Military Plans Reflect Afghanistan Uncertainty

By THOM SHANKER

JAN. 29, 2014 

WASHINGTON — American and NATO military planners, facing continued political uncertainty about whether foreign troops will remain in Afghanistan after December, have drawn up plans to deploy a force this summer that is tailored to assume a training mission in 2015 but is also small enough to withdraw if no deal for an enduring presence is reached, alliance officials said.

With President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan refusing to sign security agreements approving a presence for American and NATO troops after 2014, allied military planners have been forced to prepare for both sudden success and abject failure of proposals for a continuing mission to train, advise and assist Afghan forces after combat operations officially end this year.

The decision on whether to extend the foreign military presence is a political one, and it will be decided first by Mr. Karzai and then by President Obama and the elected leaders from NATO nations. The process has brought vitriol in Kabul, the Afghan capital, and deep concern in Washington and allied capitals.

Launch media viewer Soldiers in Kandahar, Afghanistan, last week. Allied officials have drawn up plans for a force small enough for a quick exit. I. Sameem/European Pressphoto Agency

The delays have complicated military planning, since the governments of nations that contribute troops must approve any sustained deployments — and the required financing — months in advance, with a number of notional deadlines for finishing an agreement already long passed.

In preparing the mechanics of this summer’s regular troop rotation, American and NATO military commanders have set in motion a plan intended to give the alliance’s political leadership maximum flexibility, according to senior NATO officials.

These deployment plans would put in place a coalition military force sufficient to carry out a training mission beginning on Jan. 1, 2015, if Mr. Karzai relents, and small enough for an exit by Dec. 31 of this year if political stalemate results in the so-called zero option, alliance officials said.

As of Friday, there were about 36,500 American troops in Afghanistan, and about 19,000 other allied forces.

The alliance has approved the concept for a post-2014 training and assistance force of 8,000 to 12,000 troops, two-thirds of them American, based in Kabul and in four hubs in each compass corner of Afghanistan to carry out a follow-on mission, named Resolute Support.

This summer, as the United States and coalition nations send in troops for the next round of deployments, a force of that size, based in those locations and having the required skills, will be put in place as part of the overall alliance presence to complete the official combat mission this year.

“We will use the arrival of forces in July to tailor the force so it looks like what it needs to look like in that Resolute Support mission,” a senior NATO official said. “So it’s going to be there.”

The total allied deployment in the summer months will perhaps remain 10,000 troops larger than designs for a post-2014 mission, so “between July and October we will shed weight,” the NATO official said. “We will start to shrink the perimeter, figuratively speaking, and we will get to the Resolute Support number.”

Mr. Obama, delivering his State of the Union address on Tuesday night, reiterated his administration’s policy. If the Afghan government signs a security agreement, the president said, then “a small force of Americans could remain in Afghanistan with NATO allies.” He described the potential follow-on deployment as intended “to carry out two narrow missions: training and assisting Afghan forces, and counterterrorism operations to pursue any remnants of Al Qaeda.”

The current and potential missions in Afghanistan were atop the agenda at NATO headquarters in Brussels last week as alliance military chiefs met. Senior NATO officials described internal deployment planning on the condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the effort.

Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, who attended the NATO session, did not discuss specifics of future deployments, but described a broad goal to assure that military planning gives as much flexibility as possible to the alliance’s civilian leadership.

“It’s our job to make sure that the elected leader never runs out of options,” General Dempsey said.

But he warned that a continued delay by Mr. Karzai in signing the bilateral security agreement carried risk. “The options will become more expensive and could become somewhat constrained the longer this languishes,” General Dempsey said.

Many nations are watching with concern as Mr. Karzai demurs on signing a deal with Washington — a requirement for a similar deal with NATO — because the efficient and lawful disbursement of billions of dollars of pledged international assistance is viewed as dependent on oversight by foreign troops in a country known for corruption.

American intelligence agencies are also concerned that if United States troops are pulled out of Afghanistan, they could lose their air bases for drone strikes against Al Qaeda in Pakistan and for responding to a nuclear crisis in the region.