First U.S. Official Resigns Over Afghan War

[LongWire]

Seriously doubt that he is the first, but okay................

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009...st-afghan-war/

First U.S. Official Resigns Over Afghan War
Senior diplomat in Afghanistan said he believes the war is simply fueling the insurgency

FOXNews.com
Tuesday, October 27, 2009

WASHINGTON -- A former Marine who fought in Iraq, joined the State Department after leaving the military and was a diplomat in a Taliban stronghold in Afghanistan has become the first U.S. official to resign in protest of the Afghan war, the Washington Post reported early Tuesday.

Matthew Hoh, who describes himself as "not some peacenik, pot-smoking hippie who wants everyone to be in love," said he believes the war is simply fueling the insurgency.

"I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan," Hoh wrote in his resignation letter, dated Sept. 10 but published early Tuesday. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end."

The move sent ripples all the way to the White House, the paper said, where officials immediately appealed for him to stay out of fear he could become a leading critic.

U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry brought him to Kabul and offered him a job on his senior embassy staff, but Hoh declined. He then flew home and met with Richard Holbrooke, the administration's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Holbrooke told the Post he disagreed that the war "wasn't worth the fight," but did agree with much of Hoh's analysis.

"We took his letter very seriously, because he was a good officer," Holbrooke said in an interview with the newspaper. "We all thought that given how serious his letter was, how much commitment there was, and his prior track record, we should pay close attention to him."

The revelation comes as President Obama pledged on Monday not to "rush the solemn decision" to send more troops to battle in Afghanistan as he weighs military options on what to do next in the troubled war.

The administration is debating whether to send tens of thousands more troops to the country, while the Afghan government is moving to hold a Nov. 7 runoff election between President Hamid Karzai and challenger Abdullah Abdullah. The runoff comes after complaints by international monitors of fraudulent voting in the first election.

ABC News, citing unnamed sources, reported Monday evening that Obama will likely announce his decision for Afghanistan between that nation's runoff presidential election on Nov. 7, and the president's departure for Tokyo, Japan, on Nov. 11.

"I won't risk your lives unless it is absolutely necessary," Obama told service men and women at Naval Air Station Jacksonville on Monday. He promised a "clear mission" with defined goals and the equipment needed to get the job done.

Obama, who is in the process of weighing options put forward by the Pentagon that include various levels of increased troops, spoke of the latest example of the dangers and sacrifices there -- helicopter crashes that killed 14 Americans in the deadliest day for the U.S. mission in Afghanistan in more than four years.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

[Sigaba]

The move sent ripples all the way to the White House, the paper said, where officials immediately appealed for him to stay out of fear he could become a leading critic.

Wow.

If this assessment is accurate, it speaks volumes to the White House's approach to learning from those who may have useful information and to leading. It also suggests that a reconsideration of the utility of VP Cheney's participation in the public debate over OEF is in order.

In the event that the current administration attempts to pressure the Washington Post to remove Mr. Hon's resignation letter, a copy is attached to this post.

[Richard]

...we continue to secure and bolster a failing state, while encouraging an ideology and system of government unknown and unwanted by its people.

A dangerous dilemma - not only for Afghanistan, but for the free world - and one I doubt will be corrected by the up-coming 7 Nov elections.

Richard

[nmap]

"We are spending ourselves into oblivion" a very talented and intelligent commander, one of America's best, briefs every visitor, staff delegation and senior officer. We are mortgaging our Nation's economy on a war, which, even with increased commitment, will remain a draw for years to come. Success and victory, whatever they may be, will be realized not in years, after billions more spent, but in decades and generations. The United States does not enjoy a national treasury for such success and victory.

Mr. Hoh gives voice to my concern. I suspect the administration should reflect on the possibility that economic developments could compel a hasty withdrawal. Such a possibility might have adverse consequences in Pakistan, with all that implies.

[SF-TX]

The reasons he states for resigning seem to support the proposed change in our Afghanistan strategy offered by Major Gant in 'One Tribe at a Time.'

