Secret talks are under way between the Taliban and Afghanistan's shaky leader, Hamid Karzai.
This is pretty good news:

WASHINGTON — Taliban leader Mullah Omar has, for the first time, backed secret high-level talks with the Afghan government to negotiate an end to the nine-year war, the Washington Post said Wednesday.
"They are very, very serious about finding a way out," a source close to the talks told the Post, referring to the Taliban.

The Post cited unnamed Afghan and Arab sources as saying the talks were believed to involve representatives authorized by the Quetta Shura, the Afghan Taliban group based in Pakistan, and Omar.
Omar, the Afghan Taliban's one-eyed leader who is believed to be hiding in Pakistan, and other top Taliban figures have insisted for years that foreign fighters must first leave Afghanistan before peace talks can begin.
But a source close to the talks told the Post that the leadership knows "that they are going to be sidelined," and was negotiating with the government of President Hamid Karzai to ensure their positions are protected. "They know that more radical elements are being promoted within their rank and file outside their control," the source said.

"All these things are making them absolutely sure that, regardless of (their success in) the war, they are not in a winning position."

The report comes after meetings hosted by Saudi Arabia ended without success last year.

The new negotiations involve agreements to allow Taliban leaders positions in the Afghan government and the withdrawal of US and NATO forces according to an agreed timetable, the newspaper said.

Probably the only way for this horrendous war to finally come to an end is to have some sort of peace agreement between the two. It wasn't until the U.S. shelled out millions of dollars to the warring factions of Iraq that violence finally calmed down during the Sunni Awakening and maybe these "secret" talks with the one-eyed man can serve the same function. Although the "Awakening" is in some trouble now, it did help. The "surge" of cash was much more instrumental than the surge of troops. Hopefully, Karzai is taking his meds during the meetings. By the way, just to keep you up to date, the Sunnis got screwed in the latest election so there's trouble in Iraq now.

The sooner we are outta there, the better.

The Beatles - Here Comes The Sun

As some of you may remember, I have spent the last two weeks with my sister awaiting the birth of her second child. I'm happy to report that on Tuesday, we welcomed her son into the family, the first boy in his generation (the rest of us all have girls, as my brother was the lone boy of our generation, surrounded by sisters and girl cousins). Sadly, he was born with a serious but correctable heart defect that necessitates surgeries to fix. He's had one already and will have the other next week, so I ask you to send good thoughts his way. He's proven to us time and time again through a rough pregnancy and birth that he's a fighter, so I've no doubt he'll come through this strong and ultimately healthy. Here comes our sun indeed.

On the Sunday show front, I'm afraid we're still in our long, cold, lonely winter. On This Week, Christiane Amanpour is going to focus on our relationship with the Muslim world by speaking to both Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Cordoba House Executive Director Daisy Khan, wife of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Whereas over on Meet the Press, David Gregory appears to want to focus on Republican interests, with Mitch McConnell and Dick Armey as his guests. And Fox News only want to focus on reminding their viewers how bad Democrats are by spending the hour with disgraced Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich. Sigh.

ABC's "This Week" - Afghan President Hamid Karzai; Daisy Khan, executive director, American Society for Muslim Advancement; Rabbi Joy Levitt, executive director, Jewish Community Center in Manhattan.

CBS' "Face the Nation" - Gen. Ray Odierno, U.S. commander in Iraq; Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; author Greg Mortenson.

NBC's "Meet the Press" - Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; former House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas; Gov. Jennifer Granholm, D-Mich.; New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio.

NBC's "The Chris Matthews Show" - Panel: Gloria Borger, Dan Rather, John Heileman, Michele Norris. Topics: 50 Years Since the Historic Kennedy-Nixon Campaign: Parallels for Obama. Will The GOP Yield To Its Right Wing As It Did In The Goldwater Year? Meter Questions: Will Tea Partiers Have A Veto Over the 2012 GOP Nominee? YES: 6 NO: 6;
Will Democrats In Congress Maintain Support for Afghanistan War? YES: 10 No: 2.

CNN's "State of the Union" - Odierno; former U.S. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad; retired Adm. William Fallon; retired Gen. Richard Myers; Howard Dean, former national Democratic Party chairman.

CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS" - The catastrophe in Pakistan is staggering. 4 million homeless and countless dead. One fifth of the nation is under water. And it's likely to get worse. Imran Kahn, the cricket legend and now one of Pakistan's most prominent politicians, tells Fareed just how awful the devastation is and just how poor the Pakistani government's response has been.

Then, just what is Germany's secret sauce? How is it managing to thrive when so many nations are languishing?

