The writer has a master’s degree in conflict-resolution from the Monterey Institute of International Studies in California and blogs at http://coffeeshopdiplomat.wordpress.com
The US government has been in talks with President Hamid Karzai about leaving a small “residual force” of about 8,000 troops behind. These negotiations have mostly been indecisive and started to fall apart after US attempts to conduct peace talks with the Taliban in Qatar. President Karzai responded ferociously to the opening of a political office, in Qatar, which provided legitimacy to the Taliban, who hoisted their flag and displayed a plaque identifying themselves as the representatives of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. The Taliban viewed these talks as an opportunity to set up a government in exile rather than as negotiations for peace. After President Karzai’s reaction, the Taliban’s flag was lowered, their plaque was removed and the office was temporarily shut down. Following this dispute, President Karzai rejected the Taliban talks and ended negotiations with the US over the security deal required to keep American troops in Afghanistan post-2014. Currently, there are around 60,000 US troops present in Afghanistan and this number will drop to 34,000 next year.
On June 27, a video conference to address concerns between Presidents Obama and Karzai did not end well, according to officials present from both sides. The option to leave zero troops behind was never off the table but after the fateful video conference, it has become a serious consideration. So far, the Obama Administration has been unwilling to give a definitive answer and it is quite possible that the zero option is a bluff to rein in President Karzai’s erratic behaviour as the US pushes for a security agreement with Afghanistan. At the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on July 11, Jim Dobbins, the Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, avoided giving a direct answer but stated that President Obama is “still reviewing his options” regarding troop withdrawal.
If American troops do remain in Afghanistan, the residual force is expected to be between 5,000 and 12,000 troops. Their stated mission would be to train and advise the Afghan security forces as they take up the fight to protect Afghanistan from terrorists. Bargaining with the Taliban puts the US in a precarious situation since the Taliban do not recognise the Constitution of Afghanistan. In exchange for assurances that the Taliban will not launch international attacks from Afghanistan, any troops left behind can expect to support a fragile government against terror attacks from a negotiating partner.
Afghanistan also faces a rising political crisis as the upcoming presidential elections scheduled for April 2014 are most likely to be delayed and will lack credibility in the eyes of the Afghans. An unfair election will lead to chaos and having no elections will ensure a continued insurgency. Following a total withdrawal, the $8 billion annual military and civilian aid to Afghanistan will be significantly reduced, forcing the Afghan government to cut more than half of their current expenditures. Then there is the question of what will happen to US military equipment and supplies worth billions of dollars but considered too expensive to lug back home. There are some 30,000 Humvees reported to be destroyed or left behind.
By all appearances, the US has given up on most of its goals and is going to abandon Afghanistan at the mercy of the Taliban. This is a sad end to a conflict, which began with such lofty ambitions, where success was initially based on a list of benchmarks, including ensuring women rights. These days, however, a safe withdrawal has become the singular symbol of success. All resources are being geared towards negotiating a clean withdrawal with the Taliban. Will the US pay off the militants for safe passage? There is still time for sensible solutions to prevail, but growing contradictions and confusion in US policy towards Afghanistan point towards an irresponsible withdrawal that is destined to leave chaos in its wake.
Published in The Express Tribune, July 17th, 2013.
Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.
COMMENTS (37)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
1713853507-0/MalalaHilary-(2)1713853507-0-270x192.webp)
@Parvez:
Ha,ha…..good try. Go fish somewhere else.
Precisely what the Americans are going to do shortly.
And then the Taliban will have a free hand frying the Pakistani fish.
The last laugh is yet to come.
@Humza That $130m was just coming from one of UN agencies (UNHCR). If you want to find out how much was the total aid flowing to pakistan yearly do your home work. Now as far as I know those poor refugees lived for years in camps that you wont put your animal there, those who were living in a proper dwellings were the ones who could pay for it from their pocket. They were working wether it was selling fruits or gold and were contributing to pakistan economy, now what cost of living did the pakistan government cover, if you still say no that money was not enough then bahi can you tell me how much is your government budget for 180m population of Pakistan, i love to know it.
