U.S., Taliban sign deal aimed at ending war in Afghanistan
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
The United States signed a peace agreement with Taliban militants on Saturday aimed at bringing an end to 18 years of bloodshed in Afghanistan and allowing U.S. troops to return home from America's longest war. Under the agreement, the U.S. would draw its forces down to 8,600 from 13,000 in the next 3-4 months, with the remaining U.S. forces withdrawing in 14 months.
The complete pullout, however, would depend on the Taliban meeting their commitments to prevent terrorism.
President George W. Bush ordered the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in response to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Some U.S. troops currently serving there had not yet been born when the World Trade Center collapsed on that crisp, sunny morning that changed how Americans see the world.
It only took a few months to topple the Taliban and send Osama bin Laden and top al-Qaida militants scrambling across the border into Pakistan, but the war dragged on for years as the United States tried establish a stable, functioning state in one of the least developed countries in the world. The Taliban regrouped, and currently hold sway over half the country.
The U.S. spent more than $750 billion, and on all sides the war cost tens of thousands of lives lost, permanently scarred and indelibly interrupted. But the conflict was also frequently ignored by U.S. politicians and the American public.
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo attended the ceremony in Qatar, where the Taliban have a political office, but did not sign the agreement. Instead, it was signed by U.S. peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad and Taliban leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.
The Taliban harbored bin Laden and his al-Qaida network as they plotted, and then celebrated, the hijackings of four airliners that were crashed into lower Manhattan, the Pentagon and a field in western Pennsylvania, killing almost 3,000 people.
President Trump has repeatedly promised to get the U.S. out of its "endless wars" in the Middle East, and the withdrawal of troops could provide a boost as he seeks re-election in a nation weary of involvement in distant conflicts.
Mr. Trump has approached the Taliban agreement cautiously, steering clear of the crowing surrounding other major foreign policy actions, such as his talks with North Korea.
Last September, on short notice, he called off what was to be a signing ceremony with the Taliban at Camp David after a series of new Taliban attacks. But he has since been supportive of the talks led by his special envoy, Zalmay Khalilzad.
Under the agreement, the Taliban promise not to let extremists use the country as a staging ground for attacking the U.S. or its allies. But U.S. officials are loath to trust the Taliban to fulfill their obligations.
The prospects for Afghanistan's future are uncertain. The agreement sets the stage for peace talks involving Afghan factions, which are likely to be complicated. Under the agreement, 5,000 Taliban are to be released from Afghan-run jails, but it's not known if the Afghan government will do that. There are also questions about whether Taliban fighters loyal to various warlords will be willing to disarm.
It's not clear what will become of gains made in women's rights since the toppling of the Taliban, which had repressed women and girls under a strict brand of Sharia law. Women's rights in Afghanistan had been a top concern of both the Bush and Obama administration, but it remains a deeply conservative country, with women still struggling for basic rights.
There are currently more than 16,500 soldiers serving under the NATO banner, of which 8,000 are American. Germany has the next largest contingent, with 1,300 troops, followed by Britain with 1,100.
In all, 38 NATO countries are contributing forces to Afghanistan. The alliance officially concluded its combat mission in 2014 and now provides training and support to Afghan forces.
The U.S. has a separate contingent of 5,000 troops deployed to carry out counter-terrorism missions and provide air and ground support to Afghan forces when requested.
Since the start of negotiations with the Taliban, the U.S. has stepped up its air assaults on the Taliban as well as a local Islamic State affiliate. Last year the U.S. air force dropped more bombs on Afghanistan than in any year since 2013.
Seven days ago, the Taliban began a seven-day "reduction of violence" period, a prerequisite to the peace deal signing.
"We have seen a significant reduction in violence in Afghanistan over the last days, and therefore we are also very close to the signing of an agreement between the United States and the Taliban," NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Friday in Brussels.
He was in Kabul on Saturday for a separate signing ceremony with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and U.S. Defence Secretary Mark Esper. That signing was intended to show continuing NATO and U.S. support for Afghanistan.
"The road to peace will be long and hard and there will be setbacks, and there is a risk always for spoilers," Stoltenberg said. "But the thing is, we are committed, the Afghan people are committed to peace, and we will continue to provide support."
Tags
Who is online
98 visitors
"We have seen a significant reduction in violence in Afghanistan over the last days, and therefore we are also very close to the signing of an agreement between the United States and the Taliban," NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said Friday in Brussels.
He was in Kabul on Saturday for a separate signing ceremony with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and U.S. Defence Secretary Mark Esper. That signing was intended to show continuing NATO and U.S. support for Afghanistan.
