What the US withdrawal from Afghanistan means

[nangyale]

Today I came across a good article by former Indian ambassador M K Bhadrakumar. The following are excerpts from it.


When it was made, finally, on Tuesday at the Rose Garden on the White House lawns in Washington DC, it couldn't have had any real surprise left in it -- President Barack Obama's announcement on how he is bringing 'America's longest war to a responsible end.'

The US-led war in Afghanistan has been grinding to a halt for quite some time already.

Yet, Obama sprang a surprise, a big surprise. He notionally gave in to the Pentagon's demand that an absolutely irreducible minimum of 10,000 US troops should remain in Afghanistan beyond this year. He chalked up a figure of 9,800.

But then he added the caveat that this number would come down by half in a year's time by end-2015 and the remaining troops shall thenceforth be confined to two locations -- Kabul and Bagram -- and, furthermore, that there shall be a complete drawdown by end-2016.

This is vintage Obama. Call it by any other name, but Obama has in reality decided to exercise the 'zero option' to be implemented through the next 30-month period.

Without even acknowledging it, he neatly de-linked it from the signing of the US-Afghan Bilateral Security Agreement (which is now a certainty as soon as the next Afghan president takes over in July.)

'The bottom line is it's time to turn the page on more than a decade in which so much of our foreign policy was focused on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq,' Obama said. He is redeeming an important election pledge that he'd bring the warriors home...........

Obama rationalised his decision primarily in terms of the US' priorities -- the war needed to be brought to an end -- having lasted 'longer than many Americans expected.' Period.
......................................

Plainly put, Obama has come to the conclusion that no good US national security interest has been served by the US' extended stay in Afghanistan and it is high time to extricate the troops.......................

A senior US official who annotated Obama's decision in a media briefing claimed that the primary objective of the war has been achieved, namely, to vanquish the Al Qaeda leadership ensconced in Afghanistan.

The US will continue the hunt for Al Qaeda, but the theater has shifted from the so-called AfPak region -- to Yemen, Syria, Libya and so on.

In sum, it is important to understand at this point that the Taliban have never really been the US' 'enemy' in Afghanistan and the decision to pull out all troops returns the conflict to its status of civil war.

He never once mentioned the Taliban.
......................

Of course, Pakistan's importance still remains. Obama underscored that the new shift in the US' counterterrorism strategy involves building up the capacity of the regional States to shoulder the burden and working with them without having American 'boots on the ground.'

But the US drone attacks on Pakistan have become a thing of the past. The withdrawal of troops also eliminates NATO's dependence on the transit routes via Karachi Port.

A paradigm shift

All this taken into consideration, the factors that led to the groundswell of 'anti-Americanism in Pakistani society could gradually begin to dissipate and, in turn, the US and Pakistan are in a better position than in very many years to turn a new page in their relations......................


I hope all the Indian nay sayers, day dreamers and birdie talkers can read this and understand that the US really is leaving Afghanistan. No amount of wishful thinking can turn the clock backwards or change American policy.

The full version can be found here.
What the US withdrawal from Afghanistan means - Rediff.com India News

 

[kaykay]

The dirty secret about Obama’s Afghan plan - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

 

[Hasbara Buster]

The ‘dirty secret’ about Obama’s Afghan plan

US President Barack Obama recently said Washington will keep “approximately 9,800” troops in Afghanistan for two more years after 2014 but a report says an “invisible army” of US officials and intelligence personnel will remain in the country well in the future.

“Together with our allies and the Afghan government, we have agreed that this is the year we will conclude our combat mission in Afghanistan,” Obama said Tuesday during an appearance in the White House Rose Garden, referring to America’s 13-year war in Afghanistan, which is the longest war in US history.

“At the beginning of 2015, we will have approximately 9,800 US servicemembers in different parts of the country,” he added.

Writing for Foreign Policy magazine, however, Phillip Carter said on Wednesday that the “dirty secret about Obama’s Afghan plan is that tens of thousands of American civilians will be on the ground long after the troops have left.”

