By AZAM AHMED
Afghanistan’s new president, Ashraf Ghani, is a man in a hurry to break from his predecessor’s governing style. Best not make him late.
He drove the point home this month when he started a meeting without the prominent and widely respected interior minister, Umar Daudzai. Mr. Daudzai showed up a few minutes later and was promptly barred from entry, according to three officials who were familiar with the incident. (Through a spokesman, Mr. Daudzai denied the account.)
Mr. Ghani will also be running a leaner palace. The lavish dinners that were a hallmark of President Hamid Karzai’s meetings — and are a cherished tradition among many Afghan officials, for that matter — have been slashed. Mr. Ghani wants to impart the message that palace meetings are for business, not pleasure.
Just a few weeks into his tenure, Mr. Ghani has already delivered on some big issues, including signing a long-term troop deal with the United States. But he is also signaling the direction of his presidency with a host of smaller stylistic changes, most of them unpublicized but detailed in interviews with Afghan and American officials.
Although most of Mr. Ghani’s changes have been relatively small, the implications may not be.
In a country known for perilous divisions, building broad coalitions is often a precondition for progress. Mr. Ghani’s predecessor, Mr. Karzai, was a master at using a courtly style to keep rivals working together, keenly aware that in Afghanistan, guests expect to be fed and tradition trumps expedience. He made time for the politics.
Mr. Ghani, on the other hand, is all about efficiency and building institutions. And his desire to move fast is coupled with a quick temper. There is a concern among some here that his temperament, Western style and didactic approach, sharpened in a career at the World Bank and in academia, could rub the Afghan official class the wrong way.
Consider this: Forgoing the huge convoys favored by Mr. Karzai, Mr. Ghani takes only a few cars when he travels in Kabul. That will probably be a public-relations success with residents, as Mr. Karzai’s convoys snarled traffic for hours.
It also allows Mr. Ghani to make surprise inspections, as he did when he dropped by a police station on a recent day to check attendance, or on another stop when he chastised a group of police officers goofing off at their checkpoint.
Similarly, after visiting the Kabul military hospital to meet wounded soldiers, Mr. Ghani was told there were doctors on duty around the clock. When he went back later that night to check and found no one around, people were promptly fired.
The political class of Kabul favors car analogies when describing Mr. Ghani’s style. Just about everyone agrees that he is pushing the pedal to the floor, but no one is sure what is around the bend.
“This guy is speeding ahead on a very bumpy road,” said a senior Afghan ministry official, speaking on the condition of anonymity for fear of angering the president. “Only the car is not ready for that speed, especially when you don’t have anyone sitting next to you to tell you to be careful.”
“Right now, he is focusing 95 percent of his time on institutions and 5 percent of his time on politics,” said a former Afghan official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid appearing to criticize the president. “There needs to be more of a balance.”
Mr. Ghani’s supporters say that such fears are misguided and that his efforts to signal a change in approach on women’s rights, for instance, exemplified by his wife’s higher-profile role in public life, are meant to be an example of forward-thinking leadership.
“He is very cognizant of past failures in Afghanistan — of presidents, kings and other leaders,” said Daoud Sultanzoy, an adviser to Mr. Ghani. “He will not do anything that the public is not ready for, but he will also lead and will not allow dark forces to derail progress in this country.”
There have been signs that Mr. Ghani will sometimes bend to popular will, even when it runs counter to Western mores. For instance, he refused to intervene to stay the recent executions of five convicted rapists despite the pleading of human rights organizations.
Some have speculated that Mr. Ghani’s rough-edged style could be tempered by the presence of Abdullah Abdullah, his bitter election rival, who is now the chief executive of a unity government with Mr. Ghani.
Mr. Abdullah led the political opposition through most of the Karzai years and is a far more natural politician. Mr. Ghani’s ideas coupled with Mr. Abdullah’s political skills could be a formidable combination, experts and supporters of both men say.
But no one is holding their breath for that. It took heavy pressure from the United States to bring the two men together in the same government. And though they meet three times a week to discuss plans, the rough road to agreement on issues like ministerial appointments and Mr. Abdullah’s exact role still lies ahead.
But Mr. Ghani has wasted no time pushing ahead on his own.
He has ordered all ministries to submit a list of every employee they have hired, with qualifications and résumés. He has also demanded their procurement contracts and related paperwork in an effort to bring the process under the banner of the president’s office.
As it happens, that office is also changing. Under Mr. Karzai, two entities handled the president’s affairs: the chief of staff’s office and the office of administrative affairs. The overlap often led to competition and palace intrigue.
Mr. Ghani, apparently, had little time for either.
Shortly after his arrival, the staff of both offices were called to a meeting, where names were read aloud from a list. The attendees were told that those whose names were not announced could consider the gathering their farewell party.
Despite the concerns about Mr. Ghani’s sometimes brusque style, he has been diligent about reaching out to officials. During the recent Eid al-Adha holiday, Mr. Ghani called every Afghan Army Corps commander, as well as each of the country’s 34 provincial governors.
More recently, he has been convening large gatherings of provincial officials and elders for videoconferences with the Kabul administration. Last week, for instance, nearly a thousand dignitaries gathered in the governor’s compound in Kunduz, a province hit by a surge of Taliban violence in recent weeks.