"The road to peace will be long and hard and there will be setbacks, and there is a risk always for spoilers," Stoltenberg said. "But the thing is, we are committed, the Afghan people are committed to peace, and we will continue to provide support."
As Picard would say - "Make it so".
I hope you're right, but it sounds too much like the same sort of agreement he had with North Korea. The one where we gave up everything and received nothing in return.
What did we actually give up ?
Military exercises ?
Yes. Military exercises with South Korea.
What did we get???
Sure would absolutely LOVE to see some of that PROOF that you're looking at regarding the exercises.
They're still having the exercises but had postponed them due to the virus - " The United States and South Korea have postponed annual joint military exercises until further notice amid the coronavirus outbreak. The announcement comes after the U.S. military reported one its 28,500 service members stationed in South Korea tested positive for the virus the virus. The South Korean military has tracked nearly two dozen cases of the virus among its ranks."
Now, it's your turn.
Full text of the U.S.-North Korea agreement signed by Trump, Kim
Please note the date of that agreement - 6/11/18 - 18 months ago. Since that time, the U.S and South Korea have conducted war exercises and have told Kim to pretty well shove it. The exercises are on a smaller scale, but they are still war exercises and they have not been stopped.
U.S., South Korean Defense Leaders Talk Military Exercises -
US and South Korea may scale back joint military exercises over coronavirus fears -
The above two links are from 11/19 and 2/20 - both showing that the exercises are continuing.
Saved some Money ?
If we can't get rid of them we might as will make peace with them
Trump can't make this deal work. Trump has no comprehension with what and whom he is dealing with. This is an election ploy and nothing more. The best that will come out of any Trumpian deal is nothing and the worst is US and American interest in the region will be lost. Ask the Kurds, they know what the Trump is and how little he can be trusted.
Besides, US would not be there in the manner we are if it weren't for OIL and our dismantling of the Baathist Regimes.
WTF!
No other president could even get a deal done. That includes the left's savior Barack Obama; who signed a POS SOFA tying the US to a weak corrupt Afghan government..
You don't even know what the overall deal is and what the conditions are for withdrawal; and you are bitching. Typical rampant TDS.
As for "ask the Kurds." Which faction? You know that there are 3 major factions right? Bush Jr/Obama fucked over the Kurds in Iraq when they withdrew forces bowing to an Iraqi government run by Shia loyal to Iran. That was the good Kurdish faction that has supported the US since the first Iraq War they screwed over. No fucking crying by the left over that what-so-ever.
With Syria, that is a far different Kurdish faction that is tied to the Turkish Kurd faction that are terrorists. Also, thanks to the left's savior Barack Obama we are fighting in Syria illegally. The Syrian government has asked repeatedly for US forces to leave; and we are still there! Oh, and those poor Syrian Kurds flipped sides just before our "faux" withdrawal, and are now with the Syrian government, Russians, and Iranians. Which is what would have happened to begin with, if not for Obama's moronic decision to involve the US in the Syrian Civil War in an effort to remove Assad from power.
Trump is to blame for the position that past administrations have put the US in. What BS.
Afghan peace deal hits first snag over prisoner releases
If only we had some terrorist to exchange for a deserter like the 'son of a bitch' Obama did.
Did you even attempt to read your link, the second paragraph..
Not are prisoners, not are problem unless you are a TDS sufferer.
Doesn't matter that it's not OUR prisoners, I don't have TDS=Trump DENIAL syndrome, denying that he is the worst president this country has ever had.
It doesn't? Well for those of us that read your article and not just the TDS sufferer grabbing headline, the peace deal has nothing to do with prisoners
And once again, I don't suffer from trump DENIAL syndrome.
True, lots of folks on the left don’t suffer as much from Trump DENIAL syndrome. They suffer from the original, unedited version of TDS .... Trump DERANGEMENT syndrome.
The butthurt over Trumps win in 2016 is still palpable for many nearly four years later. How sad for them ......
I think the denial is much more likely on the part of those who think that someone who has lied 15,000 times WHILE IN OFFICE should be re-elected.
15,000 times? Really?
What a strangely specific number .....
So there's been a decrease? I remember a couple of weeks ago you were claiming more than 16,000. Things should be improving for you then, eh?
Go on and split the difference and just call it fifteen thousand five hundred give or take a few hundred...
If you really look into what the WaPo claim are "lies", you will see most of them are simply extravagant story telling or something the "fact checkers" don't like, so they call it a "lie".
Tell us...what do you think about the "lies" Biden has been telling on the campaign trail the last few months? The latest is when he told the same story several times he was arrested in South Africa when Mandela was released. Now he is saying he was "detained". More than likely it will come out he was not even there,
Do you and Will you and John call that a lie?
