Top US general: Negotiations done on Afghan deal
In
this Monday, Dec. 9, fghan troops in their war against the Taliban.
| ||||
"In this Monday, Dec. 9, 2013 photo Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, left, talks to Marines and soldiers stationed at Camp Leatherneck in Washir district, Helmand province, Afghanistan. Americas top military officer said Tuesday the U.S. does not intend to renegotiate a security deal with Afghanistan and that a full withdrawal of its forces from the country at the end of 2014 could reverse gains made by Afghan troops in their war against the Taliban. D. Myles Cullen/Department of Defense" |
|
The Associated Press |
Published: December 11, 2013
BAGRAM AIR FIELD, Afghanistan — America's
top military officer warned the withdrawal of most U.S. and allied
forces from Afghanistan by the end of next year could reverse gains made
in the war against the Taliban and further destabilize the region.
But Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of
the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the U.S. has no plans to reopen
negotiations on the hard-won text. Dempsey said he hasn't started
planning for a so-called "zero-option," but he may have to soon if Hamid
Karzai doesn't change his mind and sign the deal.
Much is at stake. Afghan security forces
are still struggling against a resilient insurgency despite billions of
dollars spent on training during nearly 13 years at war. Instability in
Afghanistan, the world's largest illicit producer of raw opium, could
also impact the region as far away as Russia. Such concerns, Dempsey
said, are what make Afghanistan important to America and its allies
despite waning interest in the conflict at home.
"Were it to become less stable, it would
have impact on its neighbors," Dempsey told reporters late Tuesday at
this military base north of the capital. "All of us would be concerned
about the possibility of ungoverned space producing safe havens for
terrorism, so stability in the region is in our national interest."
He said it was important to leave
Afghanistan with a functioning government and security forces that can
prevent a "re-emergence of al-Qaida and affiliates."
Much of that hinges on the bilateral
security agreement that Afghan President Hamid Karzai helped forge but
then refused to sign.
The U.S. wants the deal to be signed by
Dec. 31 because it needs time to prepare to keep thousands of U.S.
troops in the country for up to a decade. NATO allies also have said
they won't stay if the Americans pull out.
The agreement aims to help train and
develop the Afghan National Security Forces, and allow for a smaller
counterterrorism force to go after stubborn remnants of al-Qaida and
other groups.
The 350,000-strong Afghan forces were holding their ground, Dempsey said, but still need help.
Without a foreign presence, "the
development of the security forces will be impeded, will be slowed, and
in some parts of the country I suspect could be reversed," Dempsey said.
After a year of often-turbulent
negotiations, a deal was struck on the agreement last month and Karzai
presented it to a national assembly known as a Loya Jirga for approval.
The assembly not only endorsed the deal but demanded that Karzai sign it
by the end of this month.
Karzai says he wants his successor to sign
it after the April 5 elections but said he would consider signing it
himself if the U.S. adds new conditions, including ending airstrikes and
raids on Afghan homes, and doing more to help broker peace with the
Taliban.
Dempsey said he considered the text a done deal.
"It's not our intention to reopen the text and to renegotiate that which had been already discussed," he said.
Karzai has also lashed out at the United
States, accusing it of making threats. In an interview published Tuesday
by the French daily Le Monde, Karzai said the U.S. was acting like a
colonial power.
Dempsey retorted: "It's not a threat. I
just simply think that in any negotiation you reach a point when you've
made the requirements known. And militarily, by the way, those
requirements are actually quite clear."
Dempsey, who was here for a quick visit
with U.S. troops ahead of the holidays, said he has not yet started
making plans for a full withdrawal of all U.S. troops at the end of
2014, when a NATO mandate ends and all foreign combat forces leave the
country.
"First of all I am still not planning for a
zero option, although I do consider it to be an unfortunate possibility
given the current impasse at achieving the bilateral security
agreement," Dempsey said. "So we are not planning a zero option although
we clearly understand it could be a possibility."
Allies such as Germany also want the agreement signed and have said they will not stay without the United States.
German Defense Minister Thomas de Maiziere,
who arrived in Afghanistan Wednesday for a troop visit in
Mazar-i-Sharif, said it was important for Karzai to sign as soon as
possible to give the international contingent time to prepare, Germany's
dpa news agency reported.
"I don't want to give a timeframe at this
juncture when we've past the point logistically when it becomes
impossible - that wouldn't be tactically smart," he said, but waiting
until after elections was "certainly too late."
Germany has 3,300 forces here and has
pledged about 800 to remain after 2014. The U.S. has 46,000 troops in
Afghanistan and its allies have another 26,000, down from nearly 150,000
two years ago.
Dempsey agreed that delays would affect the coalition.
"I hope it's resonating, that we probably
are a little more agile than our NATO partners who have their own
political systems, their own dynamics, their own resource-budget cycles,
and I think that the real risk in delaying is that we'll begin to
affect the coalition," he said.
No comments:
Post a Comment