A fascinating bit of work. In "And Hate Begat Hate" in today's New York Times, we learn that hatred for Americans is on the rise in Afghanistan and Pakistan. A phenomenon that can only mean one thing. George W. Bush must still be in charge of American foreign policy. Only he can engender hatred in foreign lands, right? Isn't that what they're always telling us? Weren't things supposed to be all rosy when the Democrats took charge?
So much for that.
One aspect to this story I find curious, though. It comes in this sentence:
"Since the death last year of Richard C. Holbrooke, who was devoted to creating a political strategy to underpin American policy-making, but whom President Obama seemed to ignore, there has been no American political strategy for Pakistan or Afghanistan."
Who's left out of that Holbrook-to-Obama equation? Who's responsible for developing and implementing American foreign policy? Richard Holbrook?
She's always gotten a pass. Always.
Why is that?