@observer: Ha,ha.....good try. Go fish somewhere else.
@Baghlani: Do you really think a measly 133 million dollars a year is adequate to cover the costs and damages of millions of Afghan refugees? Try tens of billions if you ask me. Pakistan got next to nothings for all of its troubles.
@Parvez:
You obviouly want to argue for the sake of argument…………….you are talking of an internal situation, while the discussion is about a bilateral situation.
OK. By now we know what you do not want, i.e. the Americans leaving.
Now tell us what do you want the Americans to do.
@Asif Butt: "I have read all that you have written here. But what is your point ?" +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Sadly most of the OpEds in ET have little analysis and just plain second hand description. Wouldnt it be great if the Editors summarised each OpEd stating its main theme and conlusions. Then all credit will 'be on the Editors:).
@observer: You obviouly want to argue for the sake of argument................you are talking of an internal situation, while the discussion is about a bilateral situation. The point you make has substance but it can not be related to this situation.
@Asif Butt These ungrateful refugees have proven to be wolves in sheep clothing.
I didnt quit get you, did you mean your country hosted Afghans (not Afghanis; Afghanis is our currency) thought to be sheep? yep that was true they were indded sheep for your country as a result of them being there millions of dollars were flowing to pakistan for just hosting these refegees and I feel disgusted when some ppl write that we hosted refugees, mate dont forget you got paid more than enough for that just as an example:
http://ipsnews2.wpengine.com/2002/07/pakistan-local-economy-feels-pinch-as-afghan-refugees-pack-up/ Pakistan receives $133 million a year from UNHCR for hosting Afghans
Why Afghans are wolves now? You know I met one pakistani one day and he was not happy with Afghan, he was complaining about Afghans not appreciating Pakiz help, I told him "Well it is very smiple It takes many good deeds to build a good reputation, and only one bad one to lose it."
ET, there is nothing wrong with my comment so plz publish it, this is the third time I am posting it! Just getting a taste of democracy in Pakistan!
@Parvez:
Ok we messed, up now we are leaving ‘……….but it does not work like that.
So how does it work?
Ayub Khan messed and left.
Yahya Khan messed and left.
Zia messed and it remains a mess.
Musharaff messed and left.
What else do you suggest?
@Asif Butt These ungrateful refugees have proven to be wolves in sheep clothing.
I didnt quit get you, did you mean your country hosted Afghans (not Afghanis; Afghanis is our currency) thought to be sheep? yep that was true they were indded sheep for your country as a result of them being there millions of dollars were flowing to pakistan for just hosting these refegees and I feel disgusted when some ppl write that we hosted refugees, mate dont forget you got paid more than enough for that just as an example:
http://ipsnews2.wpengine.com/2002/07/pakistan-local-economy-feels-pinch-as-afghan-refugees-pack-up/ Pakistan receives $133 million a year from UNHCR for hosting Afghans
Why Afghans are wolves now? You I have a paki friend he was complaining about Afghans not appreciating Pakiz help, I said "Well it is very smiple It takes many good deeds to build a good reputation, and only one bad one to lose it."
@Jafar: I am just stating the obvious. Pakistan can ill afford to care for millions of migrants - be they from Afghanistan or Bangladesh and yes there are millions of undocumented refugees from both countries who burden Pakistan's economy. Perhaps you don't understand that there are many different kinds of migrants in todays world. Most Pakistanis you see settled in North America and Australia are legal immigrants who went through a legal system for skilled workers with valid visas after an immigration process in Pakistan at foreign embassies. They work in their adopted countries and contribute to societies there through participation and taxes. Most Afghanis in Western countries smuggle themselves abroad as refugees without any valid visa to ask for asylum (panah) and a good number of them do not work in North America but live on social assistance which is like state khayrat. The same is true for Somalis, Tamils and Iraqis in North America. This is not conjecture but reality so in no way am I contributing to hate. I am just pointing out that Pakistan can ill afford to be housing and paying for Afghani refugees because we don't have the resources of the Western countries to pay for asylum seekers. When the US leaves Afghanistan, Pakistan will be stuck with millions more refugees so the West should agree to take them now in advance.
