Afghanistan - U.S. Relations
U.S.-AFGHANISTAN RELATIONS. Afghanistan remains an important partner of the United States in the fight against terrorism, working with us. In , what is the state of relations between Afghanistan's Sunni-led government and Iran's Shia theocracy? On what issues do they. The United States Needs an Afghanistan Exit Strategy when the Taliban's relationship with al Qaeda triggered the U.S. military response?.
Marine Corps, made a troubling and dangerously flawed comparison when speaking about the endgame in Afghanistan. Must the United States maintain a permanent presence in Afghanistan?
And whereas Germany and Japan were both modern industrial nations with their own histories of democracy when that war started and have since become close allies, Afghanistan, still beset by conflict, has never really been anything more than a collection of ethnic clans only loosely bound together by nationhood—where the fragments often command a greater allegiance from individual citizens than the whole.
The United States Needs an Afghanistan Exit Strategy – Foreign Policy
I rarely find a reason to agree with U. President Donald Trump and Steve Bannon, his former chief strategist, but it is possible that their initial instincts on Afghanistan were right: The United States may have unlearned the lessons of Vietnam too well.
The military seems to have forgotten that insurgents do not have to win—they only need to not lose until the foreigners give in to pressure and leave. Afghanistan is as much the graveyard of empires as it ever was. That wishful thinking aside, the argument against withdrawing U. As in Vietnam, the United States is trapped. So the ultimate question is: The risks of collapse and chaos are impossible to rule out.
U.S. Department of State
But there is reason to believe that the realities on the ground—exhaustion after years of war, a more politically sophisticated Taliban, and a multiplicity of competing jihadi groups—have changed and that a different outcome is now possible. It is not hard to understand why the idea that the United States can stay in Afghanistan and win seems to hold widespread appeal.
The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have defined the careers of an entire generation of the U. From my time in government, I can recognize the stubborn dedication to a task not yet completed and the impact of bureaucratic inertia. Taken together, these elements are a major factor in the failure of the United States to move past the sunk costs rationale for continuing the war in Afghanistan, despite the tragic toll, which will only increase the longer the United States refuses to change course.
But the United States could ensure those interests without staying in Afghanistan forever. However, the country would need to change its mindset in order to both get out and have a chance of avoiding a much-feared collapse in Kabul, which would lead to Afghanistan becoming a jihadi playground. Any plausible exit strategy must involve handing over U. First on that list is China, which has large economic and counterterrorism interests at stake. Washington should signal its intent to withdraw troops and quietly begin a dialogue with Beijing to coordinate an exit that minimizes the possibility of a political-military vacuum.
China prefers to free-ride on the United States but, faced with the reality of U. In April Afghanistan and the United States finalized a strategic partnership agreement outlining their relationship following the withdrawal of Western combat troops from the country.
The deal insures American military and financial support for the Afghan people for at least a decade beyondthe deadline for most foreign combat forces to withdraw. Beyondthe United States shall seek funds, on a yearly basis, to support the training,equipping, advising, and sustaining of the Afghan National Security Forces ANSFso that Afghanistan can independently secure and defend itself against internal and external threats, and help ensure that terrorists never again encroach on Afghan soil and threaten Afghanistan,the region, and the world.
Afghanistan will provide US forces continued access to and use of Afghan facilities throughand beyond as may be agreed in the Bilateral Security Agreement, for the purposes of combating al-Qaeda and its affiliates, training the Afghan National Security Forces, and other mutually determined missions to advance shared security interests.
While much of that is already expedited through the international security force here, Secretary Clinton says the designation is a "powerful symbol" of the U.
Washington needed the so-called bilateral security agreement BSA to be in place. A traditional national assembly of Afghan elders and politicians also endorsed the security pact 24 November But President Hamid Karzai since refused to sign the deal until the US military ends raids against Afghan homes while chasing insurgents and helps Kabul in opening peace talks with the Taliban. Karzai said the winner of that country's presidential election in April should sign the agreement.New Afghanistan Policy of Donald Trump - Impact on Pakistan & India - Complete analysis
In an article published 28 January by The Washington Post, unnamed senior Afghan officials said Afghan President Karzai has a list of "dozens of attacks" he believes the U. S government may have been involved in an attempt to weaken him and foment instability in the country.
US ambassador to Afghanistan James Cunningham is quoted in the article as describing the allegations as "deeply conspiratorial" and "divorced from reality". The Washington Post said the unnamed officials provided no evidence of any US role in the attacks, which included an assault of a Justice Ministry building and another on a courthouse in western Farah province.
The officials said some of the attacks may have been carried out to distract attention from an airstrikes in other areas.