Washington’s dim view of Afghanistan drawdown

Washington, June 25, 2011.



United States President Barack Obama's announcement this week that there will be a 33,000-troop drawdown by next summer elicited a wide range of responses that revealed, more than anything, the cross-cutting impact of this major strategic decision.



For one, his would-be Republican challengers in the 2012 presidential election have trained their guns on the alleged weakness in U.S. foreign policy that the decision implied.



Speaking at a Maryland Republican Party dinner in Baltimore, an outspoken if poorly placed challenger, former House of Representatives Speaker Newt Gingrich had strong words for Mr. Obama's failure to protect Pakistan-based informants of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency from being arrested in the aftermath of Osama bin Laden's death.



"We should have taken extraordinary actions against Pakistanis within 24 hours," Mr. Gingrich was quoted as saying, adding, "We should have said If you don't release those people you can assume we have no relationship and we'll chat with you from India."



Others critiqued with a broader brushstroke, considering the strategic implications for the U.S.' strategic approach to the region.



Lisa Curtis, a former CIA officer and Senior Research Fellow at Washington's Heritage Foundation, worried that the Obama announcement might "further discourage Pakistan from cracking down on the Taliban leadership that finds sanctuary on its soil," and also possibly "encourage Pakistani military leaders to continue to hedge on support to the Taliban to protect their own national security interests."



Ms. Curtis also argued that the rapid withdrawal announcement would likely bolster the morale of the Taliban and encourage them to stick with the fight. "Since al-Qaeda has not yet dissolved as an organization and its relationship with the Taliban remains strong, reducing military pressure on the Taliban in Afghanistan could benefit al-Qaeda and provide it a lifeline at a critical juncture in the fight against terrorism," she said.



Indeed it was think-tanks that seemed most active this week, dissecting the myriad of consequences that could stem from the drawdown that is set to begin in a week.



Both the Heritage Foundation and at a new India-focused think tank here played host to several Members of Parliament from opposition parties in India, and they focused attention on the potential fallout for India.



Speaking at the launch of the Foundation for India and Indian Diaspora Studies think tank, Arun Jaitley, Leader of Opposition in the Rajya Sabha, was quoted as saying, "We are almost close to the finishing line. What did India say all these years? We said Pakistan is the epicentre if global terrorism. Pakistan uses terror as an instrument of state policy. When these words were first used by us, some considered it to be an overstatement."



Some experts, such as Council on Foreign Relations military specialist Stephen Biddle, viewed the White House plan more favourably but added that the President "should have affirmed a longer U.S. troop commitment in the region, even if it meant cutting force size further."



Similarly Vanda Felbab-Brown, Fellow of the Brookings Instituion argued, "Although the number of troops being withdrawn this year... is not as large as some proponents of the counterterrorism-only, off-shore approach have advocated, the force reduction will be felt and could weaken progress that has been achieved."


News From: http://www.7StarNews.com