One of the problems in a world of instantaneous communication is that it is no longer possible to tailor one's comments to a specific audience without the statement coming to the attention of another audience with different motivations and objectives.
Afghan President Hamid Karzai decided to make some tough statements against the NATO forces whose airstrikes had cause collateral damage and killed Afghan civilians, although far less than the Taliban.
"I warn NATO forces that a repeat of airstrikes on the houses of Afghanistan's people will not be allowed," Karzai said at a news conference at the presidential palace. "The people of Afghanistan will not allow this to happen anymore, and there is no excuse for such strikes."
The Afghan president also claimed that the NATO forces were increasingly resembling an occupying power and the "Afghan people know how to deal with that", an allusion that the Afghans could drive out NATO just as they did the British and the Russians.
Obviously Karzai's government is not yet ready to take on the Taliban insurgency by itself although he has received advice that the Chinese could prove more reliable allies than the Americans. It was important for the Afghan leader to create daylight between himself and the NATO forces, because one of the most effective arguments of the Taliban is that Karzai is an American puppet.
It is also true that with General David Petraeus running things, there is a much heavier use of air power and drones in Afghanistan. This contrasts with the policy of the former commander General Stanley McChrysta,l who tried to avoid overreliance on air power, fearing mass civilian casualties could make the effort counterproductive and play into the hands of the insurgency.
The American Secretary of Defense Robert Gates tried to play down the statements and even displayed a sense of empathy “I think President Karzai is reflecting the pain and suffering that the Afghan people have had to endure." Gates also expressed his confidence that the Afghans knew who their true friends were.
Karzai's remarks have already played into the hands of Americans and British who would like to disengage from Afghanistan. Some would even claim that being ejected by Karzai would be a favor, as then the result would be on his head and even a return of the Taliban would not be seen as a western defeat.
The coalition calling for disengagement is growing and becoming bipartisan. Forces in the Obama administration are already leaking to the Washington Post that the war's $113 billion price tag is too onerous for the United States. The anonymous senior official quoted by the Post said that it was no longer a question of the strategy working but of whether the war was affordable.
On the other side of the spectrum, former Alaska governor and Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, claimed that if the Afghan president was serious, then a withdrawal of forces was the inevitable conclusion.
"If President Karzai continues with these public ultimatums, we must consider our options about the immediate future of U.S. troops in his country," Palin said. "If he actually follows through on his claim that Afghan forces will take 'unilateral action' against NATO forces who conduct such air raids to take out terrorists and terrorist positions, that should result in the immediate withdrawal of U.S. forces from Afghanistan and the suspension of U.S. aid."
While one can understand the Afghan president's motives is statements played into the hands of skeptics about the war