"Fox News Sunday" - Former Gov. Rod Blagojevich, D-Ill.

So what's catching your eye this morning?

Poor Afghanistan. We'll never leave now, we'll have to "help" them develop their new mining industries. Shock capitalism in action!

WASHINGTON — The United States has discovered nearly $1 trillion in untapped mineral deposits in Afghanistan, far beyond any previously known reserves and enough to fundamentally alter the Afghan economy and perhaps the Afghan war itself, according to senior American government officials.

The previously unknown deposits — including huge veins of iron, copper, cobalt, gold and critical industrial metals like lithium — are so big and include so many minerals that are essential to modern industry that Afghanistan could eventually be transformed into one of the most important mining centers in the world, the United States officials believe.

An internal Pentagon memo, for example, states that Afghanistan could become the “Saudi Arabia of lithium,” a key raw material in the manufacture of batteries for laptops and Blackberries.

The vast scale of Afghanistan’s mineral wealth was discovered by a small team of Pentagon officials and American geologists. The Afghan government and President Hamid Karzai were recently briefed, American officials said.

Sounds like a wonderful surprise, right? Well, here's something that adds more perspective:

Read a little more carefully, though, and you realize that there's less to this scoop than meets the eye. For one thing, the findings on which the story was based are online and have been since 2007, courtesy of the U.S. Geological Survey. More information is available on the Afghan mining ministry's website, including a report by the British Geological Survey (and there's more here). You can also take a look at the USGS's documentation of the airborne part of the survey here, including the full set of aerial photographs.

Nowhere have I found that $1 trillion figure mentioned, which Risen suggests was generated by a Pentagon task force seeking to help the Afghan government develop its resources (looking at thechart accompanying the article, though, it appears to be a straightforward tabulation of the total reserve figures for each mineral times current the current market price). According to Risen, that task force has begun prepping the mining ministry to start soliciting bids for mineral rights in the fall.

Don't get me wrong. This could be a great thing for Afghanistan, which certainly deserves a lucky break after the hell it's been through over the last three decades.

But I'm (a) skeptical of that $1 trillion figure; (b) skeptical of the timing of this story, given the bad news cycle, and (c) skeptical that Afghanistan can really figure out a way to develop these resources in a useful way. It's also worth noting, as Risen does, that it will take years to get any of this stuff out of the ground, not to mention enormous capital investment.

Moreover, before we get too excited about lithium and rare-earth metals and all that, Afghanistan could probably use some help with a much simpler resource: cement.

According to an article in the journal Industrial Minerals, "Afghanistan has the lowest cement production in the world at 2kg per capita; in neighbouring Pakistan it is 92kg per capita and in the UK it is 200kg per capita." Afghanistan's cement plants were built by a Czech company in the 1950s, and nobody's invested in them since the 1970s. Most of Afghanistan's cement is imported today, mainly from Pakistan and Iran. Apparently the mining ministry has been working to set upfour new plants, but they are only expected to meet about half the country's cement needs.

Why do I mention this? One of the smartest uses of development resources is also one of the simplest: building concrete floors. Last year, a team of Berkeley researchers found that "replacing dirt floors with cement appears to be at least as effective for health as nutritional supplements and as helpful for brain development as early childhood development programs." And guess what concrete's made of? Hint: it's not lithium.

UPDATE: Missed this Wall Street Journal story earlier. Money quote:

[T]he Mines Ministry has long been considered among Afghanistan's most corrupt government departments, and Western officials have repeatedly expressed reservations about the Afghan government awarding concessions for the country's major mineral deposits, fearful that corrupt officials would hand contracts to bidders who pay the biggest bribes -- not who are best suited to actually do the work.

It's kind of strange that so many progressives consistently protested the war in Iraq, but rather meekly backed off on even the idea of opposing this mess in Afghanistan -- I guess because it's Obama's war. That's why I'm heartened to see Bob Herbert continuing to speak out against it:

What’s happening in Afghanistan is not only tragic, it’s embarrassing. The American troops will fight, but the Afghan troops who are supposed to be their allies are a lost cause. The government of President Hamid Karzai is breathtakingly corrupt and incompetent — and widely unpopular to boot. And now, as The Times’s Dexter Filkins is reporting, the erratic Mr. Karzai seems to be giving up hope that the U.S. can prevail in the war and is making nice with the Taliban.

There is no overall game plan, no real strategy or coherent goals, to guide the fighting of U.S. forces. It’s just a mind-numbing, soul-chilling, body-destroying slog, month after month, year after pointless year. The 18-year-olds fighting (and, increasingly, dying) in Afghanistan now were just 9 or 10 when the World Trade Center and Pentagon were attacked in 2001.