[Marina]

Minor quibble. Mr. Hoh is not a Foreign Service Officer. He was four months in on a one-year contract as a direct-hire for DoS in Astan. The WaPo headline was eye-catching but untrue. Hoh didn't end a career in the FS to protest policy. He will likely advance his future career prospects - outside the State Dept - by speaking truth to power.

Hoh is a hero for his service as a former Marine captain with combat experience in Iraq.

His arguments support Obama's likely strategy to get out of Dodge. And Kerry-Lugar bill for mammoth civilian security assistance to Pakistan. If only the Pak military didn't so publicly resent strings attached.

I predict Mr. Hoh will soon make the rounds on cable and become a voice for the new Obama strategy.

[SF-TX]

Originally Posted by Marina

Minor quibble. Mr. Hoh is not a Foreign Service Officer. He was four months in on a one-year contract as a direct-hire for DoS in Astan.

So, you are calling Mr. Hoh a liar?

From his resignation letter:

It is with great regret and disappointment I submit my resignation from my
appointment as a Political Officer in the Foreign Service and my post as the Senior Civilian Representative for the US. Government in Zabul Province.

[Dozer523]

I would be interested in hearing the thoughts of the Ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry. I think he might have some interesting thoughts on the subject of "how goes Afghanistan". He was the former Commanding General of Combined Forces Command - Afghanistan (CFC-A); I find his silence particularly deafening.

In 2006 - 07 his position was we are not at war in Afghanistan, we are not an occupying force, we are providing security.

[Richard]

Notes from today's DOS Daily Press Briefing:

Ian Kelly, Department Spokesman
Daily Press Briefing
Washington, DC, October 27, 2009

QUESTION: Nick Spicer, Al Jazeera. Could I ask a question about the now rather public resignation of Matthew Hoh, who is --

MR. KELLY: Is there anything else on Honduras? Did you have something on --

QUESTION: Yeah, I do. Do you still think a legitimate election is possible given that it is only a month away?

MR. KELLY: Well, I think the clock is ticking. I think, in order for it to be seen as legitimate and for the authorities down there to conduct a completely open and transparent electoral process, that there needs to be some time, and this is precisely why we see some urgency in this.

So – yes.

QUESTION: Can I just – now pick up the question about – the resignation of Matthew Hoh, who was working for the State Department in Afghanistan and has made public a somewhat depressing three-page letter about the reasons for his resignation, and he talks about his loss of understanding and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States presence there.

Is this – how does the State Department view this? Is this an embarrassment of sorts, the fact that it’s become so public? It’s on the front page of the Post today.

MR. KELLY: Well, first of all, we admire Mr. Hoh. We respect the sacrifice that he’s made for his country, both in Iraq and signing up to join our effort in Afghanistan. We take his opinions very seriously. Senior officials on the ground in Afghanistan and here in Washington have talked to him, have heard him out. We respect his right to dissent. This is an old and respected tradition in the Foreign Service, that Foreign Service personnel have the right to express their dissent.

Just to give you a little more background on his affiliation with the State Department, he signed on for a limited appointment. It is a non-career appointment. He signed on March 29th of this year and his employment lasted up until September 28. He submitted his letter of resignation a few weeks before that. He was signed on as a political officer in a Provincial Reconstruction Team in Afghanistan in Zabul. And his role as a PRT political officer was to monitor and report on political and economic developments in his province.

As I say, we take his point of view very seriously. But we continue to believe that we are on track to achieving the goal that the President has set before us, and that’s – you heard Deputy Secretary Lew lay out some of those objectives: improving Afghan governance; providing security, infrastructure, jobs, basically giving the Afghan people an alternative to the very negative vision of the Taliban and al-Qaida. And this is the strategy, and as I say, we believe we're on track reaching the goals. Kirit.

QUESTION: Just a couple of things from the article about his meeting with Eikenberry and with Holbrooke. Could you tell us a little more about this, and what happened in those meetings?


