8/12/2019 Nato to Hold Crunch Afghanistan Talks as Obama Weighs Military 'Zero Option' 2-24-14

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nato-to-hold-crunch-afghanistan-talks-as-obama-weighs-military-zero-option 1/8

Find us on Facebook

The Guardian

1,607,363 people like The Guardian .

Facebook social plugin

Like

Don't show again Hide

Edition: UK US AU Sign in Beta About us Subscribe

8/12/2019 Nato to Hold Crunch Afghanistan Talks as Obama Weighs Military 'Zero Option' 2-24-14

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nato-to-hold-crunch-afghanistan-talks-as-obama-weighs-military-zero-option 2/8

2/24/2014 Nato to hold crunch Afghanistan talks as Obama weighs mili tary 'zero option' | World news | theguardian.com

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/24/nato-talks-afghanistan-obama-zero-option 2/8

Harold Ramis, Ghostbusters star and

Groundhog Day director, dies aged 69

No reliable evidence wind farms harmhealth, peak research body says

Today's best v ideo

Inside ousted Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych's palace

Ukrainians find bears, wild boars andexpensive champagne as they tour the luxuryresidence of their former president Viktor Yanukovych

Everyone's in love withJennifer Lawrence

Is it possible to loveher any more? Asong by written by

Joe Stilgoe147 comments

Why Nebraska shouldwin best picture Oscar

Catherine Shoarddrinks to Alexander Payne's black-and-

white family comedy37 comments

Bill Hicks on religiouscults

Previously unseen1993 footage of thelate American

standup355 comments

choose a successor to Karzai, who as incumbentcannot stand again. But a complicated two-roundvoting system means there is little expectation a newleader will be in office before the end of the summer.

Instead, the US is increasingly focused on making adeal with whoever succeeds him. All of the topcontenders have backed the BSA, but by the time thewinner comes into office, Nato may only have a fewmonths to plan its 2015 deployment.

Although the last troops could still be withdrawnrelatively quickly if needed, the political impassethreatens to frustrate the complex process of scalingdown the Nato presence – particularly for allies thatdepend on the US for logistical support.

As a result, the White House has been consideringwhether to order to its military commanders to includethe so-called “zero option” in its planning scenarios,

according to a senior official speaking on background.Though symbolic to the extent that Pentagon plannershave long looked at a range of possible options for troop numbers, the formal order to plan for a fullwithdrawal would mark a significant escalation in theUS war of words with Karzai.

Administration officials say that as of the middle of lastweek, president Obama had yet to make a finaldetermination on the order but is keen to demonstratethat he is not bluffing when he says the US would pullout entirely if the BSA is not signed.

Military officials, who have worked through months of uncertainty over the future US role in Afghanistan,agree that the forthcoming Nato meeting represents akey moment in the tussle with Karzai.

“Without question, the issues surrounding the future of the Afghan mission will certainly be discussed inBrussels, to include the challenges of retrograde andforce posture faced by all Allies,” said John Kirby, the

Pentagon press secretary.“We long said that we would like a BSA as soon aspossible. Absent that, we would have to start planningto withdraw all our forces by the end of the year,” Kirbyadded. “I’m not going to put any timelines on that.We’d like a BSA as soon as possible.”

The prospect of the US retreating entirely from Afghanistan without being able to guarantee acontinued counter-terrorism role would carry significantrisks for the White House, which is conscious that the

Film

Politics

8/12/2019 Nato to Hold Crunch Afghanistan Talks as Obama Weighs Military 'Zero Option' 2-24-14

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nato-to-hold-crunch-afghanistan-talks-as-obama-weighs-military-zero-option 3/8

2/24/2014 Nato to hold crunch Afghanistan talks as Obama weighs mili tary 'zero option' | World news | theguardian.com

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/24/nato-talks-afghanistan-obama-zero-option 3/8

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

Last 24 hours

Russiadenounces Ukraine'terrorists' and westover Yanukovich

oustingThe homeless Hungarian lottery winner who is giving his money to charity

Uganda politicians celebrate passing of anti-gay laws

When rebels toured the palace: how doesUkraine's presidential compound measureup?

Is San Francisco losing its soul?

More most viewed

Last 24 hours

Schapelle Corbyraid: AFP toconsult Seven

before looking athard drives

Labor records best Newspoll result since2010 as health cuts loom in May – politicslive

Manus guards let residents into centre asextra manpower, says G4S witness

Young demand rise in living standards asCambodia senses a political spring

Labor party bounces back in latest Newspoll in wake of Manus death

All today's stories

On World news

US has spent 13 years and 2,000 soldiers have diedtrying to stabilise the country.

However, it believes that US public opinion issupportive of the withdrawal process and would besympathetic to arguments that a continued presence isnot wanted by the Afghans.