Ms Sabina Khan has written an extremely sensitive paper in which she acquaints us with her anguish at the possibility and predicament that may emerge from the withdrawal of US-led forces from Afghanistan by 2014 end. The sad part is that several of the comments show a matching insensitivity. Ms Sabina has outlined the predicament rightly. The US possibly cannot think of making a compact with the Afghan Taliban by which the US will affirm return to the situation as it obtained before the Allied invasion of November 2001, which made short work of Taliban and Al Qaeda and compelled Mullah Omar and Osama bin Laden to seek refuge and safety in Pakistan. The US proceeded to liquidate Osama bin Laden in Abbottabad after long years of looking for him, but the US did not do any similar thing to Mullah Omar, although his long-time residence in Quetta was well known. Pakistan will go on assuring us, however, that Mullah Omar and Zawahiri are not in Pakistan (much as Dawood Ibrahim is not). We can understand that Ms Sabina would not go so far as to say in so many words that for long Pakistan has been sponsoring terror and that Pakistan’s survival today is predicated on Pakistan turning its back on terror. In this context there are two similes which come to mind. One, my own expression was that from the very beginning of Pakistan’s tryst with terror Pakistan was riding a tiger: the test would come when it attempted to dismount the tiger. It is trying to dismount the tiger and the tiger is now turning on its rider. Two, Mrs Hillary Clinton said if you rear snakes in your backyard, do not expect that they will bite your neighbours only. Indeed, the snakes are biting Pakistan now. But is there awareness in Pakistan that it needs to turn its back on terror? So far we have seen no sign that the new dispensation under Mr Nawaz Sharif indeed has that awareness. Finally, Pakistan needs to set its own house in order and let Afghanistan get on its feet. Will Pakistan do this? V. C. Bhutani, Edinburgh, 17 July 2013, 1720 GMT
Afghanistan's problem stems from its own willingness to blindly follow Indian wishes asa vassal state since 1947. Rather than work with Pakistan with whom it shares cultural and historical commonalities, they prefer to be dictated to by India. The US Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel mentioned the Indian use of Afghanistan as a base to cause trouble in Pakistan. This has caused Afghanistan all of its problems. Pakistan has suffered so much as well due to its unstable neighbor of Afghanistan. However unlike Iran, Pakistan has never confined Afghani refugees to internment camps or denies them the chance to build a better life in Pakistan. Pakistanis have always had a bigger heart when they first welcomed Afghanis in the Soviet invasion back in the 80s. America and the West knows that using Pakistan as a front line state to defeat the Soviets in Afghanistan and end the Cold War saved the world trillions of dollars by preventing a WW3. Pakistan is still owed billions for all its efforts so some misguided bloggers here talking about Pakistani aid know nothing about how much Pakistanis owed by the US. Pakistan saved the US trillions of dollars and suffered many times more damage than the pitiful aid that was given in return. It is because of weak Pakistani leadership that the nation was reimbursed so little for all the effort it made to dislodge the Soviets. Most Pakistanis will know that while so many Afghanis ran away to claim asylum in Western countries, Pakistani volunteers fought the Soviets themselves. That's why there are so many injured Pakistani veterans in the villages of Pakistan.
The reality is that the Afghan conflict has been a non issue to the American public for a long time and Obama is free to do anything he chooses in Afghanistan with little political blow-back. As such - the zero option is quite possible. If the American's make a total withdrawal it's likely the money supporting the Afghan army will evaporate along with Karsai. On the bright side for 8+ years the Pakistani leaders have been touting that Pakistan problems are due to the American's being in Afghanistan so Pakistan will enjoy a major turnaround - right?
