What's new

Karzai wants U.S. to reduce military operations in Afghanistan

pkpatriotic

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Apr 2, 2008
Messages
2,317
Reaction score
0
Karzai wants U.S. to reduce military operations in Afghanistan
By Joshua Partlow
Washington Post Foreign Service
Sunday, November 14, 2010


KABUL- President Hamid Karzai said on Saturday that the United States must reduce the visibility and intensity of its military operations in Afghanistan and end the increased U.S. Special Operations forces night raids that aggravate Afghans and could exacerbate the Taliban insurgency.

In an interview with The Washington Post, Karzai said that he wanted American troops off the roads and out of Afghan homes and that the long-term presence of so many foreign soldiers would only worsen the war. His comments placed him at odds with U.S. commander Gen. David H. Petraeus, who has made capture-and-kill missions a central component of his counterinsurgency strategy, and who claims the 30,000 new troops have made substantial progress in beating back the insurgency.

"The time has come to reduce military operations," Karzai said. "The time has come to reduce the presence of, you know, boots in Afghanistan . . . to reduce the intrusiveness into the daily Afghan life."

Karzai's comments come as American officials are playing down the importance of July 2011 - the date President Obama set to begin withdrawing U.S. troops from Afghanistan - in favor of a combat mission ending in 2014. The Afghan president has placed himself squarely in favor of a lighter military footprint as the administration reviews the progress of the Afghan war and debate intensifies about the pace of the withdrawal. Karzai says his troops are ready to take more responsibility for their own security.

In an hour-long interview with Post reporters and editors in his office in Kabul, Karzai said he was speaking out not to criticize the United States but in the belief that candor could improve what he called a "grudging" relationship between the countries. He described his own deep skepticism with American policy in Afghanistan - from last year's presidential election, which he said was manipulated by U.S. officials, to his conviction that government corruption has been caused by billions of American dollars funneled to unaccountable contractors. And he said Afghans have lost patience with the presence of American soldiers in their homes and armored vehicles on their roads.

Karzai has long been publicly critical of civilian casualties at the hands of U.S. and NATO troops and has repeatedly called for curtailing night raids into Afghan homes. Under Petraeus and his predecessor, such raids by U.S. Special Operations troops have increased sharply, to about 200 a month, or six times the number being carried out 18 months ago, said a senior NATO military official, who requested anonymity so that he could speak candidly about the situation. These operations capture or kill their target 50 to 60 percent of the time, the official said.

To American commanders, the nighttime strike missions are a crucial weapon to capture Taliban commanders, disrupt bomb-making networks and weaken the 30,000-man insurgency in Afghanistan. In the past three months, U.S. Special Operations troops have killed or captured 368 insurgent leaders. On each mission, Afghan commandos accompany U.S. troops and Afghan officers work with the Special Operations command at Bagram Airfield to choose targets, military officials said.

"We understand President Karzai's concerns, but we would not be as far along as we are pressuring the network had it not been for these very precision operations we do at night," the NATO military official said. "I don't see any near-term alternative to this kind of operation."

But Karzai was emphatic that U.S. troops must cease such operations, which he said violate the sanctity of Afghan homes and incite more people to join the insurgency. A senior Afghan official said that Karzai has repeatedly criticized the raids in meetings with Petraeus and that he is seeking veto power over the operations. The Afghan government does not have the type of legal arrangement that the Iraqi government has with U.S. forces to approve particular military operations.

"The raids are a problem always. They were a problem then, they are a problem now. They have to go away," Karzai said. "The Afghan people don't like these raids, if there is any raid it has to be done by the Afghan government within the Afghan laws. This is a continuing disagreement between us."

Karzai, who said during his inaugural speech last year that he would like to have full Afghan security control by 2014, said that the U.S. military "should and could" draw down its forces next year. He acknowledged that an abrupt withdrawal would be dangerous, but said that American soldiers should confine themselves more to their bases and limit themselves to necessary operations along the Pakistani border. He said he wanted the U.S. government to apply more pressure on Taliban sanctuaries in Pakistan while focusing on development projects and civilian assistance in Afghanistan.

