US Security Impact in Afghanistan

The security impact in Afghanistan

The US officials are struggling again with Afghan President after painful and prolonged negotiations, they concluded a draft bilateral security agreement last year that lays the foundation for leaving US military forces in Afghanistan after 2014. It is also expected to involve 10000 to 12000 US troops with counterterrorism, training and other responsibilities in support of Afghan forces. Most US experts on Afghanistan believe that such a residual force is critical if Afghan forces are to continue to professionalize. Only with such  help will they have a reasonable chance of containing the Taliban and giving Afghan authorities the space to negotiate a political settlement that includes the Taliban. Some NATO forces would remain but only if US troops stay.

According the US experts that without residual forces, the billions of dollars in financial support promised for Afghanistan security forces and for Afghanistan’s economic development will not materialize. Some of them believe that any Afghan government would survive long without this assistance. So the stakes are high for Afghanistan and for preserving the investment of lives and treasure that the United States and its coalition allies have made over the past 13  years.

Initially Afghan president said that he would sign the agreement after a loyajirga, a traditional congregation of Afghan leaders, approved the impact. The loyajirga approved the deal in November before but Karzazi demanded further concessions an end to counterterrorism raids into Afghan homes at high active US support for the peace process with the Taliban and non-interference in the presidential election that will determine of his successor.

At last he has threatened to leave the matter to his successor. US official have responded by pressuring Karzai directly and indirectly. They have set a succession of deadlines and said the agreement must be signed within weeks not in months. So far nothing has worked. There is one option would be for President Obama to make a public statement praising Afghanistan’s progress in assuming responsibility for its security, improving the education, health and well-being of its citizen and preparing for the coming election to be held in April.

Obama has said directly to US forces to curtail all but essential night raids. He is committed to facilitating the peace process and pledges full support for an election free from all outside influences. Soon after, Obama could announce the number of troops that he is prepared to leaved in Afghanistan post 2014 and direct the Pentagon to develop plans on that basis, but the Karzai’s had, encourages further delay and makes the United States look desperate.

Obama should make clear that his commitment of troops is dependent on the bilateral security agreement being signed. But a signing by a new Afghan president would give more than enough time to complete the necessary US military planning before  year’s end.

Obama should avoid any suggestion that he might embrace a Zero option and leave to US troops in Afghanistan after 2014. Almost every Afghan expert believes that would destabilize Afghanistan, threaten the outcome of the election and risk the collapse of Afghanistan security forces.

All of this would profoundly affect US security interests. Afghanistan again would become a haven for terrorists who history whose would attack US interests and territory. Afghanistan would contribute to destabilizing a nuclear armed Pakistan and the Afghan people would forfeit the progress they have made with our help in building a more tolerant inclusive secure and prosperous society.