MR. KELLY: Well, I think he was upfront with his own chain of command, and had the opportunity to discuss with his immediate boss who is the supervisor of the PRTs. And he also talked to the Deputy Chief of Mission out there, Mr. Frank Ricciardone. And it was very much an open and transparent process. As I say, we value his service, we value his background and his skills. This is why we appointed him to this limited non-career appointment to be a political officer, to be our eyes and ears on the ground in Zabul. In the end, he made his own decision, that he decided to resign, and we respect that.

QUESTION: Do you wish he hadn’t gone public with it?

MR. KELLY: I'm sorry?

QUESTION: Do you wish he had not gone public with that?

MR. KELLY: It’s really his decision. I mean, we don’t – it was a – obviously, a very personal decision, and I think he even told the post that it was a very painful decision. I’m sure it was, but we respect his right to act on his views.

QUESTION: So his tour – his job would have ended on March 29th of 2010?

MR. KELLY: It was a one-year appointment, yeah.

QUESTION: That would have ended on March 29, 2010?

MR. KELLY: It was supposed to end next March, yeah.

QUESTION: And then what would have happened?

MR. KELLY: At that point, he would have – his employment would have been over with the State Department. These appointments can be extended as well. I – there have been some appointments that have been extended up to 18 months, I know.

QUESTION: And the – okay, but then that’s it?

MR. KELLY: And that’s it. Yeah, that’s it.

QUESTION: So there –

MR. KELLY: He signs an agreement that he’ll – that he agrees to stay for a year and then his employment ends.

QUESTION: So that you can’t re-up it at that point.

MR. KELLY: Oh, I said we can extend him, but he has no – it’s a non-career appointment. So he doesn’t have any re-employment rights, per se. Of course, he can compete for other jobs.

QUESTION: Then I’m not – I’m unclear as to how he actually fits into the Foreign Service.

MR. KELLY: It’s – there is a provision of the Foreign Service Act that gives the Secretary the right to designate certain positions as limited with a time certain end date in order to fill positions that have not been filled through the normal Foreign Service process. And so this was one of them. We have, I think a total in the world, about 16 of these type appointments. It’s not – it’s fairly rare.

QUESTION: Is that the same thing as the 3161 or is that different?

MR. KELLY: No, that’s different.

QUESTION: It’s different, right?

MR. KELLY: I don’t know all the ins and outs of 3161. I think that’s more of a Civil – I think that’s for Civil Service appointments.

QUESTION: So this is under Foreign Service, but he is not considered --

MR. KELLY: This is under Foreign Service.

QUESTION: -- a Foreign Service officer, he’s not commissioned as a Foreign Service officer?

MR. KELLY: He’s not commissioned as a Foreign Service officer, yeah.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2009/oct/130972.htm

And so it goes...

Richard's $.02

[Dozer523]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

So, you are calling Mr. Hoh a liar?

Easy does it, Tex. Calling him a limited, non-career appointment (might be extended but probably not); a political officer, eyes and ears on the ground in Zabul. But probably not a policy maker, maybe not even a policy implementor. Observer/reporter?

[SF-TX]

Originally Posted by Dozer523

Easy does it, Tex. Calling him a limited, non-career appointment (might be extended but probably not); a political officer, eyes and ears on the ground in Zabul. But probably not a policy maker, maybe not even a policy implementor. Observer/reporter?

Now, we really are quibbling. He either is or is not a Political Officer in the Foreign Service. It appears to me that the complaint is that he is not a career Foreign Service Officer. He was only appointed to a one-year term.

Foreign Service Officers, also known as Foreign Service Generalists, follow one of five career tracks. If you're interested in becoming a Foreign Service Officer, you'll first need to select the track you want to pursue from one of the following:

* Consular: Consular Officers protect Americans abroad and strengthen U.S. border security
* Economic: Economic Officers promote economic partnerships, development, and fair trade
* Management: Management Officers run our embassies and make American diplomacy work
* Political: Political Officers analyze political events
* Public Diplomacy: Public Diplomacy Officers explain American values and policies

http://careers.state.gov/officer/index.html

[Richard]

The guy was a temp hire and not a career FSO - BIG difference in position, status, assignments, and influence.

