Subscribe to Print Edition | Wed., April 01, 2009 Nisan 7, 5769 | | Israel Time: 16:03 (EST+7)
Haaretz israel news English
web haaretz.com
Haaretz Toolbar
Diplomacy
Defense Jewish World Opinion National
Print Edition
Car Rental
Books Haaretz Magazine Business Real Estate Joy of Giving Travel Week's End Anglo File
Last update - 16:03 01/04/2009
'Israel could do more to improve its image'
By Natasha Mozgovaya, Haaretz Correspondent
Tags: israel news, Zalmay Khalilzad 
Zalmay Khalilzad tells Haaretz that Iran is seeking influence in Afghanistan to gain leverage over U.S.

When asked about rumors that he may run for a president of Afghanistan, Dr. Zalmay Khalilzad bursts into laughter.

That same contagious laughter and the hand he always extended for a handshake, a hug or a friendly pat on the back bought him many friends during his tenure as American envoy to the United Nations, even among the representatives of countries that despised the Bush administration.

"I thought that the previous rumors were of me becoming an Emperor of Iraq," he says, sitting in his new office at the Center for Strategic & International Studies (CSIS), where he holds position as counselor.
Advertisement
"This idea keeps popping up. I have a soft spot for Afghanistan, because I was born there and spent my childhood there, but I'm not running for president of Afghanistan. I'm not saying it's not an important position, but I'm not doing it. But I will always do what I can to help."

Over the last decade, Khalilzad held three of the toughest jobs in American diplomacy, serving as ambassador to Afghanistan, Iraq and the United Nations, before stepping down in January to be succeeded by Dr. Susan Rice.

Israel quite lost its faith in the UN as a positive force in its dealing of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Is there a way to improve this, or is it a lost cause?

"There have been periods when the relations have been quite constructive, but sometimes, especially at the General Assembly, Israel has not been given fair treatment. I know that Israel sometimes feels that UN is not as rigorous and critical of some of the others as Hezbollah activity or Syrian activity, and sometimes we share it, but it will be equally true that if they would like it to do more, it doesn't mean they wouldn't like it to do it at all.

"The UN has an important role in implementation of the Israel-Lebanon resolution. Israel thinks that they are not as rigorous as they maybe should be, but would Israel prefer them not being there at all?

"There were moments when I felt that Israel could do a little more. For example I thought that there was so much bad publicity, and I got under pressure when I was trying to explain or defend Israel's action, when Israel refused to give the maps for cluster bomb munitions that were used in Lebanon. I used to say to my Israeli friends, that it makes it very hard for me to sit there and the opponents say. 'kids are dying in Lebanon, and UN says Israel won't give information about it.'

"We need to focus on a strategic thing. It doesn't justify that Hezbollah is getting arms from Syria, smuggling of arms to the south and so on. I've always been very strong in taking them to task, but it makes difficult when you lose a moral argument with the cluster bomb munitions' maps, or the overflights that can be too frequent and very aggressive. If the purpose was intelligence, maybe you could do it from higher altitude.

"We've always worked very closely with the Israeli delegation, and had excellent relations with both ambassadors, but sometimes even allies can differ on tactical issues."

There were quite different versions on what happened in UN Security Council, when the U.S. abstained from voting on Gaza resolution.

"We came to conclusion that the military operation in Gaza reached a point where there has to be a cease-fire, it became counterproductive in terms of our broader interest which we think coincide with Israel's interest.

"Extremists were benefiting from it worldwide. With the U.S. preventing Security Council from acting, a lot of our friends who play a positive role in region, came under unacceptable level of pressure from bottom up if another Friday prayer was to be held with the bombings going on.

"So we thought that this resolution that was balanced in my point of view, denounced terrorism and implied clearly that Hamas was responsible for what happened by not extending the period of calm.

"The judgment was made at a very high level that the Arabs were showing unusual flexibility in accepting the denunciation of terror and blaming Hamas. Israel wanted us perhaps to veto it, and out of respect for the Israeli sensitivity the President decided to abstain. It went through, and we made a statement supporting most of its content."

When you came to the UN, America's standing was in some cases no better than Israel's - and President Ahmadinejad, meanwhile, was getting his applause.

