With Obama’s administration in power, Afghanistan and Pakistan have been the focus of America’s attention more than ever before. The issue of terrorism and the activities of Al-Qaeda combined with the weakness of the government in Afghanistan is one of the apprehensions of the new administration of America. Obama’s foreign policy team believes that Al-Qaeda’s activities and the rise of terrorism can question the global authority of their country and don’t let America get on with important global issues. On this basis, according to the fact that political conditions in Iraq are very complicated and this country has been changed to the place of invasion for extreme courses rooted in Afghanistan, foreign policy of Obama focus its attention on Afghanistan and Pakistan –the main birthplace of terrorism. In these circumstances, at least five factors are effective in adopting such approach:

•- The rise of instability and insecurity in Afghanistan and northern Pakistan

•- The presence of a weak and inefficient government in Afghanistan

•- The re rising of the Taliban and resurgence of extremist parties of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Arab-Afghan and Hezbollah;

•_ The reconstruction of the Al-Qaeda cell and renewed activation of extremist parties

•_ The record rise in the volume of drug production

The approach of new the American administration to change the condition in Afghanistan consists of four foundational principals:

•Adopting some short term solutions and exploitation political and military tools;

•Increasing the power of foreign forces;

•Strengthening and reinforcing civil organs and Afghanistan's army;

•More cooperation with the Western alliances and the participation of neighbors.

It seems that the election of a special envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan as well as dispatching new forces to Afghanistan is the introduction of this approach alteration. There are some important variables in Afghanistan's transition era each of them can be very significant in some circumstances, such as:

•- The presidential election in Afghanistan;

•- The internal condition of Pakistan and the approach of the ISI(Pakistan's army intelligence service) toward Afghanistan;

•- Iran’s approach toward the process of changes in Afghanistan;

•- The endeavor of NATO and European countries to create changes.

In the last weeks we have witnessed some disagreements between Afghanistan and some Western states. In his first press conference in the White House, which was held a few weeks ago, Obama stated that Afghanistan’s government is severely unaware of what is happening in around it. This quotation was a direct criticism of Mr. Karzai’s government.

Moreover, in the Senate sitting of that country, America’s Foreign Minister called the Afghanistan government a government of drugs, contaminated with corruption, and announced that the new government is looking for some basic guidelines and strategies to reform public conditions in Afghanistan. Besides severely criticizing the situation of Afghanistan's government, the Secretary-General of NATO believes that the corruption and inefficiency of Afghanistan's government have as much of a role as the presence of protesters and rebels in the creation and continuation of insecurity. The Secretary-General of NATO has emphasized for the participation of neighboring countries of Afghanistan to remove these problems and improve the circumstances.

In return, accepting some problems, Mr. Karzai and Afghani officials assume that the foreign forces settled in Afghanistan cause instabilities and problems. It seems that NATO’s failure in creating stability and security and unfulfilled policies of America have resulted in some uncertainties in protecting Krezai’s government and this can affect the outcome of the country’s presidential election. But in spite of present disagreements, Mr. Krezai is still emphasizing the necessity of the continued presence of foreign forces to confront terrorists in Afghanistan.

Another important point is to what extent Obama’s administration wants to resort to military tools in Afghanistan. The unsuccessful experience of Soviet army in the past and forces of America and NATO in recent years have shown that with military solutions, the present problems of Afghanistan can’t be settled, causing the foreign minister of England to announce recently that the methods used in the past to fight terrorism were ineffective and the west can’t confront threats through war and massacre. Preliminary assessments also show that Obama’s administration doesn’t treat military tools as the only way to confront present problems.

In a macro assessment of the present circumstances in Afghanistan, it seems that political solutions can settle the problems of Afghanistan better than military ones. As in 2002, in course of negotiations for shaping government and approval of the constitution, noticeable improvements were obtained. Political solutions will be more efficacious once attention is given to the below considerations:

Commitments of the global community to reconstruct Afghanistan and improve the welfare of people in this country have been given precedence. As long as people don’t have primary facilities to live and hope for the future isn’t revived, the production of drugs will continue and consequently unemployment, immigration and attraction of opposing, rebellious parties will continue.

It’s necessary for military forces settled in Afghanistan to be concerned only on building stability and security and not resorting to violent methods unless they make sure that they are engaging in confrontation against terrorist forces. Following objectives blindly and killing people have had the most devastating effect on the continuation of insecurities.

Respecting the ideas of various strata of people, it’s necessary to confront organizational activities of extremists like the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and some Arab countries, should set their approaches and stances in a way that does not encourage Taliban and extremists.

Electing the next president is the right of the Afghani people. Inflectional countries in Afghanistan shouldn't try to influence the circumstances by using different political, propagandistic, and economic methods or protecting one party and opposing another group. Such approaches not only restrict people’s rights, but also cause premature competition whose consequence will be more instability and insecurity.

A political faction or a tribe can’t govern alone. National reconciliation and participation of political parties and tribes is an introduction to the government-nation forming in Afghanistan whose consequence is a deduction of conflicts.

Inflectional neighboring countries of Afghanistan, especially Iran, which has always paid the costs of Afghanistan's insecurity and instability during the last 30 years, are willing to work for stability and peace in this country. So in light of new circumstances, if the new administration of America and the west looks to reform some of their last policies, they can play a constructive role in the process of creating positive transitions.