US
military mission in Afghanistan to shift to support role in spring
President of Afghanistan Hamid Karzai (L) sits with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in her outer office at the State Department in Washington, January 10, 2013 (Reuters / Jonathan Ernst)
U.S.
President Barack Obama meets with Afghanistan's President Hamid
Karzai in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, January
11, 2013. (Reuters/Jason Reed)
RT,
11
January,2013
The
US and Afghanistan have agreed to speed up the transition of military
control in the country from coalition to Afghan forces. President
Obama has made assurances that US troops will fully shift to a
“training and assisting” role.
The
leaders of both countries met behind closed doors in the White House
to “review friendship” and “discussed in great details all
relevant issues”.
Negotiations
between President Obama and President Karzai focused on US’s future
role in Afghanistan and the mission of those troops remaining in the
country after their combat withdrawal.
Washington
is planning to considerably reduce the number of its troops deployed
in the country from the current 66,000 to as few as between 2,000 and
6,000.
But “starting
this spring”,
Barack Obama said, the coalition forces “will
have different mission” – “training,
advising, assisting Afghan soldiers”.
Obama
said he would present plans for US troop drawdown’s in Afghanistan,
after he receives recommendations from US military commanders over
the coming weeks.
For
his part Karzai declined to spell out the size of a contingency force
he'd like to see left behind.
"Numbers
are not going to make a difference to the situation in
Afghanistan," Karzai
said. "It's
the relationship that will make a difference in Afghanistan."
But
speculation is rife that President Karzai would like to see a
relatively large residual force in Afghanistan.
But
questions have arisen as to whether Afghanistan’s own security
forces, which the US pledged to train and equip before withdrawal,
will be prepared to take full responsibility. This may be
particularly acute if US refuses to back Afghan forces with air and
artillery support during operations, instead conducting its own
independent missions, focusing on drone strikes like in Pakistan.
The
Afghan war has become unpopular among Americans and their European
allies, costing many troops lives. A spate of green-on-blue
attacks and high costs during an economic slowdown, are some of the
reasons highlighted by Ari Rutenberg, contributor of The Daily Banter
independent political site, for dwindling support.
“The
domestic politics of the United States – as they often are – are
the overriding factor here. The people fear the war and they don’t
want to pay for it anymore. Whether or not it’s a wise decision on
their part, that’s how the population feels right now,” he
told RT.
Obama
and Karzai also discussed US assistance in providing aid and support
for the Afghan people. The US president promised a better life
for “all
Afghans”, who
also made sacrifices in the battle will terrorism,
deserving“development,
education and opportunities”.
President of Afghanistan Hamid Karzai (L) sits with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in her outer office at the State Department in Washington, January 10, 2013 (Reuters / Jonathan Ernst)
Karzai may turn to China or Iran to replace America
The
tension is aggravated by the perception of Karzai and his government
as corrupt and inefficient. Leaving him to deal with his domestic
problems while maintaining a smaller footprint, which would be enough
to contain Iran and China, is a tempting course of action.
Kabul
is at risk of losing control of a greater portion of Afghanistan
territory to Taliban militants and Al-Qaeda-affiliated fighters. The
country went through a similar period of warlord-driven disarray
following the 1989 Soviet withdrawal and until Taliban ultimately
took over.
“Looking
back over the history of Afghanistan, many great powers have broken
their teeth trying to govern that particular part of the world and I
don’t think that we’ve done any better job than of any of the
previous invading powers had,” Rutenberg
believes. “I
think that unfortunately after 11 years of war if we were to leave,
it would create a power vacuum and probably leave them much of a
situation we found them in 2001.”
Karzai,
who is to abandon office in 2014 but has not yet endorsed a
successor, is left with few bargaining chips. He may take a tough
position over what small presence Washington wants to keep in the
country at the cost of losing financial aid from the US. It may also
turn to its neighbors as potential patrons to replace America.
“President
Karzai is not without his resources. He has other allies in the
region. The Afghan government tried to build more of a security,
political and economic relationship with China, with Iran, with
India,” Leverett
says.
Parting
with the US, not unlike Iraq did in 2011, may be the course of
preference for Karzai, if he fails to get enough backing. It would
boost his popularity at home, where many people loathe lasting
American involvement and justly or unjustly blame on them all
hardships of their live.
On
a longer timescale, Kabul will have to negotiate a new configuration
of power in Afghanistan, and bringing to common ground all the
parties interested may prove beyond it.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.