Although he did not say how many U.S. troops he would prefer in Afghanistan, Karzai said that at current levels "you cannot sustain that." There are about 100,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

"It's not desirable for the Afghan people either to have 100,000 or more foreign troops going around the country endlessly," he said.

"We'd like to have a long-term relationship with America, a substantial relationship with America, that's what the Afghan people want. But we'd like the Afghan countryside - villages, homes, towns - not to be so overwhelmed with the military presence. Life has to be seen [as] more normal," he added.

Insurgents have stepped up their attacks this year to record levels. In the past two days, a car bomb exploded in Kabul and fighters attacked a NATO observation post at the Jalalabad airport in eastern Afghanistan. Saturday's early morning airport assault sparked a lengthy gun battle that left six insurgents dead, including two wearing explosive vests.

As the American military campaign has moved into high gear, U.S. officials have grown increasingly concerned with the failure of the Afghan government to root out corruption and provide services to the people. Karzai deflected this criticism by arguing that much of his government's corruption problem comes from the American money that is pumped into the country outside the control of Afghan ministries and frittered away on private security firms that undermine the authority of Afghan security forces. During the Soviet occupation, he said, ministers lived in modest housing blocks and the foreign money flowed through the Afghan government.

"How come we are now so luxury-oriented today?" he asked. "The transparency of contracts is not there. Why is the U.S. government giving contracts to the sons and relatives of officials of the Afghan government? We don't do those contracts. I don't have an authority over a penny of those contracts. . . . and we've been protesting against this for years." :azn:

On the issue of negotiations with the Taliban, Karzai said that he met with Taliban leaders in "one or two" meetings about three months ago, but that the talks were in a nascent stage and amounted to little more than "the exchange of desires for peace."

He would not name the insurgents he has met but described them as "very high" level, and said that he believed that Taliban leader Mohammad Omar has been informed of the discussions.

"They feel the same way as we do here. That too many people are suffering for no reason. Their own families are suffering," he said, and it is this "national suffering they'd like to address with us."

Karzai said he was grateful to the American people for their support, particularly the flood of taxpayer money for new schools, roads, clinics and other development projects. But he questioned the Obama administration's motives. Karzai said he has become accustomed to the barrage of criticism against him and his family - allegations including graft and drug trafficking. The U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl Eikenberry, wrote in a cable last year that Karzai was not an adequate strategic partner and warned against sending troops to bolster such a troubled government.

"If a partner means a silent spectator of events conducted by Washington, if that kind of partner you seek, well, I'm not that partner," Karzai said. "Nor will be the Afghan people."
 
. .
Why does presence of Indian troops does not upset Afghans?
 
.
Petraeus warns Afghans about Karzai's criticism of U.S. war strategy
By Joshua Partlow and Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Foreign Service
Monday, November 15, 2010


KABUL - Gen. David H. Petraeus, the coalition military commander in Afghanistan, warned Afghan officials Sunday that President Hamid Karzai's latest public criticism of U.S. strategy threatens to seriously undermine progress in the war and risks making Petraeus's own position "untenable," according to Afghan and U.S. officials.

Officials said Petraeus expressed "astonishment and disappointment" with Karzai's call, in a Saturday interview with The Washington Post, to "reduce military operations" and end U.S. Special Operations raids in southern Afghanistan that coalition officials said have killed or captured hundreds of Taliban commanders in recent months.

In a meeting Sunday morning with Ashraf Ghani, who leads the Afghan government's planning on transition, Petraeus made what several officials described as "hypothetical" references to an inability to continue U.S. operations in the face of Karzai's remarks.

The night raids are at the heart of Petraeus's counterinsurgency strategy and are key to his hopes of being able to show significant progress when the White House reviews the situation in Afghanistan next month.

Officials discounted early reports Sunday that Petraeus had threatened to resign. But "for [Karzai] to go this way, and at that particular stage, is really undermining [Petraeus's] endeavors," one foreign diplomat in Kabul said. "Not only his personally, but the international community." Several officials in Washington and Kabul requested anonymity in order to discus the issue.

The weekend controversy came days before NATO leaders, including President Obama, are scheduled to hold a summit in Lisbon that will begin to set a timetable for transition - the process of turning portions of Afghanistan security control over to Afghan forces. The summit, which Karzai is to attend, will also set 2014 as a deadline for the end of coalition combat operations there and will showcase a long-term NATO-Afghan partnership.

