THE BUCK STOPS: Biden on Wednesday did what President Donald Trump had hoped to accomplish: order the end of America's involvement in the Afghanistan war. "We cannot continue this cycle of extending or expanding our military presence in Afghanistan, hoping to create ideal conditions for the withdrawal and expecting a different result," Biden said in a speech announcing the decision. "I'm now the fourth United States president to preside over American troop presence in Afghanistan. Two Republicans, two Democrats. I will not pass this responsibility on to a fifth." He declared all American troops will leave the country by Sept. 11, the 20th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. And in the process, he overruled his top military advisers, POLITICO's Lara Seligman, Andrew Desiderio, Natasha Bertrand and Nahal Toosi report for Pros. Among the fiercest proponents of sticking it out were Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Mark Milley, and the commanders in Afghanistan, the wider Middle East, and of special operations troops, who warned that Afghanistan could once again become a haven for terrorists. But in the end, Biden carried through on what he failed to persuade President Barack Obama to do when he was vice president. "President Biden has made a judgment that those are manageable concerns and not as important as drawing American participation to an end, and so everybody shut up and did it," said Kori Schake, the director of foreign and defense policy at the American Enterprise Institute. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg also announced that the estimated 7,000 alliance troops will also leave. "This is not an easy decision, and this is a decision that contains risks and a decision that requires that we continue to stay focused on Afghanistan," he said. "This is not an end, but the beginning of a new way of dealing with Afghanistan." Lawmakers from both parties want to know what that will look like. "First, what will the security architecture look like to ensure that terrorists don't reconstitute and prepare attacks against us or our allies?" asked Rep. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), a former Pentagon and intelligence official. "Secondly, what is the diplomatic plan for maintaining some insight and leverage in Kabul? We'll need a significant diplomatic plan to ensure Kabul isn't descending into chaos." The top Republicans on the Armed Services Committees also called on Biden to reverse course. "It is irresponsible to leave when conditions on the ground would lead to a civil war in Afghanistan and allow the country to become a safe haven for terrorists once again," Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Oklah.) and Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.) said in a joint statement. Related: Petraeus trashes Biden decision to withdraw from Afghanistan, via Defense One. And: The crucial questions for Afghanistan, via The New York Times. Plus: U.S. plan to withdraw troops from Afghanistan hampers peace talks with Taliban, via The Wall Street Journal. WAR DIVIDEND? What does a U.S. withdrawal mean for the defense budget? Consultant Jim McAleese did some back-of-the-envelope calculations to estimate the move could free up somewhere in the range of $21 billion next year that at least theoretically could be applied to other needs. That's the amount designated in this year's budget for "direct-combat-requirements," he points out, for operations and maintenance, military personnel, procurement, and research and development. "Consequently, this unexpected action could potentially provide up to an additional ~+$21B of topline DoD funding for currently under-resourced missions," McAleese concludes. NNSA HEAD TAPPED: Biden on Wednesday named Jill Hruby to lead the National Nuclear Security Administration, the arm of the Department of Energy that manages the atomic weapons arsenal, our colleague Connor O'Brien reports for Pros. Hruby, a mechanical engineer, was the first woman to serve as director of a national weapons lab. | 
No comments:
Post a Comment