Washington May 4:
The death of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is likely to intensify a debate about the US war in Afghanistan and add to pressure for faster troop reductions.
President Barack Obama made the defeat of al Qaeda his top goal when he rolled out a revamped strategy for the Afghanistan war in 2009 and ordered a 30,000-troop increase. Administration officials have long acknowledged that the number of al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan has dwindled to perhaps no more than a few dozen. But they have warned that allowing the Taliban movement to return to power could permit the country to once again become a safe haven for militants, putting the United States at risk of another September 11-style attack.
The killing of bin Laden, the most powerful symbol of Islamic militancy, may further erode support among the US public and members of Congress for the Afghanistan war ahead of a July deadline for the promised start to troop reductions. ''The question that has to be asked now is: Could we protect vital interests and draw down quicker than we have planned to do?'' said Daniel Serwer, a professor at Johns Hopkins University.
US analysts believe bin Laden long ago ceased to be a major operational player within al Qaeda. Because of that, many analysts said his death may do little to lessen the risks emanating from the region, in particular the concern that Afghanistan could descend into chaos. The White House yesterday was careful to avoid stirring expectations for a quicker withdrawal even as officials touted bin Laden's death as a development that would send a strong signal to al Qaeda and other militant groups.
White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters that Obama's existing plan for Afghanistan ''remains on track'' and reiterated plans for a July 2011 ''transition'' in which a modest withdrawal of US troops is expected to begin. ''The pace of that drawdown will be determined by conditions on the ground,'' Carney said. That sentiment was echoed by Democratic Senator John Kerry, a close ally of Obama. ''With the death of bin Laden, some people will ask why we don't pack up and leave Afghanistan. We can't do that,'' said Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
US PRESENCE Still, war-weary Americans may find it harder to buy the case for a continued large presence in Afghanistan. And it was Obama himself, during the 2009 White House strategy debate, who ordered the US mission strictly limited to fighting al Qaeda and degrading the Taliban -- and not defeating the Afghan insurgents altogether. ''I think it's hard for politicians who are watching 120 billion dollars a year go out the window in Afghanistan to say this changes nothing,'' Serwer said.
Since 2009, there have been fault lines within the Obama administration over Afghanistan and many experts think they will reemerge as the July 2011 timeline approaches. White House officials are adamant about fulfilling Obama's pledge to begin a troop withdrawal, however symbolic. Many in the military are expected to counsel a cautious approach to the drawdown. Obama has faced criticism over what some see as a muddled policy resulting from his efforts to craft a middle ground between the opposing views on his team.
Senator Richard Lugar, senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, yesterday weighed in on the side of the wars skeptics and said Obama needed to offer a ''sober analysis of what is possible to achieve'' in Afghanistan. ''With al Qaeda largely displaced from the country, but franchised in other locations, Afghanistan does not carry a strategic value that justifies 100,000 American troops and a 100 billion dollars per year cost, especially given current fiscal restraints,'' Lugar said.
Former Bush administration official Peter Feaver said that bin Laden's death appeared to be hardening views on both sides, portending a heated debate this summer. ''Those who were saying two weeks ago that it's time to declare victory in Afghanistan are saying 'See -- it's time to declare victory and get out of there,''' said Feaver, who is now a professor at Duke University. Some war supporters, meanwhile, are seizing on the bin Laden news as an argument to take advantage of the momentum and press for a win in Afghanistan.''If I were advising Obama, I would say, enjoy this well-earned victory lap, but by next week all of the tough choices in Afghanistan are still going to be tough,'' Feaver said.
The death of al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden is likely to intensify a debate about the US war in Afghanistan and add to pressure for faster troop reductions.
President Barack Obama made the defeat of al Qaeda his top goal when he rolled out a revamped strategy for the Afghanistan war in 2009 and ordered a 30,000-troop increase. Administration officials have long acknowledged that the number of al Qaeda operatives in Afghanistan has dwindled to perhaps no more than a few dozen. But they have warned that allowing the Taliban movement to return to power could permit the country to once again become a safe haven for militants, putting the United States at risk of another September 11-style attack.
The killing of bin Laden, the most powerful symbol of Islamic militancy, may further erode support among the US public and members of Congress for the Afghanistan war ahead of a July deadline for the promised start to troop reductions. ''The question that has to be asked now is: Could we protect vital interests and draw down quicker than we have planned to do?'' said Daniel Serwer, a professor at Johns Hopkins University.
US analysts believe bin Laden long ago ceased to be a major operational player within al Qaeda. Because of that, many analysts said his death may do little to lessen the risks emanating from the region, in particular the concern that Afghanistan could descend into chaos. The White House yesterday was careful to avoid stirring expectations for a quicker withdrawal even as officials touted bin Laden's death as a development that would send a strong signal to al Qaeda and other militant groups.
White House spokesman Jay Carney told reporters that Obama's existing plan for Afghanistan ''remains on track'' and reiterated plans for a July 2011 ''transition'' in which a modest withdrawal of US troops is expected to begin. ''The pace of that drawdown will be determined by conditions on the ground,'' Carney said. That sentiment was echoed by Democratic Senator John Kerry, a close ally of Obama. ''With the death of bin Laden, some people will ask why we don't pack up and leave Afghanistan. We can't do that,'' said Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
US PRESENCE Still, war-weary Americans may find it harder to buy the case for a continued large presence in Afghanistan. And it was Obama himself, during the 2009 White House strategy debate, who ordered the US mission strictly limited to fighting al Qaeda and degrading the Taliban -- and not defeating the Afghan insurgents altogether. ''I think it's hard for politicians who are watching 120 billion dollars a year go out the window in Afghanistan to say this changes nothing,'' Serwer said.
Since 2009, there have been fault lines within the Obama administration over Afghanistan and many experts think they will reemerge as the July 2011 timeline approaches. White House officials are adamant about fulfilling Obama's pledge to begin a troop withdrawal, however symbolic. Many in the military are expected to counsel a cautious approach to the drawdown. Obama has faced criticism over what some see as a muddled policy resulting from his efforts to craft a middle ground between the opposing views on his team.
Senator Richard Lugar, senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, yesterday weighed in on the side of the wars skeptics and said Obama needed to offer a ''sober analysis of what is possible to achieve'' in Afghanistan. ''With al Qaeda largely displaced from the country, but franchised in other locations, Afghanistan does not carry a strategic value that justifies 100,000 American troops and a 100 billion dollars per year cost, especially given current fiscal restraints,'' Lugar said.
Former Bush administration official Peter Feaver said that bin Laden's death appeared to be hardening views on both sides, portending a heated debate this summer. ''Those who were saying two weeks ago that it's time to declare victory in Afghanistan are saying 'See -- it's time to declare victory and get out of there,''' said Feaver, who is now a professor at Duke University. Some war supporters, meanwhile, are seizing on the bin Laden news as an argument to take advantage of the momentum and press for a win in Afghanistan.''If I were advising Obama, I would say, enjoy this well-earned victory lap, but by next week all of the tough choices in Afghanistan are still going to be tough,'' Feaver said.