Americans have zoned out on this war. They don’t even want to think about it. They don’t want their taxes raised to pay for it, even as they say in poll after poll that they are worried about budget deficits. The vast majority do not want their sons or daughters anywhere near Afghanistan.

Why in the world should the small percentage of the population that has volunteered for military service shoulder the entire burden of this hapless, endless effort? The truth is that top American officials do not believe the war can be won but do not know how to end it. So we get gibberish about empowering the unempowerable Afghan forces and rebuilding a hopelessly corrupt and incompetent civil society.

Our government leaders keep mouthing platitudes about objectives that are not achievable, which is a form of deception that should be unacceptable in a free society.

In announcing, during a speech at West Point in December, that 30,000 additional troops would be sent to Afghanistan, President Obama said: “As your commander in chief, I owe you a mission that is clearly defined and worthy of your service.”

That clearly defined mission never materialized.

Ultimately, the public is at fault for this catastrophe in Afghanistan, where more than 1,000 G.I.’s have now lost their lives. If we don’t have the courage as a people to fight and share in the sacrifices when our nation is at war, if we’re unwilling to seriously think about the war and hold our leaders accountable for the way it is conducted, if we’re not even willing to pay for it, then we should at least have the courage to pull our valiant forces out of it.

Exit Strategy? Walter in Denver

Just a reminder: Even justified foreign interventions can have unintended long term consequences.

Catching U.S. officials slightly off guard, Afghan President Hamid Karzai said yesterday he is seeking a long-term security partnership that could keep U.S. troops there indefinitely and make permanent the military relationship that began when U.S. forces invaded his country in 2001.

It will be hard to leave if the Afghan government wants us to stay.

One of my favorite sites is BagNewsNotes, which looks at media framing through the media's choices of visual images. This picture was not taken from a news site, but America.gov. What kind of subliminal messages are they sending to us with the use of this photo to discuss the meeting between Hillary Clinton and Hamid Karzai?

Bush's puppet. Afghanistan leader Karzai says he may consider joining the Taliban. No, really.

– Afghan President Hamid Karzai threatened over the weekend to quit the political process and join the Taliban if he continued to come under outside pressure to reform, several members of parliament said Monday.

Karzai made the unusual statement at a closed-door meeting Saturday with selected lawmakers — just days after kicking up a diplomatic controversy with remarks alleging foreigners were behind fraud in last year's disputed elections.

Lawmakers dismissed the latest comment as hyperbole, but it will add to the impression the president — who relies on tens of thousands of U.S. and NATO forces to fight the insurgency and prop up his government — is growing increasingly erratic and unable to exert authority without attacking his foreign backers.

"He said that 'if I come under foreign pressure, I might join the Taliban'," said Farooq Marenai, who represents the eastern province of Nangarhar.

"He said rebelling would change to resistance," Marenai said — apparently suggesting that the militant movement would then be redefined as one of resistance against a foreign occupation rather than a rebellion against an elected government.

Marenai said Karzai appeared nervous and repeatedly demanded to know why parliament last week had rejected legal reforms that would have strengthened the president's authority over the country's electoral institutions.

Two other lawmakers said Karzai twice raised the threat to join the insurgency.

The White House is not very happy at his remarks. I mean we're spilling a lot of blood and treasure at the expense of this war and the American public already hates it so what does he think he's accomplishing by saying this?

The lawmakers, who spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of political repercussions, said Karzai also dismissed concerns over possible damage his comments had caused to relations with the United States. He told them he had already explained himself in a telephone conversation Saturday with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton that came after the White House described his comments last week as troubling.

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said reports Karzai threatened to abandon the political process and join the Taliban insurgency if he continued to receive pressure from Western backers to reform his government are troubling.

"On behalf of the American people, we're frustrated with the remarks," Gibbs told reporters.

The lawmakers said they felt Karzai was pandering to hard-line or pro-Taliban members of parliament and had no real intention of joining the insurgency.

Peter Galbraith, the former US Ambassador to Afghanistan hinted that Karzai was partaking in Afghanistan's vast drug business.

Former U.N. envoy to Afghanistan Peter Galbraith on MSNBC's Daily Rundown this morning charged that Afghan President Hamid Karzai's "continued tirade raises questions about his mental stability." He then added, "In fact, some of the palace insiders say that he has a certain fondness for some of Afghanistan's most profitable exports." Afghanistan produces more than 90 percent of the world's opium from poppy -- used for heroin production.

He certainly is acting erratically. If you know anything about Afghanistan and their immense drug trade then you have to figure that a good portion of the people there are probably stoned out on drugs.

