Afghan Exit:why, how and more in country and beyond

[jmm99]

Not a difficult question to answer (originally asked by Jon Custis, I believe) - for which, there are three key documents:

2001 Future of Afghanistan Statement

Richard N. Haass, Director, Office of the Policy Planning Staff, and U.S. Coordinator for the Future of Afghanistan, Testimony Before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Washington, DC, December 6, 2001.

Technically, this was not a binding international agreement; but it does represent the US position in 2001-2005. It looks to three areas of strategic partnership: The Political/Diplomatic Front; Relief, Recovery, and Reconstruction; and The Military and Security Front.

2005 Strategic Partnership Agreement - Bush & Karzai (pdf file attached).

Again, this presents the same three areas of strategic partnership (in slightly different words): Democracy and governance; Prosperity; and Security.

2012 Strategic Partnership Agreement - Obama & Karzai (full text). The WH fact sheet notes the five areas covered: Protecting and Promoting Shared Democratic Values; Advancing Long-Term Security; Reinforcing Regional Security and Cooperation; Social and Economic Development; Strengthening Afghan Institutions and Governance; and further that:

The Strategic Partnership Agreement (SPA) is a legally binding executive agreement, undertaken between two sovereign nations. The President’s goal in negotiating such an agreement has been to define with the Afghan Government what's on the other side of Transition and the completed drawdown of U.S. forces. The agreement the President signed today will detail how the partnership between the United States and Afghanistan will be normalized as we look beyond a responsible end to the war. Through this Agreement, we seek to cement an enduring partnership with Afghanistan that strengthens Afghan sovereignty, stability and prosperity, and that contributes to our shared goal of defeating Al Qaeda and its extremist affiliates.

but that:

When it comes to an enduring U.S. presence, President Obama has been clear: we do not seek permanent military bases in Afghanistan. Instead, the Strategic Partnership Agreement commits Afghanistan to provide U.S. personnel access to and use of Afghan facilities through 2014 and beyond. The Agreement provides for the possibility of U.S. forces in Afghanistan after 2014, for the purposes of training Afghan Forces and targeting the remnants of al-Qaeda, and commits the United States and Afghanistan to initiate negotiations on a Bilateral Security Agreement to supersede our current Status of Forces Agreement. The United States will also designate Afghanistan a “Major Non-NATO Ally” to provide a long-term framework for security and defense cooperation.

To be clear, the Strategic Partnership Agreement itself does not commit the United States to any specific troop levels or levels of funding in the future, as those are decisions will be made in consultation with the U.S. Congress. It does, however, commit the United States to seek funding from Congress on an annual basis to support the training, equipping, advising and sustaining of Afghan National Security Forces, as well as for social and economic assistance.

In connection with timeframe and termination, the 2012 SPA is very specific:

2012 SPA - Obama & Karzai.jpg

Both parties have agreed that either party may terminate on 1 year's notice.

In this context, assertions flaunting the terms "abandon" and "cut and run" are a bit irritating and obnoxious - a mature flaming assertion would not be averse to such couplets as "coward, cowardice" and "traitor, treason".

Regards

Mike

[JMA]

Not a difficult question to answer (originally asked by Jon Custis, I believe) - for which, there are three key documents:

2001 Future of Afghanistan Statement



Technically, this was not a binding international agreement; but it does represent the US position in 2001-2005. It looks to three areas of strategic partnership: The Political/Diplomatic Front; Relief, Recovery, and Reconstruction; and The Military and Security Front.

2005 Strategic Partnership Agreement - Bush & Karzai (pdf file attached).

Again, this presents the same three areas of strategic partnership (in slightly different words): Democracy and governance; Prosperity; and Security.

2012 Strategic Partnership Agreement - Obama & Karzai (full text). The WH fact sheet notes the five areas covered: Protecting and Promoting Shared Democratic Values; Advancing Long-Term Security; Reinforcing Regional Security and Cooperation; Social and Economic Development; Strengthening Afghan Institutions and Governance; and further that:



but that:



In connection with timeframe and termination, the 2012 SPA is very specific:

2012 SPA - Obama & Karzai.jpg

Both parties have agreed that either party may terminate on 1 year's notice.

In this context, assertions flaunting the terms "abandon" and "cut and run" are a bit irritating and obnoxious - a mature flaming assertion would not be averse to such couplets as "coward, cowardice" and "traitor, treason".

Regards

Mike

Mike,

Politicians in general are the scum of the earth.

I would suggest that one does not go out on a limb and get all defensive about the actions of people you can trust about as much as you can a crack whore.

Read Perfidious Albion. The shoe fits the US (as well as most other countries).

Shrug your shoulders and live with it by all means (because its not going to change) but for heavens sake do not pretend it is not happening.

The US is going to dump its one time allies in Afghanistan and leave them to the wolves. Whether they do so in a hurry or with one years notice makes no difference... and the spin-doctors will come up with a justification.

[jmm99]

Mark:

You have posted five sentences of smoke - none of which address the simple question of "What Was Promised?".

Whatever you want to call them - "scum crack whores" in your terms - they got together this year and definitively agreed to the US withdrawal. Ain't no dumping when both parties agree to the terms.

I'll skip delving into Perfidious Albion. Not knocking your choice of reading materials; but I'm now into the BEF of WWI and especially the memoirs of the soldiers who fought in that war. As I've said elsewhere, I will be doing not much posting and much more reading.

Even your book, if my pre-publication order ever ships.

Astan's a done deal. Live with it.

Regards

Mike

[carl]

Not a difficult question to answer (originally asked by Jon Custis, I believe) - for which, there are three key documents:

Well there it is, the piece of paper that we can wave at the ghosts when they come calling; saying "You promised." We can show it to them and say "Show me where?" They will stand silent but that look won't leave their faces as they fade away. We will go on and be a lesser people but we won't know it. We have that piece of paper you see.

In this context, assertions flaunting the terms "abandon" and "cut and run" are a bit irritating and obnoxious - a mature flaming assertion would not be averse to such couplets as "coward, cowardice" and "traitor, treason".

Regards

Mike

You know I tried to figure out how "mature flaming assertion" actually fit into that sentence. I had to think on it for a whole day before I could say "Oh I get it now."