bobdina
12-03-2009, 08:48 AM
Attack On Afghanistan Withdrawal Date
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Barack Obama's new Afghanistan plan met widespread scepticism today from both Democrats and Republicans who challenged him over the troop escalation and the planned date for the start of withdrawal.
US allies, in particular British military commanders, also questioned the wisdom of setting a withdrawal date and described US projections for expanding the Afghan army and police as optimistic.
Obama sent the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, the defence secretary, Robert Gates, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Mike Mullen, to Congress today as part of a charm offensive.
But both Democrats and Republicans on the Senate armed services committee challenged Obama's security team. The Republican John McCain described the plan as "logically incoherent". He said it made no sense to announce a date. "That gives the wrong impression to our friends, it's the wrong impression to give our enemies."
The opposition on Capitol Hill underlined the hard sell that lies ahead for Obama as he needs congressional approval for the $30bn plan. He announced he was to send 30,000 extra troops, bringing the US total to 100,000, while also setting July 2011 as the date for the start of US withdrawal, though with no end date fixed.
The reaction to his speech at the West Point military academy last night was mixed, with some US commentators saying his heart did not appear to be in it. There were also heavy doubts as to whether the extra troops would be enough to prevent Taliban advances.
A Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousuf Ahamdi, told the AFP news agency: "Obama will witness lots of coffins heading to America from Afghanistan."
At the Senate hearing, Mullen said the increase in the number of troops was likely to mean an increase in US casualties.
The date for withdrawal was inserted into the speech to try to placate a US public becoming weary of the war, over casualties and cost. But today Obama's security team got into a muddle over the date.
Republicans pushed Gates over whether withdrawal would definitely begin in July 2011 or whether it depended on conditions. Gates initially said forces would begin coming home that month but later confused matters by saying Obama would review strategy in December 2010 and would make a decision then based on how the war was going.
His security team today set out to provide more details of the new strategy, as did the US commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal. The aim is to hand over Afghanistan province by province – even district by district – to the Afghan army, a phased approach along the same lines as applied in Iraq, from which the US will withdraw its troops by 2011.
But Afghanistan could be harder, with some estimates that the Taliban have established shadow governments in 31 of the 34 provinces. Mullen admitted yesterday that the Taliban had secured a "dominant influence" in 11 provinces.
Senior British defence sources said they were deeply uneasy about Obama's talk of what they labelled an "exit strategy". UK military commanders are concerned that talk of a withdrawal will increase suspicions among Afghans that foreign troops will leave them at the mercy of the Taliban. "Talking of [starting to withdraw in] 2011 is very difficult for the military," said a source. "The military want to fudge it."
Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, said: "We're not talking about timetables to leave, but we are talking about timetables for handover."
British military commanders, including Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, chief of the defence staff, believe that the US aim to have 400,000 trained soldiers in the Afghan national army and police force by 2013 is too optimistic.
General Sir David Richards, the head of the army, said tonight that British combat troops were likely to be in Afghanistan for up to five years. He told ITV's News At Ten: "We should expect to be there … in some sort of combat role for between three to five years and at around that point we'll go into a supporting role."
Gordon Brown said Britain hoped to start withdrawing troops on the same timescale outlined by Obama. At the weekend, he outlined a series of benchmarks, the last of which would see Afghan security forces taking the lead in five out of the country's 34 provinces by the end of 2010.
Brown told MPs: "Even if one or two parts of a district or a province are transferred in 2010, we will continue to have our troops in Afghanistan. By 2011 there will be over 300,000 troops … and that is the point at which the balance between Afghan forces and British, American and coalition troops will start to change. It is absolutely crucial for our strategy that the Afghans start to take control of security as soon as possible."
http://www.modoracle.com/news/Attack-On-Afghanistan-Withdrawal-Date_19390.html
Thursday, December 03, 2009
Barack Obama's new Afghanistan plan met widespread scepticism today from both Democrats and Republicans who challenged him over the troop escalation and the planned date for the start of withdrawal.
US allies, in particular British military commanders, also questioned the wisdom of setting a withdrawal date and described US projections for expanding the Afghan army and police as optimistic.
Obama sent the secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, the defence secretary, Robert Gates, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Mike Mullen, to Congress today as part of a charm offensive.
But both Democrats and Republicans on the Senate armed services committee challenged Obama's security team. The Republican John McCain described the plan as "logically incoherent". He said it made no sense to announce a date. "That gives the wrong impression to our friends, it's the wrong impression to give our enemies."
The opposition on Capitol Hill underlined the hard sell that lies ahead for Obama as he needs congressional approval for the $30bn plan. He announced he was to send 30,000 extra troops, bringing the US total to 100,000, while also setting July 2011 as the date for the start of US withdrawal, though with no end date fixed.
The reaction to his speech at the West Point military academy last night was mixed, with some US commentators saying his heart did not appear to be in it. There were also heavy doubts as to whether the extra troops would be enough to prevent Taliban advances.
A Taliban spokesman, Qari Yousuf Ahamdi, told the AFP news agency: "Obama will witness lots of coffins heading to America from Afghanistan."
At the Senate hearing, Mullen said the increase in the number of troops was likely to mean an increase in US casualties.
The date for withdrawal was inserted into the speech to try to placate a US public becoming weary of the war, over casualties and cost. But today Obama's security team got into a muddle over the date.
Republicans pushed Gates over whether withdrawal would definitely begin in July 2011 or whether it depended on conditions. Gates initially said forces would begin coming home that month but later confused matters by saying Obama would review strategy in December 2010 and would make a decision then based on how the war was going.
His security team today set out to provide more details of the new strategy, as did the US commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal. The aim is to hand over Afghanistan province by province – even district by district – to the Afghan army, a phased approach along the same lines as applied in Iraq, from which the US will withdraw its troops by 2011.
But Afghanistan could be harder, with some estimates that the Taliban have established shadow governments in 31 of the 34 provinces. Mullen admitted yesterday that the Taliban had secured a "dominant influence" in 11 provinces.
Senior British defence sources said they were deeply uneasy about Obama's talk of what they labelled an "exit strategy". UK military commanders are concerned that talk of a withdrawal will increase suspicions among Afghans that foreign troops will leave them at the mercy of the Taliban. "Talking of [starting to withdraw in] 2011 is very difficult for the military," said a source. "The military want to fudge it."
Bob Ainsworth, the defence secretary, said: "We're not talking about timetables to leave, but we are talking about timetables for handover."
British military commanders, including Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup, chief of the defence staff, believe that the US aim to have 400,000 trained soldiers in the Afghan national army and police force by 2013 is too optimistic.
General Sir David Richards, the head of the army, said tonight that British combat troops were likely to be in Afghanistan for up to five years. He told ITV's News At Ten: "We should expect to be there … in some sort of combat role for between three to five years and at around that point we'll go into a supporting role."
Gordon Brown said Britain hoped to start withdrawing troops on the same timescale outlined by Obama. At the weekend, he outlined a series of benchmarks, the last of which would see Afghan security forces taking the lead in five out of the country's 34 provinces by the end of 2010.
Brown told MPs: "Even if one or two parts of a district or a province are transferred in 2010, we will continue to have our troops in Afghanistan. By 2011 there will be over 300,000 troops … and that is the point at which the balance between Afghan forces and British, American and coalition troops will start to change. It is absolutely crucial for our strategy that the Afghans start to take control of security as soon as possible."
http://www.modoracle.com/news/Attack-On-Afghanistan-Withdrawal-Date_19390.html