nangyale
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 31, 2010
- Messages
- 2,251
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Karzai criticises lack of US respect for Afghan sovereignty as relations worsen
Obama administration looks increasingly likely to gamble with Afghan president’s successor over signing of security agreement
Afghan president Hamid Karzai, left, talks with his Turkish counterpart Abdullah Gul on Thursday. Photograph: Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images
Relations between Washington and Kabul took another turn for the worse on Thursday as Afghan president Hamid Karzai criticised a lack of US respect for its sovereignty and White House officials appeared increasingly resigned to gambling on a better rapport with his successor.
The two governments have been at loggerheads for several months over Karzai’s refusal to sign an agreement governing a continued American security presence in the country after the bulk of Nato troops pull out later this year.
But growing irritation on both sides boiled over this week after US criticism of an Afghan decision to release 65 suspected Taliban prisoners, and officials in Washington have begun openly speculating on what would happen if Karzai never signs the agreement.
“The longer the BSA goes unsigned by Karzai, it increases likelihood that there will be no troops after 2014 in Afghanistan,” said State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf in a conference call with reporters.
The threat to pull out entirely has been made before by the US, but the White House has previously insisted that Karzai sign it within weeks.
Instead, both Harf and White House spokesman Jay Carney declined to put a timeframe on the process during the latest press briefings and national intelligence director James Clapper said on Tuesday his personal view was that it would not be completed before the election.
“It is the Afghan government that negotiated this agreement,” said Carney on Wednesday.
“There is the reality that this is – we’re now in February of 2014 and we’re having to look at, with our Nato allies, what the world looks like in terms of our troops beyond 2014. And that’s why it needs to be signed promptly if we’re going to be able to fulfil our preferred approach here, which is to have a limited troop presence in order to continue to conduct [counter-terrorism] operations and to train and support the Afghan security forces.”
But a shared interest in combating Taliban attacks is not enough to prevent a growing clash, particularly over prisoner releases.
“Afghanistan is a sovereign country,” said Karzai at a conference in Turkey on Thursday. “If the Afghan judicial authorities decide to release a prisoner it is of no concern to the US. I hope that the US will stop harassing Afghanistan’s procedures and judicial authority and I hope the US will now begin to respect Afghan sovereignty.”
Karzai also insisted he still supports the principle of a bilateral security agreement, which was supported last year by a loya jirga of tribal leaders, but US officials are increasingly pinning their hopes on pressuring his successor instead after Karzai steps down for elections in April.
Speaking before the Senate armed services committee on Tuesday, Clapper said a formal US decision to wait for Karzai’s successor to sign the agreement instead could “have a salutary” effect on Kabul.
Obama administration looks increasingly likely to gamble with Afghan president’s successor over signing of security agreement
Afghan president Hamid Karzai, left, talks with his Turkish counterpart Abdullah Gul on Thursday. Photograph: Adem Altan/AFP/Getty Images
Relations between Washington and Kabul took another turn for the worse on Thursday as Afghan president Hamid Karzai criticised a lack of US respect for its sovereignty and White House officials appeared increasingly resigned to gambling on a better rapport with his successor.
The two governments have been at loggerheads for several months over Karzai’s refusal to sign an agreement governing a continued American security presence in the country after the bulk of Nato troops pull out later this year.
But growing irritation on both sides boiled over this week after US criticism of an Afghan decision to release 65 suspected Taliban prisoners, and officials in Washington have begun openly speculating on what would happen if Karzai never signs the agreement.
“The longer the BSA goes unsigned by Karzai, it increases likelihood that there will be no troops after 2014 in Afghanistan,” said State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf in a conference call with reporters.
The threat to pull out entirely has been made before by the US, but the White House has previously insisted that Karzai sign it within weeks.
Instead, both Harf and White House spokesman Jay Carney declined to put a timeframe on the process during the latest press briefings and national intelligence director James Clapper said on Tuesday his personal view was that it would not be completed before the election.
“It is the Afghan government that negotiated this agreement,” said Carney on Wednesday.
“There is the reality that this is – we’re now in February of 2014 and we’re having to look at, with our Nato allies, what the world looks like in terms of our troops beyond 2014. And that’s why it needs to be signed promptly if we’re going to be able to fulfil our preferred approach here, which is to have a limited troop presence in order to continue to conduct [counter-terrorism] operations and to train and support the Afghan security forces.”
But a shared interest in combating Taliban attacks is not enough to prevent a growing clash, particularly over prisoner releases.
“Afghanistan is a sovereign country,” said Karzai at a conference in Turkey on Thursday. “If the Afghan judicial authorities decide to release a prisoner it is of no concern to the US. I hope that the US will stop harassing Afghanistan’s procedures and judicial authority and I hope the US will now begin to respect Afghan sovereignty.”
Karzai also insisted he still supports the principle of a bilateral security agreement, which was supported last year by a loya jirga of tribal leaders, but US officials are increasingly pinning their hopes on pressuring his successor instead after Karzai steps down for elections in April.
Speaking before the Senate armed services committee on Tuesday, Clapper said a formal US decision to wait for Karzai’s successor to sign the agreement instead could “have a salutary” effect on Kabul.