Security setbacks in Iraq following a similar failure to

agree a US presence there have led to relatively littledomestic criticism, despite the recent symbolic loss toinsurgents of Fallujah.

The White House acknowledges it would be moredifficult to carry out successful counter-terrorismoperations against international militants along thelawless border with Pakistan if they do not have sometroop presence on the ground, but privately arguessuch a role is not impossible – even without dronebases in the country.

In Afghanistan, Karzai’s about-turn on the BSA late lastyear took most of the country, including portions of hisown cabinet, by surprise.

The president’s national security adviser RanginDadfar Spanta had already warned parliament that if the deal was not signed, the country would be lef t tothe wolves – a warning about Afghanistan’s fate in aregion of wealthier and more populous neighbourskeen to to have a say on policy in Kabul.

Most senior Afghans have not forgotten the fate of thelast government backed by a global superpower.Despite forecasts of rapid collapse after Soviet troopsleft in 1989, President Mohammad Najibullah held off mujahidden fighters until 1992. But when thedisintegration of the Soviet Union ended funding for the military, the government fell within weeks.

So worries in Kabul are not so much about the troopsthat the US may or may not leave behind. Without their training and support the Afghan army will probably be

less professional, and certainly struggle in criticalareas from intelligence gathering to air power, butwould probably still be able to hold off the Taliban.

The concern is about the money that the soldiers, andthe drone bases they would support, bring with them.

Few in Kabul think the west – and particularlyWashington – would be willing to provide a promised$8bn a year in military and development spending if they have been effectively booted out by the Afghangovernment. “Without the troops, there is no money,”

Most viewed Latest

8/12/2019 Nato to Hold Crunch Afghanistan Talks as Obama Weighs Military 'Zero Option' 2-24-14

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nato-to-hold-crunch-afghanistan-talks-as-obama-weighs-military-zero-option 4/8

2/24/2014 Nato to hold crunch Afghanistan talks as Obama weighs mili tary 'zero option' | World news | theguardian.com

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/24/nato-talks-afghanistan-obama-zero-option 4/8

Twe e t Email

Open for com ments. S ign in or c reate your Guardian a ccount to join the discussion.

All comments Staff rep lies Guardian p icks

said one diplomat.

The leading presidential candidates have all backedthe strategic pact, with the 2009 runner-up Abdullah

Abdullah slamming Karzai for feeding isolationistsentiment in the US.

His main rivals have openly said they would sign thedeal. Zalmai Rassoul, a former foreign minister

believed to have Hamid Karzai’s blessing, hasdescribed it as “good for Afghanistan” and promised asignature if he wins.

Former finance minister and World Bank technocrat Ashraf Ghani helped hammer out the pact anddescribed it as “the source of Afghanistan’s nationalsovereignty”, underlining that it gives only the Afghanstate the right to use force.

But after years of aborted ultimatums on issues fromnight raids on homes to control of prisoners – all areaswhere the US has ultimately bowed to Karzai’sdemands – American deadlines have limited credibilityin Kabul.

There are fears among those familiar with the climatein Washington that Afghan officials are underestimatingthe extent of American disengagement from the war.

“We don’t believe there is a zero option,” Karzai’sspokesman told journalists last year after thepresident’s surprise retreat from the long-term

strategic partnership. Although that infuriated many in Washington, thedecision of top officials there to set Karzai a deadlinefor a decision on the BSA, only to back away from itwhen it passed unheeded, strengthened the belief of the Afghan leaders’ inner circle that the US wasultimately committed to keeping troops in Afghanistanregardless of the political and financial cost.

Get the Guardian's daily US emailOur editors' picks for the day's top news andcommentary delivered to your inbox each morning.

Sign up for the daily email

Share Share

8/12/2019 Nato to Hold Crunch Afghanistan Talks as Obama Weighs Military 'Zero Option' 2-24-14

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nato-to-hold-crunch-afghanistan-talks-as-obama-weighs-military-zero-option 5/8

2/24/2014 Nato to hold crunch Afghanistan talks as Obama weighs mili tary 'zero option' | World news | theguardian.com

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/24/nato-talks-afghanistan-obama-zero-option 5/8

21 co mmen ts. Showing 50 conversations, threads collapsed , sorted oldest first

snix

The A mericans don@t leave once your part of their Military industrial Empire ,as theywould put it its no t in their best interests. That's not good for the rest of the world asthere exceptional warmongering and espionage spreads chaos and death which of course is profitable ,if you have invested with this in mind .

24 February 2014 4:30pm

Mike5000

Why can't Poodle Cameron do as much for Britain?

24 February 2014 4:30pm1

2 PEOPLE, 2 COMMENTS

damandblast

This is n't going to end well .

