Gold9472
12-02-2009, 09:04 AM
President Obama invokes memory of 9/11 as he outlines vision for Afghan war
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6939971.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1
President Obama invoked the threat of nuclear terrorism and the memory of the 9/11 attacks in an address to the American nation last night that began a important new offensive in Afghanistan with 30,000 extra troops.
Confronting head-on the criticism that he has dithered over the Afghan war, Mr Obama said that he owed the American people an exhaustive review of his options.
He said that the situation he inherited in Afghanistan was not sustainable, that parallels with Vietnam were not applicable and that the threat to US security posed by the Taleban and al-Qaeda remained all too real.
“I do not make this decision lightly,” he told an audience at West Point Military Academy, 50 miles north of New York. “I make this decision because I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicentre of the violent extremism practised by al-Qaeda.”
After 92 days of slow and at times agonised debate over how to prosecute the war in Afghanistan, Mr Obama is suddenly a man in a hurry: he wants 30,000 US troops to hit the ground within the next six months, an enormous logistical and financial challenge. The troops would start withdrawing by 2011. The extra US troops would be supported by at least 5,000 more soldiers from other Nato members, he said.
Mr Obama said that his surge was intended to secure Afghanistan and hand it back to its own security forces within three years.
“The 30,000 additional troops that I am announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010 — the fastest pace possible — so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centres,” he added.
It was critical “to train competent Afghan security forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight” and to create the conditions for an eventual American exit strategy.
The pace of the deployment of the long-awaited surge and the start of an American withdrawal has been accelerated because of Mr Obama’s insistence on a provisional timetable for withdrawal.
“Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011,” Mr Obama said.
“We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan’s security forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But it will be clear to the Afghan Government – and, more importantly, to the Afghan people – that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country.”
White House officials said that he had ordered the military to hit the Taleban hard and fast. He wants to show quick gains in the battle for the hearts and minds of the civilian population. Unstated, but as important to the White House, is the battle to shore up crumbling support for the war at home.
Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, will travel to Brussels tomorrow to ask America’s Nato allies to provide extra troops for the surge.
The combined US and Nato forces would amount to nearly the 40,000 new troops requested three months ago by General Stanley McChrystal, Mr Obama’s ground commander. The new deployments, in addition to the 22,000 troops Mr Obama ordered to Afghanistan early this year, will bring the total number of US troops there to more than 100,000 — more than half of whom will have been sent by Mr Obama.
The scale of the challenge is staggering. It costs $1 million a year to station a single soldier in Afghanistan. New bases will have to be built, and huge numbers of extra tanks, armoured vehicles and weapons will need to be airlifted into the war zone.
General McChrystal’s strategy is a classic counter-insurgency plan: he wants to secure the ten largest cities, protecting civilians from Taleban attack. If he succeeds in building trust and security the hope is that ordinary Afghans will begin to provide good intelligence on the whereabouts and identities of the Taleban leadership and al-Qaeda operatives. Armed with such intelligence, specialist units — like the hunt-and-kill squads General McChrystal led in Iraq — will seek out and eliminate the enemy.
General McChrystal also plans to pull forces out of the rural outposts, effectively ceding sparsely populated areas to the Taleban. He believes if he can control and protect the heavily populated areas and the connecting roads, the country can be stabilised.
The first deployment of 9,000 US Marines begins next month. They will head to Helmand province in the south, a Taleban stronghold.
Next in will be 1,000 military trainers. Mr Obama wants the Afghan Army increased to 134,000 by next autumn, three years ahead of schedule, with 10,000 of them stationed in Helmand. He also wants the Afghan police force greatly increased in size.
The Pentagon is also expected to send the 101st Airborne Division and 10th Mountain Division as combat troops, mostly for southern Afghanistan. In all, 4,000 military trainers are expected to arrive in the country.
President Karzai of Afghanistan has been told in the clearest terms that the plan is also heavily contingent on his performance. He must drop corrupt ministers and governors and institute real reforms within a Government that is at present viewed as a deeply unreliable partner. Mr Karzai has also been told that Mr Obama is holding the option to delay or halt troop deployments if his Government does not meet specific benchmarks, or targets, both on the political and military fronts.
Gordon Brown, who was briefed by Mr Obama on Monday, said the plan was “to create the space for an effective political strategy to work, weakening the Taleban by strengthening Afghanistan itself”. He added that the strategy called for “transfer of lead security responsibility to the Afghans — district by district, province by province — with the first districts and provinces potentially being handed over during the next year”.
Mr Obama said: “Because this is an international effort, I have asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies.”
