Eye rolls are the usual response when Karzai's name comes up in official circles in Washington - where the Afghan leader was once feted as a silk robed savior but is now mocked as an erratic Machiavel.
In his latest mercurial move, Karzai is refusing to sign a painstakingly negotiated bilateral security agreement (BSA) with the United States, setting rules for American soldiers in a post-2014, post-combat force that would train Afghan troops and counter terrorism.
Washington warns that unless Karzai relents before the end of the year, there will be no option but to plan a full US exit that would put Afghanistan at risk of a Taliban resurgence and choke off billions of dollars of military aid.
Karzai, who openly mistrusts Washington, says it should be up to the next president to sign the BSA. But since the coming election is in April - US military planners say they would not have time to prepare a post-2014 force that could stretch to 15,000 troops.
Karzai has nursed a long grudge against Barack Obama's White House, perhaps unhappy that his frequent contact with ex-president George W Bush was not replicated by his successor.
He has also railed against US military tactics, civilian deaths and drone strikes through the 12-year war.
But patience for Karzai in Washington, always endangered, is almost extinct.
Obama sent National Security Advisor Susan Rice to read the riot act to Karzai last week - but she returned only with new conditions - including a demand for no operations by foreign troops in residential areas.
Karzai is now accusing the United States of halting fuel and supplies to Afghan troops to force his hand - a charge NATO denies.
Many observers here believe that Karzai is motivated by a desire to exercise his own political leverage and to preserve his own power in the run-up to elections.
Washington is meanwhile loathe to let the BSA, already endorsed by a loya jirga of Afghan tribal elders, become an election issue.
But few observers are surprised that best laid plans are once more being disrupted by Karzai and former officials who have dealt with him are betraying frustration that the administration is struggling to keep private.
"President Karzai should go ahead and sign the agreement," said Tom Donilon, who until August was Obama's National Security Advisor told ABC News, branding the Afghan leader's antics as "reckless."
Former CIA Chief and National Security Agency boss Michael Hayden told Fox News Sunday that Karzai's gambit was a "temper tantrum" while warning that tough US rhetoric would not work.
Officials in the White House and the Pentagon are clear about what further delays could mean.
"We'd like to see the BSA signed as soon as possible - certainly by the end of this year," said Colonel Steven Warren, a Pentagon spokesman.
"If it's not signed very quickly, we will be forced to begin planning for an Afghanistan that has no US presence after 2014," said Warren.
Such an outcome would be unpalatable for Washington; it would risk a collapse of still fragile Afghan forces; it could open the door for a resurgence of the Taliban, and forces like al Qaeda which the war was launched in 2001 to quell.
A total withdrawal would also leave Obama with the question of whether he squandered the sacrifice of nearly 2,300 US troops in Afghanistan. It could also condemn the country to the same post-US torment as Iraq.
But Obama is also adamant that there will be no troops left in Afghanistan if they are not offered the legal protections that the BSA provides - and there remains a suspicion that some officials would welcome the chance to wash their hands of Afghanistan.
A delay in the US-Afghan BSA is also problematic for US NATO partners who must conclude their own status of forces agreements with Karzai.
Many analysts believe that Karzai will not ultimately allow his nation to be left alone to its fate and believe he will sign in the end.
One option may be just to wait Karzai out, said Michael O'Hanlon, a senior military analyst at the Brookings Institution.
"The better part of wisdom here is just to relax, time will make it a lot easier," O'Hanlon said, arguing that the true answer to the conundrum was to stress the long-term interests of the Afghan people and not Karzai's personal pique.
Caroline Wadhams, of the Center for American Progress, just back from Afghanistan, suggested Karzai had miscalculated his nation's strategic importance to Washington - and convinced himself that Obama would make further concessions because Washington is desperate to stay.
"It is not clear what he wants. I don't know how you negotiate with him," she said, adding that Washington needed to convince Karzai, "this is it, we are not doing this anymore."
COMMENTS (12)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Rex Minor: What exactly are the "ground realities" you speak of? I'm assuming you're in Afghanistan, so I'd be interested to hear more.
Again, if the Taliban took years to overrun Northern and Western Afghanistan at the height of their military prowess in the late 90s, I see no way they'll be able to do just as good this time around.
I also disagree with your claim that the Taliban have defeated the Americans. I see it as a stalemate. Are the Taliban in control of any major cities and rural areas? If the answer is yes, where are these areas? As far as I know, the Taliban have managed to infiltrate areas, do hit and run attacks but are then pushed back by the Afghan Army. If the Taliban are winning, then why have they urged Karzai to not sign the security agreement?
As for the drug trade, the poppy is the life blood of the Taliban insurgency.
@Rex Minor:, It is good to see you again, if you remember Reuters Blog on Pakistan. I have spent couple of years in Peshawer when I was younger. I know something about tribal system and patronage relationships. Read my posting one more time and tell me the part you consider delusional and i would stand corrected. I can't read American or Euro mind. It will become progressively clear.
@Pmahmud: Do not have delusions or wild imaginations. No European country has any interest to occupy Afghanistan!
Rex Minor
@RD Sultan: You might be right! I could even believe in what your prognosis is but it does not correlate with the reality. The facts are that it is the Talibans who have defeated the mighty Americans on the battle ground forcing them to remain airborne or rely on night raids trying to frighten women and childreni in houses or drone individual trgets to the annoyance and distaste of President Karzai and his cabinet. The soldiers from the ISAF force have just been performing the day time patrols to keep themselves present on highways. Anyone who stands up to the Taliban force be it from the former northern alliance or some one else in the newly trained Afghan army from Bacha Saqqa family will do so at their peril. President Karzai efforts have all along been to enlist the support of the strong ones from the Taliban group on his side so as to bring stability to the country once the American occupation ends which by the way is his final task before he steps down. Not to forget Afghanistan opium production now exceeds more than the total demand of the world, which no Taliban dominated Government will accept.
Rex Minor
Most Americans want the US to completely leave Afghanistan like it left Iraq. See the sectarian violence in Iraq who are they blaming. When the USA left Iraq they could have proven to the world with Saddam gone, they had the faith of their future in their own hands. Why have not all the Muslim brothers from the area helped Iraq help itself? If America leaves Afghanistan then the people with its Muslims brothers can help it achieve its independence & success. But if you look at the mess in Pakistan where the Taliban have been allowed to continue their reign of terror, you can just imagine what will happen to the future of the people of Afghanistan? People in the WEST are tired of these countries unable to work out their internal problems looking for help then talking badly of the hands that help them.
It is interesting situation to say the least. Nobody knows for the intent of NATO forces. All moral, legal, and enlightened arguments have been exhausted. Karzai knows all players up close from his life experience. He knows the golden rule i.e. one who has gold rules. To rule Afghans you need constant flow of gold. Kabul is also cash and carry place. If NATO funds the army to the tune of $4B then they control. Then you would have direct funding of various ministries to the tune of $2B. Then you have NGO crowd to contend with.So what does President of Afghanistan do to enforce his writ except beg.Such a situation would be unacceptable to any President.I must also say that government revenue is almost zero.I only have one suggestion for Karzai. Ask for free access to NATO countries for all products without exception and no restriction on capital and technology. This would the best for future of Afghan women and children.Such a deal one could live with.
Classic Karsai - no doubt he wants the USA to give him a big bribe. I suspect the USA is tired of Karsai, tired of the duplicity, and tired of the Afghanistan. I don't think the American's are going to give him his bribe and are willing to implement the zero option - so long as the blame for it attaches to Karsai. Afghanistan deserves better than Karsai.
Taliban may not be able to overrun Afghanistan but those who are on the other side of Taliban are not any good and that includes Karzai. He has just wasted time while in office, presided over an administration which squandered trillions of dollars worth of financial aid; channelized properly it could have changed Afghanistan forever. On social and cultural front he is an ideological soul mate of Talibans. The guys wife is a doctor who worked with Afghan refugees before marrying him. Now as first lady no body has seen her or even know if she exists. By refusing to sign security pact with the US this guy is hellbent on committing suicide, tragedy is he is taking Afghanistan with him!
My Advice to Mr. Karzai: Sir, Haven't you milked them enough, already? I mean billions upon billions of dollars could not be used all on you and your chieftain's designer suits and shirts and palaces, you know. You were given all the time, money and training to be able to learn to run your country yourself.
Take my advice please! I know it's going to happen with proof.
@Rex Minor: If the Taliban attempted a takeover, its writ wouldn't extend beyond the Pashtun southern and (perhaps) eastern regions. In fact, Pakistan does not want them to come back into full power as they might well join the TTP and try to recover the Pashtun dominated areas of Pakistan.
Last time around, it took the Taliban one year to overrun Kabul (they were successful because government rebels abandoned the city without firing a single shot), two years to overrun Mazar-i-Sharif and Bamiyan, but (despite Pakistani, Arab, and Chechen fighters) they were unable to overrun the Panjshir and Badakhshan provinces.
To its disadvantage, the NATO campaign has left the Taliban reduced to smaller and more localized groups than in their pre-2001 heyday.
The Talibans are poised to overrun Afghanistan comes the year 2014; the Americns know of it and so does Mr Karzai: He is not standing for the next election, let the new man sign his death warrant!
American role ends in Afghanistan in 2014 and the Chinese role begins to unfold in developing the mining industry in search for minerals. Neither the marines nor the seals are liked by the indigenous natives not because they are anti racist but simply because of different cultural values. General Macchrstal tried to win the hearts and the minds of locals but then he was fired by the Supremo.
Rex Minor
Karzai will most certainly sign the BSA, for if he doesn't, he may earn the same fate as Najibullah, the last Communist President of Afghanistan.
When Najibullah sought to flee Afghanistan in 1992 (27 months after the soviets withdrew), he was detained at the airport by militias loyal to (his "ally" and Karzai's current "ally") Abdul Rashid Dostum.
Najib then took refuge in Kabul's UN compound, where he was executed by the Taliban in 1996.
This time it might not be the Taliban who will administer Karzai's punishment, as the group will be unable to take over Northern and Western Afghanistan.