Why do I feel like you won't.
Take for instance the second "lie" claim from the link. It says Trump claims China will buy 40 to 50 billion dollars worth of agriculture a year. When the deal was actually signed, the actual numbers were 36 billion in 2020 and 43 billion in 2021.
The HORRORS!!!!
IMPEACH!!!
Not blaming Trump for the current Western positions in the ME. I simply do not believe Trump nor his closest loyalists understands the history of the ME or how fast and how often alliances shift. My advice to Trump would to be very-very cautious in dealing with these people who are opportunists, dishonest and do not give a whit about their own people and their only concern is to maintain their avenues to power. I most certainly do not wish to have our president make a deal that may give the US and The West any grief in the future.
If any of our PRECEDING presidents had understood the history of the ME, we wouldn't have stepped in during the '50's.
Totally agree. But in the 1950s, with the US assuming itself to be a 'transforming power' in the World after WW2 this is what the US did. The US jettisoned it's ideals of democracy to pursue its perceived and questionable stances against the Soviet Union to covertly and overtly destroy Iran's elected democratic government, thusly replacing it with an autocratic regime the US correctly assumed would be staunch geopolitical and economic supporters of US policy in the region. In my opinion this action was the first of many mistakes the US made in its pursuit of a Cold War policy whose goals could have been achieved much easier and swiftly had the US simply stood by democratic principals instead of agitation, weapons buildups and meddling in the governance of the ME nations.
Okay, so it is really 15,413. Kavatch, kavatch, kavatch.
So that's like an average of 14 lies a day so far.
Amazing!
The amazing part is that his supporters could care less that he is a continual pathological liar.
It would be amazing if any of what you say was actually the truth.
An average of 14 lies per day, every day? C'mon man! Even you can't really believe that ....
It just means that it averaged 14 a day. In reality, some days had none and other days it was more. His lies have been checked and verified. Some are subtle and other are blatant.
So, let's get back to discussing the topic, please
Well, the cease fire lasted all of 2 days, with the Taliban attacking 43 Afghan check points in Helmund and the US conducting air strikes in retaliation/support .
That should make the left-wing neocons happy. The idea of a peace deal seemed to have a lot of people upset.
I know ... crazy eh?
But, think about it - the Taliban did not strike U.S. forces - just the Afghan who were not part of the peace treaty - were they?
Then why did we support them with airstrikes?
Why not just keep withdrawing per the "deal"?
Thank Barack Obama for the shitty SOFA agreement he signed with the Afghan government. We are tied to them.
Tricky situation, maybe semantics, but the existing SOFA dates back to 2003, Bush, not Obama.
In 2012 Obama signed a "strategic partnership agreement" of 10 years which turned over the control of all military prisoners and prisons to the Afghan "government" as well made the Afghan special forces the lead fighters while relegating US forces to support roles and increased the NATO training of Afghan security forces.
The Agreement calls for a new SOFA in 2022 or within a year of that point,
but I seriously do not think either of the two current governments vying for power in Afghanistan will exist
after we pull out and the Taliban initiate this year's spring offensive against them.
The current SOFA still calls for all US military and civilians working for them to be treated as if they were Embassy employees, something that the Taliban cannot stand and will not abide by.
"To date, according to The Associated Press, the United States has spent nearly $1 trillion in Afghanistan and more than 3,500 U.S. and coalition soldiers have died there. More than 2,400 of them were Americans. Saturday's agreement sets the stage for March 10 intra-Afghan talks in Oslo, with the aim of forming a power-sharing agreement between rival Afghan groups."
So, we don't completely pull the plug this time? We gradually withdraw, but keep military options in play.
The Taliban has already stated that they will not abide by the accord -
U.S. has persuasive intel Taliban do not intend to abide by terms of peace deal, officials say
The Taliban sources say the group will continue to train fighters but plans to wait for the outcome of the intra-Afghan dialogue before officially announcing a spring offensive.
"Presently we are training around 15,000 fighters in our dozens of training centers across Afghanistan," one commander said. "As per our agreement with the U.S., we will not carry out attacks in the cities and district headquarters in Afghanistan . But we will continue our attacks in the rural areas of the country."
That's a peace deal?????
According to Pompeo, yes. Trillions of dollars, 2,500 deaths, 21,000 service men and women injured.
Opium production which was supposed to be reduced, actually increased four fold.
We will capitulate, leaving behind billions of dollars worth of equipment which will eventually be used by the Taliban
against other Afghans or new invaders should China be the next super power foolish enough to try to rein in these people.