“Our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in Afghanistan. Now, we must come together to end this war successfully. For what’s at stake is not simply a test of Nato’s credibility. What’s at stake is the security of our Allies, and the common security of the world.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6939971.ece?token=null&offset=0&page=1
President Obama invoked the threat of nuclear terrorism and the memory of the 9/11 attacks in an address to the American nation last night that began a important new offensive in Afghanistan with 30,000 extra troops.
Confronting head-on the criticism that he has dithered over the Afghan war, Mr Obama said that he owed the American people an exhaustive review of his options.
He said that the situation he inherited in Afghanistan was not sustainable, that parallels with Vietnam were not applicable and that the threat to US security posed by the Taleban and al-Qaeda remained all too real.
“I do not make this decision lightly,” he told an audience at West Point Military Academy, 50 miles north of New York. “I make this decision because I am convinced that our security is at stake in Afghanistan and Pakistan. This is the epicentre of the violent extremism practised by al-Qaeda.”
After 92 days of slow and at times agonised debate over how to prosecute the war in Afghanistan, Mr Obama is suddenly a man in a hurry: he wants 30,000 US troops to hit the ground within the next six months, an enormous logistical and financial challenge. The troops would start withdrawing by 2011. The extra US troops would be supported by at least 5,000 more soldiers from other Nato members, he said.
Mr Obama said that his surge was intended to secure Afghanistan and hand it back to its own security forces within three years.
“The 30,000 additional troops that I am announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010 — the fastest pace possible — so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centres,” he added.
It was critical “to train competent Afghan security forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight” and to create the conditions for an eventual American exit strategy.
The pace of the deployment of the long-awaited surge and the start of an American withdrawal has been accelerated because of Mr Obama’s insistence on a provisional timetable for withdrawal.
“Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011,” Mr Obama said.
“We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan’s security forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But it will be clear to the Afghan Government – and, more importantly, to the Afghan people – that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country.”
White House officials said that he had ordered the military to hit the Taleban hard and fast. He wants to show quick gains in the battle for the hearts and minds of the civilian population. Unstated, but as important to the White House, is the battle to shore up crumbling support for the war at home.
Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, will travel to Brussels tomorrow to ask America’s Nato allies to provide extra troops for the surge.
The combined US and Nato forces would amount to nearly the 40,000 new troops requested three months ago by General Stanley McChrystal, Mr Obama’s ground commander. The new deployments, in addition to the 22,000 troops Mr Obama ordered to Afghanistan early this year, will bring the total number of US troops there to more than 100,000 — more than half of whom will have been sent by Mr Obama.
The scale of the challenge is staggering. It costs $1 million a year to station a single soldier in Afghanistan. New bases will have to be built, and huge numbers of extra tanks, armoured vehicles and weapons will need to be airlifted into the war zone.
General McChrystal’s strategy is a classic counter-insurgency plan: he wants to secure the ten largest cities, protecting civilians from Taleban attack. If he succeeds in building trust and security the hope is that ordinary Afghans will begin to provide good intelligence on the whereabouts and identities of the Taleban leadership and al-Qaeda operatives. Armed with such intelligence, specialist units — like the hunt-and-kill squads General McChrystal led in Iraq — will seek out and eliminate the enemy.
General McChrystal also plans to pull forces out of the rural outposts, effectively ceding sparsely populated areas to the Taleban. He believes if he can control and protect the heavily populated areas and the connecting roads, the country can be stabilised.
The first deployment of 9,000 US Marines begins next month. They will head to Helmand province in the south, a Taleban stronghold.
Next in will be 1,000 military trainers. Mr Obama wants the Afghan Army increased to 134,000 by next autumn, three years ahead of schedule, with 10,000 of them stationed in Helmand. He also wants the Afghan police force greatly increased in size.
The Pentagon is also expected to send the 101st Airborne Division and 10th Mountain Division as combat troops, mostly for southern Afghanistan. In all, 4,000 military trainers are expected to arrive in the country.
President Karzai of Afghanistan has been told in the clearest terms that the plan is also heavily contingent on his performance. He must drop corrupt ministers and governors and institute real reforms within a Government that is at present viewed as a deeply unreliable partner. Mr Karzai has also been told that Mr Obama is holding the option to delay or halt troop deployments if his Government does not meet specific benchmarks, or targets, both on the political and military fronts.
Gordon Brown, who was briefed by Mr Obama on Monday, said the plan was “to create the space for an effective political strategy to work, weakening the Taleban by strengthening Afghanistan itself”. He added that the strategy called for “transfer of lead security responsibility to the Afghans — district by district, province by province — with the first districts and provinces potentially being handed over during the next year”.
Mr Obama said: “Because this is an international effort, I have asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies.”
“Our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in Afghanistan. Now, we must come together to end this war successfully. For what’s at stake is not simply a test of Nato’s credibility. What’s at stake is the security of our Allies, and the common security of the world.”