"That was embarrassment to the UN, but that was a General Assembly. Every country is equal, but their role is mostly advisory. The mandatory role of the UN is in the Security Council. And Iran never scored a success during the period that I was there. So there is a tradition that any head of state can come and speak, sometimes they say outrageous things, like Hugo Chavez who spoke against President Bush. But Iran, that wanted to be a member of the Security Council, lost by a landslide when it mattered. Iran wanted not to be criticized for human rights violations - they lost.

"The General Assembly was designed so anyone could speak. It's the big debating society, but when it comes to decisions, we work hard to explain our positions.

"I think the U.S. is a most important player in the UN. People mostly want to engage with us, they like to see the American ambassador talk to them, work with them. My style was not to assert, but to explain, to work, to build coalition, to make sure I always brought Israel on.

"Sometimes they were skeptical, but I think that it was a very effective approach. Obviously, I couldn't work with Iran, but certainly you say hello when you're in a close setting. People are polite, even Israelis say hello to their counterparts from theregion, and people sometimes reciprocate and sometimes they don't. It depends on how polite and civil you are."

Of the three ambassor posts Khalilzad held, it was Afghanistan - where he served as U.S. presidential envoy after the collapse of the Taliban regime - which he saw as the most challenging experience.

"We had to take with us our own towel, medicine, toilet paper, our own sleeping bags, and to sleep on the floor of the office," recalls Khalilzad.

"In fact, when the current Vice President Joe Biden came there as a senator, he had to sleep on the floor, too. We had only two operational bathrooms for over a hundred people. One was in a main building, the other was in a basement in another part of the embassy, so in the morning there would be a long line waiting to use the facilities."

"There was no plan to go to Afghanistan on the part of the United States, it all happened after the 9/11 attacks," he says. "And it happened very quickly, so we had to deal with the situation we found ourselves in after the fall of the Taliban regime and to go with what was available. Later on, when I went there as an ambassador, we put around trailers for residence, big metal containers, and I had double container. So I couldn't complain. Later we built two nice buildings, but these became operational after I left."

Khalilzad may not fully approve of the some of the new U.S. administration's first steps, in particular its hints that the current Afghan president is ineffective as a leader, but he is cautious with his criticism.

"I think that President [Barack] Obama's message to the Islamic world was well received," says Khalilzad. "He explained that we want a mutual respect, to show empathy, talking about his own family having Muslims. On the symbolic level it made an impression."

"Of course, there is a substance of politics and that will have to come. But the fact that an African-American with some Muslim heritage was elected, I think it in itself had a positive impact on American image, it demonstrated to the world that America is true to its values," he adds.

"I think there is a period of honeymoon in many parts of the world, because many people did not genuinely believe that would happen. It's a so-called meritocracy and universal nation made of all kinds of people. It has been a big public affairs gain for the U.S. around the world. But it takes time for the new administration to find its bearings, and some could raise questions about some of their statements, or leaks."

Do you believe that Afghanistan can have an effective central government?

"For a long time, Afghanistan was a functioning state, looking from 1930 to 1978. The national institutions, the army, the police, courts, national education system were functioning. Girls were going to school. It was a modernizing, relatively open state.

"People from India used to go to Kabul for shopping, because you could get there stuff from Russia, from Europe, from America. It was an open market. You had visitors from all over the world. Pakistanis used to come to Kabul to see Indian movies because they were banned in their country, and Kabul was a relatively small, but nice town at these days. So the image of Afghanistan, that they've never had a government, that there always was a bunch of tribes fighting each other is incorrect."

So what might the new strategy be?

"I believe that the policy review is not finished yet, but they recognized the interconnection between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Even when I was an ambassador in Kabul, I used to raise those issues of sanctuaries, from which terrorists came across the border, and this problem emphasizing this linkage is a first step.

"But some of the problems coming out of Afghanistan can't be dealt with without functioning central government. The reason the Taliban gained the influence, because people were tired of these warlords fighting each other. These warlords destroyed Kabul, not the Soviets.

"When Soviets left, began the fighting over control, and the school I went to in Kabul was totally destroyed. It was one of the sad days of my life, when I went back to see that my school wasn't standing anymore or the home that I lived was no longer there. In anarchy, you leave home and don't know if you'll come back, and that's why people initially accepted Taliban that promised to bring order.