The “invisible army” of US civilians who will remain in Afghanistan for an unknown duration include intelligence agents, contractors, diplomats, and civilian government officials.

While Obama said on Tuesday that “by the end of 2016, our military will draw down to a normal embassy presence in Kabul,” what remains unclear is the extent of US operations under the auspices of agencies like the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which was recently in the headlines for the covert creation of a text-based social network to stir political unrest in Cuba.

US foreign service officers in Afghanistan will work “alongside scores more from USAID, the Justice Department, the Department of Agriculture” and “a clandestine force reportedly including hundreds of personnel from the CIA and other agencies,” wrote Carter.

During a speech at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, on Wednesday, Obama made it clear that there are some differences between his foreign policy and that of his predecessor George W. Bush, saying he would rely on allied or indigenous troops more than on US forces.

He said his foreign policy strategy “expands our reach without sending forces that stretch our military too thin.”

PressTV - The ‘dirty secret’ about Obama’s Afghan plan

 

[nangyale]

The ‘dirty secret’ about Obama’s Afghan plan

US President Barack Obama recently said Washington will keep “approximately 9,800” troops in Afghanistan for two more years after 2014 but a report says an “invisible army” of US officials and intelligence personnel will remain in the country well in the future.

“Together with our allies and the Afghan government, we have agreed that this is the year we will conclude our combat mission in Afghanistan,” Obama said Tuesday during an appearance in the White House Rose Garden, referring to America’s 13-year war in Afghanistan, which is the longest war in US history.

“At the beginning of 2015, we will have approximately 9,800 US servicemembers in different parts of the country,” he added.

Writing for Foreign Policy magazine, however, Phillip Carter said on Wednesday that the “dirty secret about Obama’s Afghan plan is that tens of thousands of American civilians will be on the ground long after the troops have left.”

The “invisible army” of US civilians who will remain in Afghanistan for an unknown duration include intelligence agents, contractors, diplomats, and civilian government officials.

While Obama said on Tuesday that “by the end of 2016, our military will draw down to a normal embassy presence in Kabul,” what remains unclear is the extent of US operations under the auspices of agencies like the US Agency for International Development (USAID), which was recently in the headlines for the covert creation of a text-based social network to stir political unrest in Cuba.

US foreign service officers in Afghanistan will work “alongside scores more from USAID, the Justice Department, the Department of Agriculture” and “a clandestine force reportedly including hundreds of personnel from the CIA and other agencies,” wrote Carter.

During a speech at the United States Military Academy at West Point, New York, on Wednesday, Obama made it clear that there are some differences between his foreign policy and that of his predecessor George W. Bush, saying he would rely on allied or indigenous troops more than on US forces.

He said his foreign policy strategy “expands our reach without sending forces that stretch our military too thin.”

PressTV - The ‘dirty secret’ about Obama’s Afghan plan

Dude you got to understand all this intelligence agents, contractors and diplomats can only work when their physical safety is assured. Once you remove the sea of American bases, the fish of intelligence agents et all will die away.
If it wasn't for this fact no country will ever send troops to another country, they will just send in the intelligence agents and the like and finish the job on the cheap.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Querstion; What US withdraw means?
Answer; Nothing. Just some Naswari Army taking over.

 

[nangyale]

The dirty secret about Obama’s Afghan plan - Newspaper - DAWN.COM

I don't know how many times this story is going to be recycled.
The fact remains that you can only achieve so much with Intelligence agents, contractors and diplomats.
All these assets can only work properly only when backed by serious military muscle. Once that is gone then it's only a matter of time that you loose the rest. This is especially true for a hostile culture like Afghanistan. Even today (because of the many so called friendly-fire accidents) the US personnel are constantly on their guard. No imagine how will they carry out their activities when they know that there won't be any quick extraction when things get sticky.

 

[GR!FF!N]

Querstion; What US withdraw means?
Answer; Nothing. Just some Naswari Army taking over.