Leaders from across Kunduz, some living under Taliban rule, gathered to see the new president. At exactly 11:20 a.m., as scheduled, Mr. Ghani appeared on the screen with a row of cabinet ministers arrayed behind him. On cue, he allowed the provincial governor and other leaders exactly 10 minutes each to speak.
Mr. Ghani then directed his ministers to brief the crowd while he diligently scribbled in his notebook. The men spoke for five minutes each, detailing their plans for the province. Having listened patiently, Mr. Ghani then claimed the final five minutes. At exactly 12:20 p.m., the conference concluded.
But even as the event typified the modern and accountable approach Mr. Ghani hopes to foster, it quickly clashed with the reality on the ground. Orchestrated via Skype using local Wi-Fi, the teleconference was hindered by the sound’s cutting in and out. Ministers would suddenly freeze on screen. Mr. Ghani was without a voice for seconds on end.
But for all the technical difficulties, his message came through. He acknowledged that the situation in Kunduz posed a threat to national security and vowed to disarm militias sowing chaos in the districts.
Then, as a parting shot, he promised change — and delivered right away.
“I have already approved a new governor for the province,” he told the shocked crowd, including the suddenly fired governor.
By Matthew Campbell
The fatal attack on a soldier this morning prompted a frenzied evacuation of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and a lockdown of public buildings. Civil servants and tourists described chaotic scenes as police swarmed to locate the assailant, or assailants -- one of whom was shot and killed by police inside Parliament.
What would be a shocking series of events in any nation is even more so in Canada, where security at many public buildings is minimal. Until recently, security guards at Parliament -- where more than 10 shots could be heard in a mobile phone video recorded by a Globe and Mail journalist -- were unarmed.
“It’s too soon to speculate, but it’s hard to see how this won’t change things,” said Andrew MacDougall, a former director of communications for Harper who’s now a consultant in London at MSLGroup. “To see my former place of work lit up in a blaze of gunfire is shocking, disheartening and worrying,”
The shootings come two days after a Canadian soldier died and a second was injured after being run down by a car driven by a suspected Islamic militant whom authorities said had been “radicalized.” The incident in Saint-Jean-Sur-Richelieu, about 50 kilometers (30 miles) southeast of Montreal, was linked to “terrorist ideology,” the government said. The driver was killed by police after a car chase.
immunity Ends
There was still no official word from authorities on what motivated today’s assault or who might be responsible. Canadian politicians have warned for some time that the country’s immunity to organized attacks wouldn’t last forever. Harper, a member of the Conservative Party who has contributed troops to interventions in Afghanistan, Libya, and Iraq, said in 2011 that violence could arrive “out of the blue” both from Islamic extremists and methodical lone murderers like Norway’s Anders Behring Breivik.
Canadians have largely taken such warnings in stride. In Toronto’s financial district, home to the headquarters of Royal Bank of Canada, Bank of Montreal, and the local offices of dozens of foreign financial institutions, most office buildings have no barriers preventing passers-by from riding elevators to any floor they please.
A low violent crime rate may explain some of that. Last year Toronto, with 2.8 million residents, recorded 57 murders -- compared with more than 400 in Chicago. Canada’s largest city gets by with 5,500 police officers, less than half the number in Chicago proper, which has roughly the same population.
War Memorial
Today’s shootings struck at the heart of Canada’s governing institutions, which are clustered around a few square blocks in downtown Ottawa. The first attack killed a member of a ceremonial honor guard at the National War Memorial, police said. A suspect was later shot and killed in the Hall of Honour, just outside the door leading into the Library of Parliament, according to the Globe’s video of the incident.
Ottawa is a sleepy government town of about 1 million people unused to violent crime of any kind, much less gunplay. Throughout the city’s compact center, police warned office workers to stay away from windows and shouted at journalists to take cover as they tried to locate attackers. The U.S. embassy, a five-minute walk from the war memorial, was locked down, as were the offices of civil servants in the area. The Bank of Canada canceled a scheduled press conference.
Canada’s federal parties hold caucus meetings each Wednesday when the legislature is in session, meaning most members of Parliament were in the building when the gunfight occurred. Pictures on social media showed some had barricaded doors with furniture to prevent assailants from entering.
‘Times of Risk’
While Canada’s major parties yesterday urged unity in the wake of the attacks, the drama plays into the political narrative Harper has sought to construct in advance of elections scheduled for next year. In a speech last month unveiling his party’s legislative agenda for the current parliamentary session he told Canadians they lived in “times of risk and danger” that require steady leadership.
The country has experienced occasional episodes of headline-grabbing violence. Each December, Canadians wear white ribbons to commemorate the slaughter of 14 women at the Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal in 1989 by a lone gunman, and in 1984 a former army corporal killed three people in the Quebec’s provincial legislature before being persuaded to surrender. In June, three Royal Canadian Mounted Police officers were killed in the east coast town of Moncton.
Just over a decade earlier, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau briefly declared martial law in Quebec to stop a series of bombings by a nationalist group.
The Ottawa attack feels different, leading politicians to conclude the country has changed permanently.
“It will impact on our dialog of how we live in this country,” Liberal Party Member of Parliament John McKay said of the violence in an interview with the Canadian Broadcasting Corp. “This is the kind of day that changes everything.”