"People prefer even Sharia draconian backward order to anarchy, because there is predictability. I don't think the president himself is dealing with it, but people on the lower levels are checking different ideas. But to deal with the warlords, I don't think it will work."

What about the idea of engaging with the 'moderate elements of the Taliban'?

"My sense will be that you have first to get your house in order. When you're weak, your enemies are not going to help you solve the problems, they are only going to take advantage of them. Once Afghanistan is on a better footing and they have no sanctuaries in Pakistan, reconciliation issues will be easier. But if you go there now, they will say: 'You have to change your constitution, it's too secular; you should limit women's rights, you should have no foreign forces.'

"That's not reconciliation, and I'm not in favor of that. Don't mislead yourself into thinking that the deal can be made with Taliban as a whole while your circumstances are as difficult as they are."

So will [deploying] more troops help reverse the dynamics of this war?

"To protect a population, to counter insurgency, you need more troops. It will be better if there were more Afghans troops, but Afghanistan is so poor that the budget cannot support too many.

"When I came there, all they could generate by themselves was $200 million dollars of government taxes collection - the whole country. Now it's come close to $1 billion, which is a lot, given where they were, but it's not much given the normal standard for the big army.

"So until the Afghan economy can pick up, the world has to pay for a bigger Afghan force, so there won't be a need for a big foreign presence. But in the short time, since it takes time to build the Afghan force, it requires more foreign troops to do the job.

"But it's only a part of the work, a comprehensive approach is needed. I got reports that there is so much unemployment among the young people in Kabul, that when people go for the day work, 60 percent don't find a job by 1 P.M. and some are so desperate they offer their work just to be fed. And when you have an insurgency, that has money from drugs, from foreigners, they can recruit you easily, when you're desperate and cannot support your family. So we need to look at how to deal with the economic situation.

"There is as well a problem with governance and justice. [Afghan] President [Hamid] Karzai needs to do better and the government needs to do better. There is no real coordination of the effort, and that needs to be addressed. And then you have to deal with the regional issues.

"As long as you have people coming across the border - your country [Israel] has experienced it - they are cheap to rent and they can be manipulated.

"There is also an Iranian dimension. In order to get leverage over the U.S., they are heading into difficulties in Afghanistan. Not that they like Taliban.

"Taliban are Sunni insurgents, and there is a real fault line between them. But in order to get leverage over U.S., to show that we [the Americans] can't solve Afghanistan or Pakistan, or Palestine and Israel, or Iraq or Lebanon issues without them, they use their proxies so we will recognize them and deal with them as a regional influence."

Some analysts are saying that you need to recognize Iranian ambitions in order to contain them.

"In my view, it is absolutely possible to come to terms with an Iran that has a reasonable definition of its national interest as a state. But I think it will be harder to come to terms with Iran that defines itself as a revolution rather than a state, as a hegemonic power, as a nuclear power.

"We and others have too many interests to allow that. And at the same time, Iran as a nuclear state will have all kinds of consequences, some of which will be very difficult. Maybe the prices of oil will produce a more balanced definition of those interests, but I'm not counting on that.

"The nuclear bomb will have a huge impact. The region is already very combustible, and if you add the nuclear dimension to it, how will the Egyptians, the Turks react? You get more nervous than you might if it was a different Iran, than this one, talking about destroying a sovereign state, Iran with links to the problem of extremism and terror. It's one of the biggest challenges facing the world."

So where you start dealing with this mess? Some say the key lies with the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, others [say] that you must first detach Syria from Iran.

"You start wherever you can. There is no question that the Arab-Israeli conflict is a big source of problems in the region. And as a principle, it's not a bad idea to separate your enemies one from another. It's what we did between China and Russia at one time. When China has shown an interest to separate, we were smart enough to respond and facilitate that move.

"I'm not in government so I don't know what the Syrians are signaling vis-a-vis Iran, but in the very nature of the regimes in Syria and Iran, you cannot expect a huge progress very quickly. But I think some tactical flexibility is prudent. You don't want to take everybody on at the same time, even if you?re the most powerful country in the world."