Petraeus "never actually threatened resignation," but his comments to Ghani reflected his desire to ensure that the Afghans understood the seriousness of the situation, a senior NATO military official said.

"We've been [subsequently] assured that President Karzai is fully supportive of the joint strategy, that we share the desire for Afghan forces to take the lead, and that we've worked hard together to address all the issues over which [Karzai] raised concerns and will continue to do so," the official said.

Petraeus did not attend a scheduled meeting Sunday with Karzai, officials said. Karzai's spokesman also cancelled a scheduled news conference. Some Afghan officials Sunday attempted to smooth over the issue by declaring Karzai's respect for Petraeus and faith in his strategy.

It is "categorically false" to interpret Karzai's remarks as a "vote of no-confidence in Gen. Petraeus," one senior Afghan official said. In addition to agreement on ending the coalition combat mission by the end of 2014, he said, there are many areas of "common interests and common objectives."

"These are two men who are comfortable working with each other. There's an environment of mutual respect, and trust has been building among them," the official said.

In the Saturday interview, Karzai said that the often-troubled U.S.-Afghan dynamic had improved since Petraeus's arrival in the summer, and that the two countries have a more "mature relationship." But he also outlined a vision for the U.S. military presence here that sharply conflicts with the Obama administration's strategy.

In addition to ending night raids, Karzai said that he wants U.S. troops to be less intrusive in the lives of Afghans, and that they should strive to stay in their bases and conduct just the "necessary activities" along the Pakistan border.

"I think it's [Karzai's] directness that really sticks in the craw," another NATO official said. "He is standing 180 degrees to what is a central tenet of our current campaign plan."

"It's pretty clear that you no longer have a reliable partner in Kabul," the official added. "I think we tried to paper it over with [Karzai's] Washington visit" in May. "But the wheels have becoming looser and looser . . . since that."

The latest rift follows a string of public disputes between Karzai and the West in recent months. They clashed on corruption issues last summer after Karzai freed an aide from jail who was accused of soliciting a bribe and moved to stem the activities of U.S.-backed anti-corruption investigations.

This fall, Karzai's push to disband private security companies that protect foreign assistance projects was seen as putting at risk billions in development aid. His public comments, often bluntly criticizing the West for meddling or worsening the war by harming civilians, have made it difficult for the nations to deliver a common message.

In Washington, officials described Karzai's remarks as nothing out of the ordinary and said he had expressed similar views to Petraeus and other officials in private.

"While we certainly didn't expect the list that he laid out," a senior administration official said, "the fact that those were concerns to him was not a surprise to us."

The official added: "Obviously, President Karzai has expressed some frustration recently. We've been working very hard to deal with those frustrations. It's challenging. That's no secret." The administration, he said, shared some of Karzai's concerns and was trying to "work with" him to address them.

At the Lisbon summit, NATO plans to declare that progress in the war will enable "transition" to Afghan security control, beginning in the spring. Petraeus is to decide which provinces and districts are stable enough to turn over to Afghan national security forces, with coalition troops remaining in an "overwatch" capacity as they head toward complete combat withdrawal by the end of 2014.

Coalition officials hope that the formal start of the transition process will allow Karzai to assert that his concerns about a reduced foreign military footprint are being addressed. Areas slated for transition will be cleared with the Afghan government and Karzai will announce them in coming months.

"We are making sure that he is the person who is out front," the senior administration official said.

NATO has emphasized that "transition" decisions are separate from decisions made by individual coalition members about withdrawing their forces from Afghanistan altogether. Obama has pledged to begin bringing U.S. troops, now totaling about 100,000, home from Afghanistan in July, although the administration has said the size and pace of the drawdown will be determined by "conditions on the ground."

Many coalition officials said they have grown accustomed to Karzai's provocative statements and think that they are intended primarily for an Afghan audience. But others worry that such comments will erode NATO's resolve to stay in Afghanistan, already challenged by declining public approval of the war in member nations.

"It undermines the support and trust of the Western countries," one foreign diplomat in Kabul said. "That's what the NATO summit should be all about. Are we on the same page? Or are we in different worlds?"
 