If after killing hundreds of thousands of afghan and alqaida terrorists and losing just few hundred soldiers the US is still thought to be defeated in afghanistan then I really do not understand what is the definition of defeat in a battle field. With regards to US withdrawal from afghanistan, it is triggered by domestic pressure as american public just does not want to waste even a single penny in a useless country like afghanistan since the US economy is in very bad shape. US came in this region to hunt down Osama bin laden and his alqaida affiliates and they have successfully eliminated majority of them. US did not come in this region to entertain afghans or karzai a puppet himself installed by the US. And they will leave afghanistan without even giving a second thought to the future miseries that could possibly be faced by afghanistan government because US and west believes in rationality not emotions.
@Parvez:
The US has not been defeated by the Afghans………..they have been defeated by their own stupidity.
And they will take their 'stupidity' back with them. Leaving 'the sanguine and the sagacious' Afghans in charge.
So where exactly is the problem?
@mind control: The US has not been defeated by the Afghans...........they have been defeated by their own stupidity.
@Maria: That boat has already sailed...........a long time ago.
@taurus: ..."Does Pakistan understand the significance of a US reversal, is it good for Pakistan or bad for it?? "...
I dont know how or where you learned to take every published article seriously.
This Afghanistan is another super puppet story . And Pakistan knows what to do and how to do , much better than these think tanks sitting in their offices/homes and writing stuff whenever they feel comfortable enough to.
But I am disgusted by the comments of some people here , probably Afghanis.
These ungrateful refugees have proven to be wolves in sheep clothing.
And they dream of building Afghanistan all with the help of foreign aid, as if Afghans arent already earning millions globally , thanks to the visas they got from embassies in Pakistan , the very Pakistan they stab each day with their pathetic brainless hatred.
Hi Maria,
hasn't pakistan been lliving off social assistance from US for supporting the war in Afghanistan?
That money will stop, and pakistan will be bankrupt since US wont need pakistan to kiss its behind
Good News for world, funny news for slave state pakistan
@Maria,
Madam do you realize that Pakistanis also migrates, there are many Pakistani refugees in USA, Europ etc.. No one can tolerate your comments and it provoke devil and plants hatrd in our hearts against Afghans - there are good Afghans and bad ones and they are human before being Afghan. Please stop accusing them, millions of Afghans are living in Iran too but they are never thought to be responsible for a mess made by the government so i think it is better we dont blam someone for our mistake if we have made one.
@Maria:
I thought Taliban represented whole of Afghanistan and good for Afghans. If thats the case why would refugees come to Pakistan?
Plus, ideology cannot recognize borders. Taliban are not just a group, but an ideology. That ideology exists in Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and many other places. Even though India has fenced and barricaded and mined the borders with Pakistan, that ideology has given rise to IM.
Also lets not forget Taliban are supported by Pakistan(Quite idiotic really..), so if Afghans do run away from Taliban, isn't that Pakistan's fault?
@Sabina Khan
There is still time for sensible solutions to prevail,
Such as?
A. US handing over Afghanistan to Pakistan?
B. US accepting Taliban/ Al Qaeda suzerainty over Afghanistan and helping them in Global Jihad?
C. US agreeing to keep on pumping billions of US Dollars into Af-Pak for no apparent reason?
D. US agreeing to become the cat's paw of ISI?
Pray, do elucidate upon some 'sensible solutions'.
@Parvez:
A. The fact that the US stands defeated is no secret, what they are doing now is searching for a fig leaf to try retain some semblance of dignity, if that is possible.
B. The Afghans said don’t do what you did to us the last time ( abandon them )
Err.. If the US is soundly defeated by the Afghans, then what option, other than leaving, do they have?
And if the Afghans are asking US not to abandon them, then who exactly defeated the US?
Perhaps what you want is that the US should stick around as a defeated slave doing the Taliban Master's bidding?
Dream on!
Whether US walks away or not, it is Pakistan which is in trouble. By sheltering Afghan Taliban the goodwill of Afghan people is lost. Secondly, TTP claims Mullah Omar as their head so if Afghan Taliban come anywhere close to Power, Pakistan could be doomed. I see only a lose lose situation for Pakistan unless it has a sudden change of heart and sacrifices the good Taliban to emasculate the bad Taliban.
@Asif Butt: If you know it all why read it; if you already understand, why follow it? Why should you drown when you can walk away? Everyone has an opinion its just like any other part of your anatomy. The article is trying to give you a perspective about how the US will try and pay their way out and how the Taliban will haggle for the right amount. It also points to a day after scenerio where Pakistan is affected. Does Pakistan understand the significance of a US reversal, is it good for Pakistan or bad for it?? Butt sab this was the substance, hope you have manged to grasp the basics of the write up.
I think there are many things about the US goals in the region that we do not know, so I am not sure how it is possible that they have given up there goals. On the other hand, no matter what the outcome in Afghanistan will be, it is a lose lose situation for Pakistan because the Pakistani administration has lost the trust of Taliban by selling them to the Americans after 9/11 and at the same time they are in a direct war with the current government in Afghanistan.
@Maria I know what you mean exactly when you write about Afghans coming to pakistan, i know they are like milking cows for the fragile economy of pakistan. Remember last time 1980 - 90s you had a boom in your economy? Anyways can you tell me which part of border you will plant mines, please ensur to plant them on the other side of sind river cause upto that area it is a disputed and! and until it is sorted no one can cal Afghans refugess ! Also did you say Afghans live on social assistance.. umm have you heard of pakistani refugess coming to australia by boat and claiming to be Afghan and abusing the social benfits Australia.
Mohtarma Sabina Khan ,
I have read all that you have written here.
But what is your point ?
You havent concluded as to what it is that you are trying to say here ?
Or are you just some news reporter reporting something which we already know ?
Or are we people from the public just supposed to follow all the pipe pipers of journalism blindly until we we wake up to find ourselves drowning in the river of impotent opinions ?
@Parvez: I agree that this article neatly sums up the problem and it will be bad for Pakistan if the Afghan Taleban come to power too. It is clear to many that Afghanistan will descend into chaos but the key is for Pakistan to try to set up fences or mine the border with Afghanistan so Afghani refugees and trouble doesn't blow into Pakistan like it always does. At least in Fremont and other parts of California, the Afghani refugees can live on social assistance and be supported by the state but the same is not true for Pakistan will they will be a burden on the economy.
Can you please gives us the reader some references that usa will abandon Afghanistan. Your article makes a passing remark about this.
Clearly and well written. The fact that the US stands defeated is no secret, what they are doing now is searching for a fig leaf to try retain some semblance of dignity, if that is possible. The Afghans said don't do what you did to us the last time ( abandon them ) .........and it seems that is exactly what will happen.
Sitting in California and thinking about Afghanistan...writer is just coping and pasting Foreign policy website news...she really dont have anything else to do..dont worry about Afghanistan... it has survived for 5000 years without your Americans or Natos... America was not even discovered that we were ruling so called Hindustan.. worry about your Pakistan... your load shitting will soon divide pakistan into 4 new countries soon..... KPK is already going to blast soon because of Punjab as KPK do not get the share in anything.. all new projects and developments only happen in Punjab.. look at KPK... it has nothing new... all built before 1947... I hope KPK people understand that Punjabis will always rule you and KPK will be their slave for ever...
Pakistanis are grateful to Karzai for having the guts to say No to US Bilateral Security Agreement. You know otherwise, US having military bases in Afghanistan, there, will be many Abbotabad like raids. For we are not stupid to let go our Molla jihadi monkey business Karzai will not sign BSA for free, he is smart enough to ask for things like elimintating sancturies of terror, equiping Afghan Army & airforce, supporting Afghan economy. US have no choice but to oblidge Karzai, they have invested a lot in blood & money. It is existentional threat for US to have pre 9/11 Afghanistan. Russia, China & India the three major international players are on the same page with Karzai. So Sabina, take it easy on Karzai, he is presented erratic by Western media, you do not want to copy Western media.
In your previous articles you gloated about how the US is being defeated. Now you think its sad that the Taliban will dominate?
Great points ... man, I hope the US rethinks their surrender to the Taliban.