Do you believe that Iraq in 18 months from now will be stable enough so the situation won't deteriorate again?

"I'm cautiously optimistic. There is of course fragility to the situation, the oil and gas issues are unresolved, there hasn't been an agreement, and there is a draft.

"Some border issues between different provinces, the problems of the center and the regions. But Iraqi security institutions are performing better and the improved security leads to more economical activity. If the current trend holds, the next year will be the year of reconstruction in Iraq, and Iraq is about to shape the future of this region. It?s a very important and rich country; it can shift a balance of power in the region. And it's still the only country in the world that can produce 6 million barrels of oil a day. That can affect the world economy."

Do you think Osama Bin-Laden is still the biggest threat to the U.S.?

"It's sort of unfinished business with him. It's not satisfying to have him still not captured or killed. But the level of threat he poses is another story."

You probably don't feel U.S. is losing its influence that some call monopoly.

"We never had a monopoly. We were the preeminent power after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and with all the problems we have, America in its weakest is stronger than anyone else.

"I think in the future, America will still be the single most powerful country in the world, but our role increasingly will be how to build coalitions and lead them. We are the most effective in building coalitions when we want to. It's cheaper. And it makes it easier politically at home and abroad. But when we have to, we are able to act alone."
Bookmark to del.icio.us  
 
On to you, Netanyahu
As new coalition sworn in, Netanyahu pledges to seek lasting peace with Arab world.
Olmert's legacy
Olmert's 39 months in office were characterized by military crises, decisions to use force.
  1.   "Israel could do more to improve its image ..." 22:53  |  Andreas 18/03/09
  2.   America`s Image? 06:03  |  bob 19/03/09
  3.   ex-US envoy to UN 10:08  |  Riva RubinTel Aviv 20/03/09
  4.   Setting Double Standards for U.S. and Israel actions,doesn`t help 15:15  |  Susanna/shoshana 20/03/09
  5.   Ex envoy 23:58  |  Rob 21/03/09
 Haaretz Hot Topics
Air strike in Sudan
Israel 2009 election results: Voter breakdown
Conflict in Gaza
Israel vs. Hamas
Iran: Nuclear and regional ambitions
More Headlines
16:02 Lieberman: Israel not bound by Annapolis commitments
15:42 Livni on new government: I'll back what's right, attack what's wrong
13:03 Abbas urges U.S., world to pressure Netanyahu on peace
09:28 Aluf Benn / Will Netanyahu attack Iran?
14:06 Netanyahu government / Who's who in the new cabinet
13:28 IN PICTURES / Netanyahu government is sworn in
15:24 All private flights to Israel to now require anti-hijacking system
11:26 IDF raps soldiers for images of dead Palestinian babies on t-shirts
11:13 WATCH: Daily news round-up from Israel
15:56 Blair: 'There is no alternative to a two-state solution'
05:46 Haaretz poll: 54% of public dissatisfied with new government
03:42 UN: 70% of Palestinian youth oppose violence to resolve conflict with Israel
03:29 Netanyahu government / No sense of democracy in action
04:53 Netanyahu's first crisis / Who gets top security clearance
11:20 Sharp rise in number of reports of soldiers harming Palestinian civilians
06:03 Northern farmers learning Thai to better communicate with their workers
Previous Editions
Special Offers
Advertisement
Spring Specials-Dan Hotels
Jerusalem from 179$. Tel-Aviv from 223$. Herzliya from 336$
Dead Sea Skin Care
Quality cosmetics from the Dead Sea. Coupon code HAARETZ for 12% off!
Camp Kimama Israel 2009
The best place for your children this summer
Eldan Rent a Car
Israel's leading car rental company offers you a 20% discount on online reservations
Jewish Singles Personal Ads
Find the love of your life on JDate.com
Junkyard
Junk a car - get free towing nationwide and a tax-deductible receipt
Home | TV | Print Edition | Diplomacy | Opinion | Arts & Leisure | Sports | Jewish World | | Israel 2009 election results
Site rules | Makom: Engaging on Israel | Search engine marketing
Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, offers real-time breaking news, opinions and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.
© Copyright  Haaretz. All rights reserved