- Obama’s regulatory agenda will cost U.S. economy $143B next year: report
- Patriot Act author on James Clapper: Fire, prosecute him
- Russia P.M. Medvedev: No amnesty for political prisoners
- Michigan GOP Senate hopeful reminds government is the ‘servant’
- Christmas, by Congress: Members mull a 15-cent tax on trees
- U.S. unemployment falls to five-year low of 7 percent; 203K jobs added
- World mourns Nelson Mandela and celebrates his life; burial set for Dec. 15
- Bill O’Reilly reminds: Nelson Mandela ‘was a communist’
- John Boehner says GOP should support gay candidates: ‘I do’
- Grass-Whopper: Pan-fried cricket burgers go over big in New York City
Afghans fear a civil war if all U.S. troops depart
Question of the Day
Afghan lawmakers are alarmed that the White House will consider an option to remove all U.S. troops from their country by the end of next year, warning that such a decision would pave the way for a Taliban takeover.
“If all U.S. troops leave, it will be terrible news for Afghanistan,” said Naeem Lalai Hamidzai, a lawmaker from Kandahar province. “Civil war will erupt, and the Taliban will once again control Afghanistan.”
In addition, Mr. Hamidzai and some of his colleagues serving in parliament’s committee on domestic security said in telephone interviews that they doubt Afghan soldiers and police officers will be able to handle their country’s security responsibilities by this spring, as touted by President Obama.
“Afghan forces are not capable of taking over full security duties in the spring,” Mr. Hamidzai said. “[Afghan President Hamid] Karzai is saying we can control security in three months. He is mistaken. We first need to show that we can control a single district.”
Nazifa Zaki, a retired army general who represents Kabul in parliament, said Afghan security forces could carry out their responsibilities after 2014, provided they receive proper training and equipment.
U.S. and Afghan officials have been negotiating about the number of U.S. troops who will remain in Afghanistan after 2014, when all international combat forces are due to leave the country. The American troops would train Afghan security forces and conduct missions against al Qaeda.
Washington and Kabul have yet to reach an agreement on the status of American troops in Afghanistan after 2014, however. Such an agreement would shield U.S. troops from prosecution in Afghan courts for acts committed while on duty.
Last week, Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser for strategic communications at the White House, told reporters that the Obama administration is open to withdrawing all U.S. troops, the so-called “zero option.”
Afghan Ambassador to the U.S. Eklil Hakimi said Monday that some U.S. troops likely would remain in his country after 2014, regardless of the zero option.
“The whole purpose for the [agreement] is for U.S. forces that will stay beyond 2014 … to train, assist and advise our forces and also to combat terrorists,” Mr. Hakimi told reporters in Washington. “We have clarified our red lines, which is Afghan sovereignty, and our U.S. colleagues have already specified their red lines, which is the protection of their forces.”
Saleh Mohammad Saleh, a lawmaker from the northeastern Kunar province, said the U.S. also must ensure that Afghanistan’s neighbors — particularly Pakistan and Iran — don’t meddle in its internal affairs because the Taliban would exploit the ensuing chaos.
“When the Americans helped us, the Taliban were never able to control Afghanistan,” said Mr. Saleh, deputy chairman of the domestic security committee. “God willing, the U.S. force and NATO force will continue to help our security.”
A third round of negotiations on the agreement will begin at the end of this month.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Ashish Kumar Sen is a reporter covering foreign policy and international developments for The Washington Times.
Prior to joining The Times, Mr. Sen worked for publications in Asia and the Middle East. His work has appeared in a number of publications and online news sites including the British Broadcasting Corp., Asia Times Online and Outlook magazine.
- U.S. teacher shot dead in Benghazi after al Qaeda call for violence
- Syria nightmare: Fresh fears about al Qaeda fighters there returning home as sleeper terrorists
- Iran official: Sanctions 'utterly failed' to stop nuclear program
- China accuses Japan of raising tensions over new air defense zone
- Joe Biden meets Xi Jinping in China to try to defuse tensions on air defense zone
- Bill OReilly reminds: Nelson Mandela was a communist
- 'Hunger Games' delivers Obama's message on income inequality
- Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement
- Colorado judge: Bakery owner discriminated against gay couple
- Kill team: Obama war chiefs widen drone death zones
- Rush Limbaugh: Obama trying to make Mandela death about himself
- Obama administration issues permits for wind farms to kill more eagles
- Inside China: Nuclear submarines capable of widespread attack on U.S.
- Obamas call to close Vatican embassy is 'slap in the face' to Roman Catholics
- MILLER: Obamacare enrollees include 101 members of the House of Representatives
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
The Constitution: Every issue, every time. No exceptions, no excuses. And how to get from here to there.
Why can’t humans just be free to be humans?
Get in the middle of all the action inside and outside the boxing ring.
Find the latest news and happening that effect those in the Washington D.C., Northern Virginia and Maryland Metro region.
White House pets gone wild!