The death of Sept. 11 mastermind Osama bin Laden in Pakistan has brought to full boil the long-simmering debate over the current aims and merits of the nation's 10-year war in Afghanistan.
And though there are those still making forceful arguments for sustained military engagement in the country that harbored bin Laden and his al-Qaida operatives after the 2001 attacks, his demise has broadened and intensified calls for the U.S. to get out.
Or at least for President Obama to redefine the mission from one that has evolved into nation-building, to a limited counter-terrorism effort that acknowledges vexing facts on the ground in Afghanistan — including the durability of the Taliban — and the greater threat in next door Pakistan.
"In theory, several more years of intense U.S. military effort will provide the time and space required to train up the Afghan army and police and weaken the Taliban so they no longer constitute an overwhelming threat," Afghanistan expert Richard Haas said during a Senate hearing Tuesday.
But Haas, Afghanistan coordinator for President Bush after Sept. 11, said he doesn't buy that theory.
"I am deeply skeptical that this policy will work given the nature of Afghanistan and the reality that Pakistan will continue to provide a sanctuary for the Taliban," he said.
More than 100,000 U.S. troops, including a 30,000 troop surge Obama ordered up in 2009, remain in the country that the U.S. invaded to root out bin Laden and disable al-Qaida.
Obama has said he'll begin a partial withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan in July; the number and speed have yet to be revealed, and are evolving given bin Laden's death and new questions about Pakistan's role in harboring the terrorist.
0 comments:
Post a Comment