Spencer Ackerman, in tweet, says that Galbraith is not being serious:

Dear Entire Media Landscape: Peter Galbraith is not being serious re Karzai being on drugs. Read this int & calm down http://bit.ly/aziYoW

Have you ever had a friend or relative who was a junkie? You know what it's like, watching them go steadily downhill. You've heard the speeches about how they're going to move, get a new job and start over so many times, you can repeat it in your sleep. But eventually you understand that you're dealing with an addict, and you just have to detach and let the horrors play out - because there's not a damned thing you can do to stop it.

That's how I feel about this war. War is the needle in the arm of our national leadership:

KABUL -- Days after President Obama outlines his new war strategy in a speech Tuesday, as many as 9,000 Marines will begin final preparations to deploy to southern Afghanistan and renew an assault on a Taliban stronghold that slowed this year amid a troop shortage and political pressure from the Afghan government, senior U.S. officials said.

The extra Marines will be the first to move into the country as part of Obama's escalation of the eight-year-old war. They will double the size of the U.S. force in the southern province of Helmand and will provide a critical test for Afghan President Hamid Karzai's struggling government and Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy.

"The first troops out of the door are going to be Marines," Gen. James T. Conway, the Corps' top officer, told fellow Marines in Afghanistan on Saturday. "We've been leaning forward in anticipation of a decision. And we've got some pretty stiff fighting coming."

The Marines will be quickly followed by about 1,000 U.S. Army trainers. They will deploy as early as February to speed the growth of the Afghan army and police force, military officials said.

The new forces will not start moving until Obama outlines his new strategy in a speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y. The revised plan, which faces a war-weary and increasingly skeptical American public, is expected to call for 30,000 to 35,000 new troops in a phased deployment over the next 12 to 18 months.

The parceling-out of reinforcements is driven in part by Afghanistan's lack of infrastructure, which cannot immediately support a larger U.S. force. The phased approach will also allow the president to cancel some of the additional reinforcements if the counterinsurgency strategy advocated by McChrystal, the top U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan, does not show results or if the Karzai government does not meet goals for stamping out corruption and providing for the Afghan people, White House officials said.

Now, what do you suppose the odds are of that happening?

If this is real resistance, and not a choreographed dance to make himself look "strong," we might possibly (it's a long shot, I know) avoid sinking deeper into this Afghanistan quagmire:

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama does not plan to accept any of the Afghanistan war options presented by his national security team, pushing instead for revisions to clarify how and when U.S. troops would turn over responsibility to the Afghan government, a senior administration official said Wednesday.

That stance comes in the midst of forceful reservations about a possible troop buildup from the U.S. ambassador in Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, according to a second top administration official.

In strongly worded classified cables to Washington, Eikenberry said he had misgivings about sending in new troops while there are still so many questions about the leadership of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

Obama is still close to announcing his revamped war strategy — most likely shortly after he returns from a trip to Asia that ends on Nov. 19.

But the president raised questions at a war council meeting Wednesday that could alter the dynamic of both how many additional troops are sent to Afghanistan and what the timeline would be for their presence in the war zone, according to the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss Obama's thinking.

Military officials said Obama has asked for a rewrite before and resisted what one official called a one-way highway toward war commander Gen. Stanley McChrystal's recommendations for more troops. The sense that he was being rushed and railroaded has stiffened Obama's resolve to seek information and options beyond military planning, officials said, though a substantial troop increase is still likely.

BBC:

A panel probing fraud claims in the Afghan election has found Hamid Karzai did not gain enough valid votes for an outright win, the BBC understands.

Preliminary results from August's first round had placed Mr Karzai comfortably over the 50% plus one vote threshold needed to avoid a run-off.

But the BBC understands Mr Karzai's vote share has fallen below half, after a number of votes were ruled invalid.

Under poll rules, Mr Karzai now faces a runoff against rival Abdullah Abdullah.

The panel said it had found "clear and convincing evidence of fraud" at the polling stations, which were across the country.

It was not clear how Mr Karzai would respond to the ECC findings, amid reports of a possible legal challenge.

Initial results released last month had given him nearly 55% of votes, with former foreign minister Mr Abdullah on 28%.

The Afghan president has insisted he won the election outright, but EU observers have said as many as one in four votes cast were suspicious.

Sources have told the BBC that Mr Karzai is furious over the prospect of a second round.

It makes Rahm Emanuel's comment that we must know if we have a partner in Afghanistan before making a decision on troop escalation that much more pointed and the Republicans pressuring Pres. Obama to make a quicker decision regarding Afghanistan that much more ridiculous and reactionary.