显示标签为“Afghanistan”的博文。显示所有博文
显示标签为“Afghanistan”的博文。显示所有博文

2011年6月6日星期一

Steeper Pullout Is Raised as Option for Afghanistan

WASHINGTON — President Obama’s national security team is contemplating troop reductions in Afghanistan that would be steeper than those discussed even a few weeks ago, with some officials arguing that such a change is justified by the rising cost of the war and the death of Osama bin Laden, which they called new “strategic considerations.”


These new considerations, along with a desire to find new ways to press the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, to get more of his forces to take the lead, are combining to create a counterweight to an approach favored by the departing secretary of defense, Robert M. Gates, and top military commanders in the field. They want gradual cuts that would keep American forces at a much higher combat strength well into next year, senior administration officials said.


The cost of the war and Mr. Karzai’s uneven progress in getting his forces prepared have been latent issues since Mr. Obama took office. But in recent weeks they have gained greater political potency as Mr. Obama’s newly refashioned national security team takes up the crucial decision of the size and the pace of American troop cuts, administration and military officials said. Mr. Obama is expected to address these decisions in a speech to the nation this month, they said.


A sharp drawdown of troops is one of many options Mr. Obama is considering. The National Security Council is convening its monthly meeting on Afghanistan and Pakistan on Monday, and although the debate over troop levels is operating on a separate track, the assessments from that meeting are likely to inform the decisions about the size of the force.


In a range of interviews in the past few days, several senior Pentagon, military and administration officials said that many of these pivotal questions were still in flux and would be debated intensely over the next two weeks. They would not be quoted by name about an issue that Mr. Obama had yet to decide on.


Before the new thinking, American officials were anticipating an initial drawdown of 3,000 to 5,000 troops. Those advocating steeper troop reductions did not propose a withdrawal schedule.


Mr. Gates, on his 12th and final visit to Afghanistan as defense secretary, argued repeatedly on Sunday that pulling out too fast would threaten the gains the American-led coalition had made in the 18 months since Mr. Obama agreed to a “surge” of 30,000 troops.


“I would try to maximize my combat capability as long as this process goes on — I think that’s a no-brainer,” Mr. Gates told troops at Forward Operating Base Dwyer. “I’d opt to keep the shooters and take the support out first.”


But the latest strategy review is about far more than how many troops to take out in July, Mr. Gates and other senior officials said over the weekend. It is also about setting a final date by which all of the 30,000 surge troops will be withdrawn from Afghanistan.


A separate timetable would dictate the departure of all foreign troops by 2014, including about 70,000 troops who were there before the surge, as agreed to by NATO and the Afghan government.


Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American commander in Afghanistan, sounded a cautious note about the state of the war in a telephone interview on Sunday. Although General Petraeus said there was “no question” that the Americans and the Afghans had made military progress in the crucial provinces of Helmand and Kandahar in the south, he said the Taliban were moving to reconstitute after the beating they took this past fall and winter.


“We’ve always said they would be compelled to try to come back,” General Petraeus said, adding that the Taliban would be trying to “regain the momentum they had a year ago.”


General Petraeus declined to discuss the withdrawal of American forces in July or the number he might recommend to the president. Late last week Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that General Petraeus had not yet submitted his recommended withdrawal number.


The decisions on force levels in Afghanistan could mirror how Mr. Obama handled the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq. Senior Pentagon officials noted that after Mr. Obama set a firm deadline for dropping to 50,000 troops in Iraq, he then let his commanders in Baghdad manage the specifics of which units to order home and when. The argument over where to set those “bookends” promises to be one of the most consequential and contentious of Mr. Obama’s presidency. It also has major implications for his re-election bid.


David E. Sanger and Eric Schmitt reported from Washington, and Thom Shanker from Forward Operating Base Dwyer, Afghanistan. Elisabeth Bumiller contributed reporting from Washington.


View the original article here

2 Are Killed in Sixth NATO Copter Crash Since Late April in Afghanistan

 

KABUL, Afghanistan — Two NATO service members died Sunday when their helicopter crashed in eastern Afghanistan. It was the latest in a string of crashes in recent weeks that were being investigated.


A NATO spokesman said the helicopter in the crash on Sunday went down in the Sabari District of Khost Province, a mountainous area near the Pakistan border where insurgents have been active this spring. The spokesman said two crew members were airlifted from the crash site, but he provided no other details, including the nationality of the two who were killed.


The Taliban quickly claimed responsibility for shooting down the aircraft, but NATO officials in Kabul said there had been no reports of hostile activity in the area.


“But what we don’t want to do is state categorically the reason for the crash, which is under investigation,” said Maj. Tim James, a British Army spokesman for the NATO-led military coalition.


At least six coalition helicopters have gone down since April 24, and five people have been killed. NATO has not announced the cause of any of the crashes, or whether the helicopters were downed as a result of hostile action. Officials said it typically takes two months to investigate a crash, and they have declined to release any details before the investigations are complete.


In at least four of the crashes, NATO said there was no indication of enemy activity.


The crashes do not appear to show a pattern, either involving problems with the aircraft or a shift in enemy tactics, Major James said.


Zabiullah Mujahid, a Taliban spokesman, said insurgents were planting roadside bombs on Sunday in the village of Noori when an American helicopter flew close overhead.


“This helicopter was flying at low altitude and wanted to target the mujahedeen,” Mr. Mujahid said by telephone from an undisclosed location. “But before it could shoot at the mujahedeen, it was shot down by a rocket-propelled grenade.”


On May 30, an Australian Chinook helicopter crashed in the town of Tarin Kowt in the southern province of Uruzgan, killing one service member and injuring five others. The Australian military said the crash was under investigation but ruled out enemy ground fire as a cause.


An American soldier died May 26 when a helicopter crashed in Paktika Province in eastern Afghanistan, and another died in a crash on April 24 in Kapisa Province, also in eastern Afghanistan.


Coalition helicopters were also forced to make what NATO described as hard landings on May 15 in the Panjwayi District in Kandahar Province and again on May 29 in southern Afghanistan. No casualties were reported in either landing.


Hard landing is a term that NATO uses for crashes in which the pilot does not lose control of the craft during the descent. The difference in classification, officials say, can be a gray area.


Sanghar Rahimi contributed reporting from Kabul, and an Afghan employee of The New York Times from Khost.


View the original article here