24 February 2014 4:30pm2

Forwa rdThinking damandblast

It didnt start well, the middle bit was less than satisfactory as well.....24 February 2014 5:45pm

7

IllWind

How I love the bewilderment of Americans! Their frustration that they cannot threatens an ctions. Not even more drone strikes will bring Karzai to his knees. What a super power can do in face of such an enemy? Just lick its wounds!!

24 February 2014 4:31pm2

2 PEOPLE, 2 COMMENTS

johnandanne

The way the USA operates is that it needs Countries where it can perform it's acts(directly and indirectly) of division which ultimately means deaths, injuries anddisplacements. The main benefactors are big business and arms manufacturers.

As long as the USA is permitt ed to carry on, to them it doesn't matt er where thecurrent or next theatre of war is. Afghanistan will disappear if they can no longer make money out it, but will be replaced by other Countries forever until the Worldsays 'No More'

24 February 2014 5:08pm6

ForwardThinking johnandanne

Forever it is then.

24 February 2014 5:44pm3

4 PEOPLE, 4 COMMENTS

monkofgreatrenown

C'mon NATO: just walk away.

Let Afghanistan return to backwardness and obscurantism.

It was folly to att empt 'nation building' for people who'd rather live in the 7th Century.

24 February 2014 5:49pm8

Haynonnynonny monkofgreatrenown

8/12/2019 Nato to Hold Crunch Afghanistan Talks as Obama Weighs Military 'Zero Option' 2-24-14

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nato-to-hold-crunch-afghanistan-talks-as-obama-weighs-military-zero-option 6/8

2/24/2014 Nato to hold crunch Afghanistan talks as Obama weighs mili tary 'zero option' | World news | theguardian.com

http://www.theg uardian .com/world/2014/feb/24/nato-talks-afghanistan-obama-zero-option 6/8

Use of cell phones in Afghanistan went up 99% the last 10 years.Education, for girls and boys, up 80%. The youth often ware designer jeans,and watch a version of American Idol.

Zepp monkofgreatrenown

Yeah, obviously they don't appreciate enlightened sorts like yourself occupying their country and bombing their weddings.

24 February 2014 8:37pm5

Cavalle monkofgreatrenown

What makes you think that the Afghans want to live in the 7th century? Areyou confusing the rules of the Taliban with the wishes of the people?

24 February 2014 10:43pm3

vcbhutani

US decision makers do not seem to know their own minds. They should not laydown deadlines if they are not deadlines. To lay down a deadline and then behave asif there was no deadline does not enhance US reputation for decisive andbusinesslike attitude to international relations. As it is, the world is not full of

admiration for USA's capacity for continued world leadership: recent decades haveseen USA retreat from such a role. Now, if no one in USA is able to think coherentlyand act like a world leader, then there is no point in expecting Karzai's successor tosign the BSA. Now Nato leaders are about to meet but can they do anythingmeaningful if Karzai remains adamant, as it seems he will? Then, Hagel is taking USarmed power back to a 1940 level. Perhaps that is as clear a message as there canbe that USA is either unable or unwilling to meet the costs of keeping world order going. Now, Afghanistan itself will mean an annual bill of $8b. Where will that moneycome from? Why should the world care so much about keeping Afghanistan's headabove water, especially when no one in Afghanistan is inclined to work in a spirit of self-help? What are the stakes if Afghanistan does not remain on its feet? Itsimmediate neighbours are not too friendly or too caring. USA and its Nato allies haveto pay the cost of wrong choices of the past dating back to the immediate aftermathof 9/11. The chief sufferers will be the people of Afghanistan, especially in theabsence of enlightened leadership. V . C. Bhutani, Edinburgh, 24 Feb 2014, 1819GMT

24 February 2014 6:19pm1

3 PEOPLE, 3 COMMENTS

greysky

Come on chaps, admit it, 'drawdown' means surrender, and that's the truth, nomatter how the PR people spin it.

24 February 2014 7:25pm

bloggod greysky

hardly. it means "retreat" and pay for the past decade plus of waste andgenocide of the entire region.

24 February 2014 7:49pm

Zepp bloggod

"Drawdown" is easier to say and spell than "Afghanistanisation"

24 February 2014 8:38pm

2 PEOPLE, 2 COMMENTS

bloggod

"the White House, which is conscious that the US has spent 13 years and 2,000soldiers"

24 February 2014 7:48pm2

8/12/2019 Nato to Hold Crunch Afghanistan Talks as Obama Weighs Military 'Zero Option' 2-24-14

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nato-to-hold-crunch-afghanistan-talks-as-obama-weighs-military-zero-option 7/8

2/24/2014 Nato to hold crunch Afghanistan talks as Obama weighs mili tary 'zero option' | World news | theguardian.com

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/24/nato-talks-afghanistan-obama-zero-option 7/8

_

Quit "spending soldiers" as if they were pawns, or poker chips.

Industry wants t he resources of Afghanistan? Give them a premium price.

