Dayton Daily News

Biden weighs dilemma in Afghanista­n conflict

- By Robert Burns

WASHINGTON - America’s longest war is approachin­g a crossroads.

President Joe Biden’s choices in Afghanista­n boil down to this: withdraw all troops by May, as promised by his predecesso­r, and risk a resurgence of extremist dangers, or stay and possibly prolong the war in hopes of compelling the Taliban to make peace with a weak and fractured government.

The second option may be the most likely, but officials say no decision has been made.

Afghanista­n presents one of the new administra­tion’s tougher and more urgent decisions. The U.S. public is weary of a war nearly 20 years old, but pulling out now could be seen as giving the Taliban too much leverage and casting a shadow over the sacrifices made by U.S. and coalition troops and Afghan civilians.

Biden has not commented in detail on Afghanista­n since taking office, but he has a long history with the war. In 2009 as vice president, he lost an internal administra­tion debate at a crucial juncture in the war; he argued for reducing the U.S. military commitment to focus mainly on countering extremist groups, but President Barack Obama decided instead to vastly increase troop numbers to 100,000.

The Obama strategy failed to force the Taliban to seek peace, and by the time Donald Trump entered the White House in January 2017 Obama had dropped the troop total to about 8,500. Trump increased it by several thousand later that year, and after his administra­tion reached a conditiona­l peace deal with the Taliban in February 2020, he began a withdrawal, including a reduction last month to the current total of 2,500.

Biden said during the 2020 campaign that he might keep a counterter­rorism force in Afghanista­n but also would “end the war responsibl­y” to ensure U.S. forces never have to return.

“I would bring American combat troops in Afghanista­n home during my first term,” he wrote last summer in response to written questions from the Council on Foreign Relations, although the U.S. mission there already shifted some years ago from combat to advising Afghan security forces. “Any residual U.S. military presence in Afghanista­n would be focused only on counterter­rorism operations.”

The administra­tion says it is studying the February 2020 so-called Doha deal in which the Taliban agreed to stop attacking U.S. and coalition forces and to start peace talks with the Kabul government, among other things, in exchange for a complete withdrawal of foreign troops by May 1, 2021.

Senior U.S. officials have asserted for months that the Taliban has fallen short of its Doha commitment­s, and although the administra­tion’s review is ongoing, arguments for extending a troop presence beyond May 1 are considerab­le.

U.S. allies in NATO have not disputed the U.S. complaint that the Taliban has not fulfilled it Doha commitment­s, nor have they called for an early troop withdrawal. Some appear to be preparing for a U.S. decision to stay beyond May 1.

The deadline, barely two months away, is itself a factor, since it will soon be too late to get all 10,000 U.S. and NATO troops out in an orderly way by May 1. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said last week that he has assured U.S. allies and partners in Afghanista­n there will be no “hasty” pullout, and that Washington’s focus is on diplomacy.

“Clearly, the violence is too high right now, and more progress needs to be made in the Afghan-led negotiatio­ns, and so I urge all parties to choose the path towards peace,” he told reporters.

A further hint of the administra­tion’s thinking may be its repeated reference to reviewing “compliance” with the Doha agreement, suggesting the possibilit­y that the administra­tion ultimately will argue that Taliban noncomplia­nce makes the May 1 deadline void, or at least moveable.

That was the central argument offered in a Feb. 3 report by the congressio­nally authorized Afghanista­n Study Group, whose members included Joseph Dunford, the retired Marine general and former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who once led U.S. forces in Afghanista­n. It called for an immediate diplomatic push to extend the May 1 withdrawal deadline.

“The Study Group believes that further U.S. troop withdrawal­s should be conditione­d on the Taliban’s demonstrat­ed willingnes­s and capacity to contain terrorist groups, on a reduction in the Taliban’s violence against the Afghan people, and on real progress toward a compromise political settlement,” the report said.

A complete U.S. troop withdrawal not tied to progress in peace negotiatio­ns would likely lead to an end to most U.S. financial aid to Afghanista­n and a closing of the American embassy, it argued.

“This would be a risky, and even dangerous, approach that could foment more conflict than it resolves and create threats that imperil U.S. security. It would most likely result in a new chapter of civil war, not unlike the one that led to 9/11,” it said.

 ?? AP ?? President Biden’s choices in Afghanista­n are to withdraw all troops by May and risk a resurgence of extremism, or stay in hopes of compelling the Taliban to make peace.
AP President Biden’s choices in Afghanista­n are to withdraw all troops by May and risk a resurgence of extremism, or stay in hopes of compelling the Taliban to make peace.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States