Foreign Desk Report
NEW YORK: A Pakistani military official has underscored the need for a “responsible withdrawal” of US troops from Afghanistan, as President Joe Biden nears a decision to honour the May 1 pullout deadline negotiated by the former Trump administration with the Taliban.
“There has to be a responsible withdrawal,” rather than a chaotic pullout that could affect Pakistan and other countries in the region, the official, who was not named, was quoted as saying by David Ignatius, a prominent American journalist, in his regular Washington Post column Sunday about options before President Biden about the remaining 2,500 US troops in Afghanistan.
Ignatius, an associate editor and columnist for The Washington Post, wrote from Islamabad where he traveled with General Frank McKenzie, the head of US Central Command who is responsible for this region. The Pakistani military official spoke to Ignatius after Gen. McKenzie’s meeting on Friday with Pakistan Army chief General Qamar Javed Bajwa, who is concerned about whether the new administration has a clear plan for what’s ahead in Afghanistan.
The unamed official told the Post that Pakistan’s military leaders “would not be unhappy” if the United States extended its departure date. Ignatius quoted Gen. McKenzie as saying that the United States was at a “fragile point” now, as the May 1 deadline looms. “He (McKenzie) wouldn’t specify which option he favours. But other senior officials in Washington have told me that military leaders agree with a recommendation this month from retired Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. He said the United States should maintain its 2,500 troops, alongside about 5,000 NATO allies, and hunker down for a long support mission,” he said.
In his Washington Post column, Ignatious also wrote:
“Biden’s military and intelligence advisers have presented him with three unpleasant alternatives: leave May 1 as previously agreed, even though this would probably mean the fall of the Kabul government and a return to civil war; stay for a limited period, perhaps negotiated with the Taliban, which would delay its eventual takeover; or stay for an undefined period, which could mean a long continuation of what’s already the United States’ longest war.
“Every pathway has risks. The Kabul government, headed by President Ashraf Ghani, may be too corrupt and fragile to survive, no matter what the United States does. Pakistan and other neighbors will protect their interests, regardless of US. policy. And the Taliban may be so convinced that victory is near that it will escalate attacks, regardless of whether its leaders agree to extend the deadline. “If Biden tries to negotiate a limited stay, the Taliban may demand a steep price, perhaps in release of prisoners or other concessions. If Biden instead unilaterally decides to remain, the Taliban is likely to resume attacks on US forces, which it has halted for the past year. The United States would retaliate, and the cycle of violence would again resume.
“Maintaining a counterterrorism presence outside Afghanistan may sound like an attractive option. But experts caution that it may not be feasible militarily. A robust counterterrorism force would require drones over Afghanistan, but neighbouring countries probably wouldn’t provide bases, meaning the drones might have to fly from the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia, hours away. “Leaving now would carry a reputational risk for the United States. The Taliban’s success would embolden jihadists and perhaps rejuvenate their movement, which has been in retreat. Allies in the Middle East, Europe and Asia would be shaken. And there would be an unmeasurable cost to American credibility. This last argument was a rationale for the United States’ prolonged but ultimately unsuccessful war in Vietnam, so it’s disheartening to see it invoked again.