NATO allows opium poppy production to skyrocket?

Go figure.

Zepp bloggod

Quit "spending soldiers" as if they were pawns, or poker chips.

Isn't that exactly what they are, though?

24 February 2014 11:32pm

ID7776906

Karzai`s playing NATO like a Barbary Coast Pirate.

24 February 2014 7:50pm1

robingeorge

Enough is enough. It is time to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan. The efforts totrain a protective Afghan army and police force,has been continually compromised bythe Taliban infiltration into the ranks. If that cannot be contained , what is the point ineven allowing the allied forces that task. Far to much of our GDP both American andEuropean has been plundered and wasted. Thousands of killed and maimed troupesand civilians. The eventuality of a Taliban Afghanistan government is both logical andclearly wanted by the majority. The task was to terminate Osama, that has beenaccomplished. We have excellent imagery from space monitoring the region. Dronescan be used to deal with any further build up or training grounds. 13 years is longenough.

24 February 2014 8:13pm4

DocHollywood

The Afghanistan War is opposed by an overwhelming majority of Americans ,Europeans , and Afghanis .

CNN Poll: Afghanistan war arguably most unpopular in U.S. history

The invaders remain in Afghanistan against the will of the people.It's a violation of democratic principles. It's a failure. It's illegal:

The UN Charter is a treaty ratified by the United States and thus part of US law. Under the charter, a country can use armed force against another country only in self-defense or when the Security Council approves.Neither of those conditions was met before the United S tates invaded

Afghanistan. The Taliban did not attack us on 9/11. Nineteen men – 15from Saudi Arabia – did, and there was no imminent threat that

Afghanistan would attack the US or another UN member country. The

council did not authorize the United States or any other country to usemilitary force against Afghanistan. The US war in Afghanistan is illegal.

— Marjorie Cohn, professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law, president of theNational Lawyers Guild

By our own laws and principles, the war and occupation is the supreme internationalcrime .

Now the West is considering a "zero option" when it should be convening a war crimes tribunal.

24 February 2014 9:18pm4

Cavalle

I hate the warmongering that the US is prone to. I was angry when we went to war in

24 February 2014 10:58pm

8/12/2019 Nato to Hold Crunch Afghanistan Talks as Obama Weighs Military 'Zero Option' 2-24-14

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nato-to-hold-crunch-afghanistan-talks-as-obama-weighs-military-zero-option 8/8

2/24/2014 Nato to hold crunch Afghanistan talks as Obama weighs mili tary 'zero option' | World news | theguardian.com

http ://www.the guardian.com/world/2014/feb/24/nato-talks-afghanistan-obama-zero-option 8/8

;

World news

Afghanistan · Barack Obama · US foreign

policy · US military ·

Afghanistan tr oop cutswill likely lead to Talibansurge, study warns20 Feb 2014

Insurgency ‘likely toswell’ followingupcoming US andNato militarywithdrawal,challenging Nato’s2012 expectations

13 Feb 2014Karzai criticises lack of US respect for Afghansovereignty as relationsworsen

13 Feb 2014 Afghanistan release s 65prisoners againstobjections from US

11 Feb 2014 Afghan president Karzaiunlikely to sign US trooppact, says intelligencechief

Chuck Hagel stressesUS foreign policy shiftfrom military might todiplomacy1 Feb 2014

Defence secretarysays US is movingoff 'a 13-year war footing' in itsapproach tointernational affairs

Related information

Open for comments. Sign in or create your Guardian account to join the discussion.

Afghanistan, and I did not appreciate that we had armed them to begin with, decadesago.

HOWEVER, I have Afghan friends there who will be brutalized if the west pulls out.They will be savaged. The Taliban is not going to ignore all the men and women andchildren who broke their laws while the US was present to protect them, andinfluence their behavior. Which we did. We encouraged all of the things that will nowget those people maimed or killed..

There will not only be a crackdown with a return to orthodoxy, there will also beretaliations to women who had the audacity to get an education, young girls whowent to school, men who shaved their beards. And on, and on. It's a quandary.

We ignored what Hitler did until we could not ignore it any longer, and as a nation we

are proud of helping to end that holocaust. We are doing the same thing now if wesay, "oh let those Afghans sort it out themselves. Let them live in the 7th century if they want to. It's not our problem." I agree, and yet....

It was our presence t hat gave many Afghans t he courage to buck the Talibansystem, and now we're just going to throw them under the bus? I too, think weshould not have gone, but we did. And I think that puts some responsibility on our shoulders to not just throw up our hands and walk away.

I am basically a pacifist, but I would have killed Hitler if I were there. And I would killas many Taliban as it took to rescue an entire country from the brutal grip of their regime.

License/buy our content | Privacy policy | Terms of service | US advertising | A - Z index | About us

© 2014 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.