Differing Afghan, U.S. priorities could sabotage proposed security agreement

[unhappycamper]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/differing-afghan-us-priorities-could-sabotage-proposed-security-agreement/2012/12/04/2d0fd054-3e22-11e2-8a5c-473797be602c_story.html



FABRIZIO BENSCH/REUTERS - Afghan National Police officers line up after their training session at a training centre in Kunduz, northern Afghanistan, on Dec. 3, 2012.


Differing Afghan, U.S. priorities could sabotage proposed security agreement
By Pamela Constable and Craig Whitlock, Published: December 4

KABUL — When Afghan and American negotiators sat down here last month to begin talks on a bilateral security agreement that would define and govern a long-term U.S. military presence in Afghanistan, their meeting was cordial, vague and brief.

When the two sides meet again this month for more substantive discussions, each will begin to lay out a competing set of military concerns, political constraints and legal priorities that could severely test their fledgling postwar partnership, possibly to the point of failure.

For the Afghan government, which has smarted under a decade of Western military dominance in the fight against Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents, the key will be balancing the desperate need for continued U.S. support of Afghan security forces with the public and political pressure to ensure equality and sovereignty after U.S. combat troops leave Afghanistan in 2014.

“There is no question we would like to see a continued U.S. military presence to strengthen Afghan institutions and assure the Afghan people that the U.S. will be a friend and ally after 2014. But this must be an agreement between two sovereign nations,” said Jawed Ludin, Afghanistan’s deputy foreign minister. “Some see this as being mostly about immunity and jurisdiction, but we see it in the larger context. This is our future at stake.”