WASHINGTON - The Obama administration’s nominee to take command of US-led forces in Afghanistan says that he foresees maintaining American forces and equipment in the war-torn country after international contingents leave by the end of 2014, the agreed deadline for a total withdrawal of foreign troops.
General Joseph Dunford, who is due to replace Marine General John Allen as the top commander of American troops in Afghanistan, also acknowledged that America’s longest war has not met its primary original objective: rooting out al-Qaeda and the militants who give sanctuary to terrorists.
But he cited statistics showing progress made as a result of multinational efforts in Afghanistan. “Seventy-six percent of the population is currently secured by Afghan security forces. The vast preponderance of violence is now taking place outside of populated areas. The Taliban have been displaced from the population, and I view that as a sign of success,” Dunford said during his confirmation hearing before the US Senate Arms Services committee on Thursday.
Dunford added that Afghanistan has recruited more than 300,000 security force members, and that he expects them to be fully-trained during the next year. He said he is “encouraged” by what he has seen of the evolving capabilities of Afghan troops. In his testimony, Gen Dunford refused to elaborate on how many military forces he intends to keep in Afghanistan but emphasized that “1,000 would be too few,” the Washington Post reported Friday.
While backing the notion that the US must maintain some troops in Afghanistan beyond the 2014 deadline in what he described as “an advisory role,” the general emphasized that the remaining American troops will require US air power “such as combat helicopters” to be “effective,” according to the report. He further underlined that there will be a persistent need for “counterterrorism operations” in Afghanistan to avert the revival of al-Qaeda and other groups “that might threaten the US and its allies.”
Dunford is reportedly set to oversee the drawdown of the 68,000 US troops in the country and handing off national security responsibilities to Afghan forces.
The pullout plan reportedly set by Obama, Nato allies and Afghan President Hamid Karzai calls for handing over primary responsibility for combat and security to Afghan forces next year and removing all American and other foreign combat troops by the end of 2014.
Dunford, however, parried questions by Republican and Democratic senators on whether he intends to scale down forces gradually, in line with White House wishes, or in a sudden pullout just prior to the deadline.
According to a written statement Dunford submitted to Senators at his confirmation hearing, the general believes that until the end of 2014, the Afghan security forces will not be able to operate completely on their own and will need American “enablers” to help them fly planes and helicopters, do engineering, counter roadside bombs, and to help them with intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance.
The general further emphasized on the need to begin negotiations early on the arrangement of forces the US intends to keep in Afghanistan in order to avoid last minute complications about maintaining a military contingent in the country, similar to what happened in Iraq, where the government rejected the idea.
Meanwhile, veteran Republican Senator Lindsey Graham “warned Dunford that he wouldn’t vote for ‘a penny’ for the war if that deal does not give US soldiers full immunity from any prosecution in Afghan courts, one of the sticking points in Iraq,” the report added.
Many US troops and armed security contractors were widely involved in shooting and mass killing of civilians in Iraq, which was the main reason the Baghdad government rejected insistence by American officials to grant total criminal immunity for American forces operating in the country. US forces have been widely reported to behave in a similar manner in Afghanistan, attacking and killing Afghan civilians, including women and children, without any accountability.