Having been in an embassy, I'd bet dollars to doughnuts this is necessary because the DOS can't get enough of the Foggy Bottom 'striped pants' set to take the assignments under such 'hardship' conditions.

And so it goes...

Richard's $.02

[The Reaper]

I have to agree, the media has promoted Mr. Hoh far beyond reality.

He was a former Marine Captain and a DoS contractor, not a "senior State Department official."

TR

[Dozer523]

Originally Posted by SF-TX

Now, we really are quibbling. He either is or is not a Political Officer in the Foreign Service. It appears to me that the complaint is that he is not a career Foreign Service Officer. He was only appointed to a one-year term.

O - kay. . .
Since you asked . . . I'll tell you what I really think.

A former Marine I'm not real crazy about Marines operating in a COIN environment. Marines do not train for COIN and IMO the USMC does not attract the kinds of people who embrace the underlying precepts of COIN.who fought in Iraq, IMO it has been shown time and time again that the lessons learned in Iraq do not apply to Afghanistan and it is human nature that people that have been in one theater are prone to use what they know instead of/before they can learn/adapt to a new environment. joined the State Department after leaving the military which means he quit the USMC as a junior officer forgoing contibuting to the effort from that direction and was a diplomat in a broad interpretation of the word, just as all Army personnel are Soldiers whether you are an Infantryman or a Graphic Illustrator in a Taliban stronghold in Afghanistan has become the first U.S. official to resign in protest took a one year job in March, pulled the plug less then six months later after serving in two different provinces of the Afghan war, the Washington Post reported based on a personal letter Hoh wrote but the WP got from. . . ? Hoh! Tuesday.

Matthew Hoh, who describes himself as "not some peacenik, pot-smoking hippie who wants everyone to be in love," said he believes the war is simply fueling the insurgency. I thought the Insurgency was fueling the war.

"I have lost understanding of and confidence in the strategic purposes of the United States' presence in Afghanistan," Hoh wrote in his resignation letter, dated Sept. 10 but published early Tuesday. "I have doubts and reservations about our current strategy and planned future strategy, but my resignation is based not upon how we are pursuing this war, but why and to what end." The why and to what end" is pretty fundamental, and if he doesn't understand it; if his leaders -- to include the Ambassador cannot enlighten him, it appears his resignation is a wise choice.

The move sent ripples all the way to the White House, the paper said, where officials immediately appealed for him according to the paper to stay out of fear according to the paper he could become a leading critic. Again, according to the paper according to an interview with Hoh. Based on his time in Iraq and 8 months as a contractor. . . right.
U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry brought him to Kabul and offered him a job on his senior embassy staff, At best, sounds like a mobility kill and being on senior staff isn't always being a senior staffer but Hoh declined. He then flew home and met with Richard Holbrooke, the administration's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan. I wonder if they reviewed the provisions of his Non-Disclosure Agreement?

Sorry, Mister Hoh sounds like a guy who has been plagued by doubts and reservations about the way a lot of things were, are, might be; quits; and then -- with nothing better to do -- trys to get his full fifteen minutes of fame. He is not worth making a fuss over. $.02

[LarryW]

His arguments support Obama's likely strategy to get out of Dodge. And Kerry-Lugar bill for mammoth civilian security assistance to Pakistan. If only the Pak military didn't so publicly resent strings attached.

I predict Mr. Hoh will soon make the rounds on cable and become a voice for the new Obama strategy.

When first hearing this news it sounded like John Kerry, Jr. Hoh's letter is an articulate summary of what are proported to be his own observations.

I have to agree, the media has promoted Mr. Hoh far beyond reality.

Something tells me this is the other risk. I see a large wooden horse at the gates.

Expect Mr. Hoh to present his new book soon. Does anyone know what his major was in college? Poly-Sci? International Studies? Communications? Curious...