.
On this forum we have serving US officers saying that Afghan govt is doing great and here we have the Afghan President asking the US military to stop it's operations -- interesting this divergence between the two "allies"
 
.
Clinton defends US operations after Karzai criticism
November 16 2010, 5 Hrs ago

clinton-AFP-543.jpg

Hillary Clinton on November 15, 2010 defended US military operations as having “a significant impact” in Afghanistan after criticism from Afghan President Hamid Karzai. – Photo by AFP (File)

WASHINGTON: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton defended US strategy in Afghanistan Monday after Afghan President Hamid Karzai called on Washington to reduce its military footprint and Taliban leaders ruled out peace talks.

Insurgent violence meanwhile showed no signs of letting up as nine security guards were killed and a Taliban rocket attack on a military base destroyed six armored vehicles in Afghanistan on Monday.

The violence occurred in the build-up to a key NATO summit in Lisbon, where the continued presence of foreign forces in the country — and the timetable for their withdrawal — is likely to be high on the agenda.

Clinton defended “intelligence-driven, precision-targeted” US military operations in Afghanistan as having “a significant impact on the insurgent leadership and the networks that they operate,” following criticism from Karzai.

The chief US diplomat said the “operations are conducted in full partnership” with the Kabul government, with Afghan forces included in each operation.

But, Clinton added, the United States remains “very sensitive of the concerns” expressed by Karzai.

In a weekend interview with the Washington Post, Karzai had urged the US military to lighten its footprint in his country and shift toward a more civilian development operation to “reduce the intrusiveness into the daily Afghan life.”His calls — including those for sharply reducing night raids in local communities — run counter to US plans to intensify the offensive against the Taliban before any withdrawal, possibly as early as mid-2011.

The Washington Post then reported Monday that US General David Petraeus, the coalition commander in Afghanistan, had voiced “astonishment and disappointment” over Karzai’s calls, saying they could undermine progress against the insurgency.

In Brussels, NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen said he did not agree with everything Karzai said.

But he added that his comments were in line with the NATO-led mission’s plan to endorse at a summit in Lisbon on Saturday a plan to start the handover of security responsibility to Afghan forces early next year.

Nonetheless, there are indications that there is a growing recognition within the 28-member bloc that a full withdrawal is likely to come later rather than sooner, with the end of 2014 — or beyond — seen as more realistic.

The US envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, said on a visit to Islamabad that some troops would withdraw from July next year as the coalition aimed to transfer security to Afghan forces by the end of 2014.

The Taliban high command meanwhile ruled out a negotiated settlement, calling reports that they were involved in peace talks “misleading rumors” and vowing to step up their campaign of targeted strikes at coalition troops.

“The aim is to entangle the enemy in an exhausting war of attrition and wear it away like the former Soviet Union,” the militant group said in a statement attributed to its one-eyed leader, Mullah Omar.

“Our strategy is to increase our operations step by step and spread them to all parts of the country to compel the enemy to come out from their hideouts and then crush them through tactical raids,” he added.

With violence unabated, Monday’s deadliest strike was on a telecommunications tower in northern Kunduz province. Nine security guards, an Afghan police officer and seven Taliban were killed, local police said.

Telephone antennae have become a target for the Taliban and other insurgents since the militant group banned mobile telephone communications at night in areas they control.

The rebels maintain that the Afghan security forces and their international backers in the 150,000-strong US-led NATO force track down militants using mobile phone signals.

In Ottawa, Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s extension of a military mission in Afghanistan beyond a parliamentary-mandated 2011 exit drew fire from opposition parties on Monday.

Ottawa last week announced it would deploy hundreds of military trainers until 2014 to help Afghan security forces take over security in the war-torn nation. – AFP
 
.
US had promised Pakistan that Northern Alliance would not be allowed to enter Kabul, no sooner promised than reneged on - Now with a troublesome karzai as the nominal Pashtun face on the American Satrapy of Afghanistan, policy makers must we wondering "what if" - but like it or not, the US is stuck with Karzai.

To maintain herself in Afghanistan, policy makers must now be seriously considering the utility of a unified Afghanistan.
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom