(CNN) - One of main "deliverables" Afghan President Hamid Karzai is looking for, according to a senior State Department official is a commitment by the United States that it will be engaged with Afghanistan beyond July of next year, the date that President Obama has laid out for U.S. troops to begin to withdraw.
"He wants to know the United States is with Afghanistan beyond the July 2011 date and beyond the core goals," the official said. "To really lock in U.S. national security interests means Afghanistan can't go back. Allowing it to be undone is not in our interests or in the interests of the people of Afghanistan. That is the thing he wants us to explain, that the United States is committed to the long term."The official said the question involves civilian and security assistance after troops withdraw.
"We are seriously looking at the strategic partnership, not just the dynamic of the insurgency but also Afghanistan's future role in the region as a source of stability," the official said.
From CNN Politics
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
Slow but steady progress? Heard that before ... about Vietnam.
"Golly, remember when a SCJ actually had presided on the bench at the Federal level to gain years of knowledge and understanding of how the Constitution is to be applied through our Courts?"
Nope. We don't remember it at all. A little over one third (1/3) of people who have sat on the SCOTUS never sat the bench before being appointed and confirmed.
Specter is such a coward ,he already said the only thing he cares about is saving his own seat.
U.S. COMMITMENT IN AFGHANISTAN AFTER JULY 2011?
(1.) – Of course the U.S. is committed to providing some level of support to Afghanistan and any other struggling, fledgling democracy. That is a U.S. creed.
(2.) – But I'm not so sure the U.S. will guarantee boots-on-the-ground "indefinitely".
Karzai is just trying to sell us another bridge to nowhere. My God, just how much should one man be allowed to steal from us anyway??
Seems like on all fronts: wars, economy, diplomacy we have very very unnoticeable progress (according to the spin-meisters), so unnoticeable that we do not see it!
How can anybody in their right mind call the almost daily killing of civilians and the usual military, "We're sorry!" be called progress?