* Obama, Karzai to meet on Friday
* U.S. may be taking a bargaining position – analyst
* Immunity for U.S. troops remaining in Afghanistan is a
sticking point
By Matt Spetalnick and Phil Stewart
WASHINGTON, Jan 8 (Reuters) – The Obama administration does
not rule out a complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from
Afghanistan after 2014, the White House said on Tuesday, just
days before President Barack Obama is due to meet Afghan
President Hamid Karzai.
The comments by U.S. Deputy National Security Adviser Ben
Rhodes were the clearest signal yet that, despite initial
recommendations by the top military commander in Afghanistan to
keep as many as 15,000 troops in the country, Oba ma could opt to
r emove eve ryone, as happened in Iraq in 2011.
Asked about consideration of a so-called zero-option once
the NATO combat mission ends at the end of 2014, Rhodes said:
“That would be an option that we would consider.”
Rhodes made clear that a decision on post-2014 troop levels
is not expected for months and will be made based on two U.S.
security objectives in Afghanistan – denying a safe haven to al
Qaeda and ensuring Afghan forces are trained and equipped so
that they, and not foreign forces, can secure the nation.
“There are, of course, many different ways of accomplishing
those objectives, some of which might involve U.S. troops, some
of which might not,” Rhodes said, briefing reporters to preview
Karzai’s visit.
In Iraq, Obama decided to pull out all U.S. forces after
failing in negotiations with the Iraqi government to secure
immunity for any U.S. troops who would remain behind.
The Obama administration is also insisting on immunity for
any U.S. troops that remain in Afghanistan, and that unsettled
question will figure in this week’s talks between Obama and
Karzai and their aides.
“As we know from our Iraq experience, if there are no
authorities granted by the sovereign state, then there’s no room
for a follow-on U.S. military mission,” said Douglas Lute,
special assistant to Obama for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Jeffrey Dressler, an Afghanistan expert at the
Washington-based Institute for the Study of War who favors
keeping a larger presence in Afghanistan, questioned whether the
White House comments might be part of a U.S. bargaining strategy
with Kabul.
“I can’t tell that they’re doing that as a negotiating
position … or if it is a no-kidding option,” Dressler said.
“If you ask me, I don’t see how zero troops is in the national
security interest of the United States.”
SHOULDN’T JUST “LEAVE THEM”
U.S. officials have said privately that the White House had
asked for options to be developed for keeping between 3,000 and
9,000 troops in the country, a lower range than was put forward
initially by General John Allen, the top U.S. and NATO commander
in Afghanistan.
Allen suggested keeping between 6,000 and 15,000 troops in
Afghanistan.
Retired General Stanley McChrystal, a former U.S. commander
of the Afghan mission who resigned in 2010, said in an interview
with Reuters on Monday there was a value to having an overt U.S.
military presence in Afghanistan after 2014 – even if it wasn’t
large.
“The art, I would say, would be having the smallest number
so that you give the impression that you are always there to
help, but you’re never there either as an unwelcome presence or
an occupier – or any of the negatives that people might draw,”
he said, without commenting on any specific numbers.
The United States now has about 66,000 troops in Afghanistan
and Rhodes confirmed there would be steady reductions in troop
levels through 2014.
Also on the agenda for the Obama-Karzai talks are tentative
reconciliation efforts involving Taliban insurgents. Those
efforts have shown flickers of life after nearly 10 months of
limbo.
Still, hopes for Afghan peace talks have been raised before,
only to be dashed. Last March, the Taliban suspended months of
quiet discussions with Washington aimed at getting the
insurgents and the Karzai government to the peace table.
Washington has also had a strained relationship with Karzai,
who in October accused the United States of playing a double
game in his country by fighting the war in Afghan villages
instead of going after those in Pakistan who support insurgents.
Karzai will give a joint press conference with Obama on
Friday and will visit the Pentagon on Thursday, meeting with
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and the U.S. top military
officer, General Martin Dempsey.
Still, it is unclear what, if any, concrete agreements might
emerge from Karzai’s visit to Washington.
Michael O’Hanlon, a defense analyst at Brookings, cautioned
against expecting too much from the visit, which he said is best
seen as an opportunity for Washington and Kabul to “shore up
this partnership that has had such a troubled status and a weak
foundation.”
“There are a lot of scars in this relationship. There are a
lot of hurt feelings,” O’Hanlon said. “It’s sort of like a bad
marriage and it’s very easy for just the wrong word to
immediately set people off in an emotional way.”
