try to work more closely together”.
“People should listen to what he said. These are issues he has had on his mind for a long, long time.”
Other Afghan government sources speak of American exasperation. They expressed concern that a carefully choreographed political calendar for the months ahead could be affected, including the president’s long-awaited invitation to the White House on 12 May, and a follow-up to the London conference on Afghanistan set to take place in the next few months.
A White House spokesman said the Afghan leader’s remarks were “genuinely troubling” but the trip to Washington was still on, “as of right now”.
‘Spontaneous’ outburst
The president’s speech during a visit to the Independent Election Commission came the day after the lower house of the Afghan parliament delivered a resounding rejection of a recent decree.
The president had amended the Electoral Law, granting himself the power to appoint all five commissioners at the Electoral Complaints Commission. The current law gives responsibility to the United Nations to appoint three members on a body that plays a key role in investigating election irregularities.
That parliamentary vote, along with allegations that foreign embassies may have tried to influence it, appears to have rekindled his still festering anger over last August’s presidential election.
“He went over the edge,” remarked one Afghan official. It’s understood the president, still fuming about the vote, went to the election office without written talking points.
“It was spontaneous,” confirmed another senior government source.
The president is known to be still deeply bitter about the August election. He still believes foreign countries, in particular the United States and Britain, were determined to oust him.
Western diplomats in Kabul concede mistakes were made during that process that fed the president’s suspicions.
They include weaknesses in the methodology used by the Electoral Complaints Commission. In the heat of the crisis last year, when visiting US Senator John Kerry was trying to convince President Karzai to accept the need for a second round, even the senator asked to see election experts involved in the process to raise his doubts about their analysis of the fraud.
Former UN envoy, Kai Eide, who was in Kabul at that time, criticised in a recent BBC interview what he saw as foreign interference. He cited as one example the decision by the US special representative Richard Holbrooke to urge a large number of Afghans, including senior presidential advisers, to run against Mr Karzai.
Mr Holbrooke spoke of a fair playing field. But it was widely seen by Afghans, and most of all by the president, as an effort to defeat him.
“I can understand how and why he reacted,” commented one Western diplomat about the president’s latest intervention. But, he added, “it wasn’t wise to do so.”
‘Defiance’
The president’s outburst came only days after US President Barack Obama made a long-awaited visit to Kabul. Afghans invited to meet the US leader at the presidential palace, including government ministers and advisers, all speak positively about their meeting. The US president is said to have mainly listened to their concerns.
Sources say the smaller meeting with the presidents and a few aides involved a frank exchange of views focusing on issues ranging from corruption, government appointments, relations with Pakistan and parliamentary elections set for September.
In an apparent display of defiance, President Karzai brought his Vice President, Mohammad Fahim Khan, to the smaller meeting even though the Americans had made it clear he was not invited. The president’s choice of Mr Fahim as his running mate last year was widely criticised in Western capitals and among those Afghans who regard him as a warlord accused of abuses of power.
Afghan government sources say even the long-awaited invitation to visit Washington did not ease President Karzai’s ambivalence about the intentions of his key ally.
The president and senior members of his team also express uncertainty and anxiety about Washington’s broader aims in the region, including relations with neighbouring Pakistan.
This new strain comes at a critical juncture when a strong partnership is essential. Every issue that matters - from a major campaign planned in the southern province of Kandahar, to reconciliation, and improving aid and governance - will involve a decisive role for the United States, and more broadly, the rest of Kabul’s allies.
Without mutual trust, that goes to the very top, turning the tide will be difficult indeed.This article is from the BBC News website. © British Broadcasting Corporation, The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites.