Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, April 2003, pages
12-13
Special Report
Zalmay Khalilzad: The Neocons’ Bagman To Baghdad
By Issam M. Nashashibi
In addition to “weakening, containing and even rolling back Syria,”
Israel should “focus on removing Saddam Hussain from power in Iraq—an
important Israeli objective in its own right.”
These recommendations were contained in a 1996 paper prepared
for then-incoming Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu by the
Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies. The paper’s
authors included the current Under Secretary for Defense Policy
and chair of the Defense Policy Board, Douglas Feith and Richard
Perle, respectively.
Perle whet his neo-conservative whistle under Albert Wohlstetter,
a University of Chicago mathematician who was key in drawing up
the Pentagon’s strategic and nuclear blueprints during the Cold
War. That same Wohlstetter mentored many of the Bush administration’s
reigning neo-conservatives, including Deputy Defense Secretary Paul
Wolfowitz, one of the most pro-Zionist of the so-called chickenhawks,
and Zalmay Khalilzad.
Who? “Precisely,” said a former associate of the 52-year-old Afghan
American and Pashtun native who was appointed last December as the
president’s “special envoy and ambassador at large for free Iraqis.”
“Part of his genius is that the people who are supposed to know
about him, don’t even know he exists.”
According to the White House announcement, Khalilzad “will serve
as the focal point for contacts and coordination among free Iraqis
for the U.S. government and for preparations for a post-Saddam Iraq.”
Khalilzad’s qualifications include not only advocating Saddam’s
ouster since the 1980s, but also his proven prowess in orchestrating
the installation of the Hamid Karzai regime in Afghanistan after
being appointed special U.S. envoy to Afghanistan in December 2001.
Neo-con Credentials
More importantly, perhaps, Khalilzad’s impeccable credentials make
him a natural for membership in the neo-conservatives cabal which
is the driving force behind Washington’s Iraq policy. “He has a
narrow view of the Middle East and South Asia,” his former associate
stressed. “[Zalmay thinks of] security to the exclusion of everything
else. He tends to look at military solutions as the first, not the
last policy option.”
Such views may not have been inculcated during his education at
the elitist Ghazi Lycée school in Kabul, where his father worked
as an adviser to the Afghan king, Zahir Shah, or at the American
University of Beirut in the early 1970s.
His hawkish views most likely were formed at the University of
Chicago, where he studied under Wohlstetter. After obtaining his
Ph.D. in 1979, Khalilzad taught political science at Columbia University,
where he worked with Zbigniew Brzezinsky, the Carter administration’s
architect of the policy supporting the Afghan mujahideen resistance
to the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan. In 1984 Khalilzad
accepted a one-year fellowship to join the State Department, where
he worked for Paul Wolfowitz, then the director of Policy Planning.
His fellowship turned into a full-time position that extended through
the Reagan administration.
In the first Bush administration, Khalilzad became assistant deputy
undersecretary of defense for policy, again working for Paul Wolfowitz,
who by then was the Number 3 man at the Pentagon. In that capacity,
Khalilzad rejoined the coterie of policymakers who had successfully
pressed the Reagan administration to provide arms to the Afghan
mujahideen. During the 1991 Gulf war, Khalilzad caught the
notice of then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney, who stayed in close
touch with him throughout the Clinton administration.
During the Clinton years, Khalilzad served as senior political
scientist at the RAND Corporation, a California think tank that
performs policy studies for the U.S. military. At RAND, he was the
director of strategy and doctrines for Project Air Force and founder
of the Center for Greater Middle East Studies.
Khalilzad also signed the 1998 open letter calling on the Clinton
administration to adopt a “comprehensive political and military
strategy for bringing down Saddam and his regime.” The letter’s
other signers include a litany of Bush administration hawks on Iraq,
including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, and four of his top
Pentagon deputies—Wolfowitz, Douglas Feith, Dov Zakheim and Peter
Rodman—as well as the State Department’s undersecretary for arms
control, John Bolton, and Undersecretary for Global Affairs Paula
Dobriansky. Another signatory to the 1998 letter was the person
who, last December, replaced Khalilzad at the National Security
Council as Adviser on Middle East Affairs: Elliot Abrams.
The letter was issued by the Committee for Peace and Security
in the Gulf, a 1991 spin-off of the Project for a New American Century,
a group consisting mainly of neo-conservative Zionist Jews and Christians
whose public recommendation for fighting the “war on terrorism”
and alignment with Israeli Prime Minster Ariel Sharon have been
an accurate predictor to the current administration’s policies.
That confirms the observation of a former Khalilzad associate:
“He, Wolfowitz and Perle tend to reinforce each other."
Oil Credentials
Khalilzad’s oil credentials are no less impeccable than those of
President Bush, Vice President Cheney, or National Security Adviser
Condoleezza Rice, who served on Chevron’s board of directors. Like
current Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, Khalilzad was
a paid adviser to UNOCAL Corp., a U.S. oil company that was competing
for Taliban approval to construct a $2 billion gas and oil pipeline
across Afghanistan. While Khalilzad worked at the for-profit Cambridge
Energy Associates, he conducted a risk analysis for UNOCAL. By 1997
he was a participant in UNOCAL’s negotiations with the Taliban.
Moreover, as a paid lobbyist for UNOCAL, he urged the Clinton administration
to take a softer line on the Taliban.
Khalilzad’s attitude to the Taliban seems to have correlated well
with UNOCAL’s efforts to build the pipeline. At the time, he defended
the Taliban in an opinion piece published in The Washington Post.
“The Taliban do not practice the anti-U.S. style of fundamentalism
practiced by Iran,” he wrote in 1996. “We should…be willing to offer
recognition and humanitarian assistance and to promote international
economic reconstruction. It is time for the United States to re-engage,”
he concluded.
In 1998, however, when the Taliban were implicated in the attack
on the U.S. embassies in East Africa, UNOCAL ended its contact with
the Taliban, and Khalilzad changed his tune. In the Winter 2000
issue of the Washington Quarterly, he co-authored “Afghanistan:
Consolidation of a Rogue State” (<www.twq.comwinter00/231bayman.htm).
In that article he proposed the following six-step strategy for
transforming Afghanistan: 1) Change the balance of power by supporting
anti-Taliban forces; 2) Oppose the Taliban ideology by strengthening
Voice of America broadcasts; 3) Press Pakistan to withdraw its support
for the Taliban; 4) Aid the victims of the Taliban to bolster their
position; 5) Support moderate Afghans through funding those who
are anti-Taliban in their diaspora; and 6) Elevate the importance
of Afghanistan at home by raising the profile of the conflict with
the Taliban in the U.S.—a strategy that has materialized into the
administration’s post-9/11 policy.
The Cheney Connection
His connection with Dick Cheney during the Clinton years was influential
in Khalilzad’s being selected to head George W. Bush’s transition
team for the Pentagon. Significantly, however, he was not appointed
to a sub-cabinet position—that would have required Senate confirmation
and might have engendered uncomfortable questions for the administration.
Khalilzad avoided embarrassing questions about his UNOCAL connections
and his flip-flopping views on the Taliban when he was appointed
to the National Security Council, which does not require confirmation.
At Cheney’s urging, President Bush in May 2001 appointed Khalilzad
as a special assistant to the president and senior director for
the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia, reporting to Condoleezza Rice.
Like the Seldom-seen Kid in Damon Runyan’s tales of 1920s Chicago
mobsters, Khalilzad has worked in relative obscurity as the president’s
special envoy to Afghanistan and now to the Iraqi opposition.
Most recently, he shared the podium with former Israeli Chief
of Staff Shaul Mofaz at last October’s conference of the pro-Israel
think tank, the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. There
Khalilzad declared that he hoped for a post-Saddam “broad-based
and representative government that would renounce terror, give all
religions and ethnic groups a voice, have no weapons of mass destruction,
and provide an example for peace.
“We will not enter Iraq as conquerors,” he added, but as “liberators.”
His many critics point out, however, that Khalilzad has been wrong
as often as he has been right—going back to the days when he advocated
arming the same Afghan groups that later spawned the Taliban. “If
he was in private business rather than government,” said Anatol
Lieven, an analyst with the Carnegie Endowment for Peace in Washington,
“he would have been sacked long ago.”
Khalilzad’s list of critics most recently included the same exiled
Iraqi leadership whom he has pledged to help topple the Saddam Hussain
regime. The London-based opposition leaders objected to his efforts
to reach out to Adnan Pachachi, a strongly Arab nationalist octogenarian
who once served as foreign minister and Iraq’s ambassador to the
U.N.
Issam M. Nashashibi is a U.S.-based director of Deir Yassin
Remembered, <www.deiryassin.org>. |