http://www.denverpost.com/politics/ci_16569467


WASHINGTON — The Obama administration has decided to begin publicly walking away from what it once touted as key deadlines in the war in Afghanistan in an effort to de-emphasize President Barack Obama's pledge that he'd begin withdrawing U.S. forces in July 2011, administration and military officials have told McClatchy Newspapers.

The new policy will be on display next week during a conference of NATO countries in Lisbon, Portugal, where the administration hopes to introduce a timeline that calls for the withdrawal of U.S. and NATO forces from Afghanistan by 2014, the year when Afghan President Hamid Karzai once said Afghan troops could provide their own security, three senior officials told McClatchy, along with others speaking anonymously as a matter of policy.

The Pentagon also has decided not to announce specific dates for handing security responsibility for several Afghan provinces to local officials and instead intends to work out a more vague definition of transition when it meets with its NATO allies.

What a year ago had been touted as an extensive December review of the strategy now also will be less expansive and will offer no major changes in strategy, the officials said. So far, the U.S. Central Command, the military division that oversees Afghanistan operations, hasn't submitted any kind of withdrawal order for forces for the July deadline, two of those officials said.

Shift already underway

The shift already has begun privately and came in part because U.S. officials realized the conditions in Afghanistan were unlikely to allow a speedy withdrawal.

"During our assessments, we looked at if we continue to move forward at this pace, how long before we can fully transition to the Afghans? Of course, we are not going to fully transition to the Afghans by July 2011," said one senior administration official. "Right now, we think we can start in 2011 and fully transition sometime in 2014."

Another official said the administration also realized in contacts with Pakistani officials that the Pakistanis had concluded wrongly that July 2011 would mark the beginning of the end of U.S. military operations in Afghanistan.

That perception, one Pentagon adviser said, has convinced Pakistan's military — which is key to preventing Taliban sympathizers from infiltrating Afghanistan — to continue to press for a political settlement instead of military action.

"This administration now understands that it cannot shift Pakistani approaches to safeguarding its interests in Afghanistan with this date being perceived as a walk-away date," the adviser said.

Last week's midterm elections also have eased pressure on the Obama administration to begin an early withdrawal. Earlier this year, some Democrats in Congress pressed to cut off funding for Afghanistan operations. With Republicans in control of the House of Representatives beginning in January, however, there will be less push for a drawdown. The incoming House Armed Services Committee chairman, Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., told Reuters news agency last week that he opposed setting the date.

On Tuesday, a White House official who spoke with reporters in a conference call about the December review said the administration might withdraw some troops next July and may hand some communities over to Afghan authorities. But he said a withdrawal from Afghanistan could take "years," depending on the capability of the Afghan national-security forces.

He also said the December review would measure progress in eight areas, though he declined to specify what those are. Congress will get a report by early next year, but Army Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of U.S.-led international forces in Afghanistan, will not testify.

"This is designed to be an inside-the-administration perspective," he said, adding that it will "set the policymaking calendar" for the Obama administration's first six months of next year.

De-emphasizing deadlines also allows the administration greater flexibility in responding to conditions in Afghanistan, officials said.

While the Taliban is facing increasing coalition airstrikes, it has no driving incentive to negotiate with an unpopular government. Officials in Afghanistan quietly worry that while they, too, are seeing some drops in violence and the Taliban's hold in pockets of the country, those limited improvements aren't leading to better governance.

A U.N. report issued in August showed that civilian casualties rose 31 percent during the first half of the year compared with the previous year; 76 percent were caused by the Taliban, it said. More than 400 U.S. troops have been killed so far this year.

Many officials privately worry that talk of a withdrawal without results will cost the military credibility, with Americans and Afghans alike.

"Good governance"

"What we ultimately need in Afghanistan is good governance," said one senior military officer. "Right now there is a gap" between security gains and governance.

Christopher Preble, the director for foreign-policy studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank in Washington, said he's not surprised that the scope of the December review has narrowed and that Obama administration officials are no longer highlighting the July 2011 date.

"The very players who were arguing so strenuously for a deepening of our involvement in Afghanistan a year ago are unlikely to now declare that their earlier recommendations were faulty," he said.

Right off the bat this article doesn't tell the whole truth.

What the President said was that there would be a timeline for withdrawal but it would also depend on conditions on the ground.

Everyone seems to forget that part.

If they do indeed pull the troops out.....there will bne repercussions and the war will eventually come here....you cannot go into another country cause problems and just expect that that country will just let everything go....not with the type of people we r dealing with....we just took the place of the brits.....and european countries that they warred with for years they don't stop fighting just change objectives and enimies

Dec. 1, 2009 Obama to the nation

"As your Commander-in-Chief, I owe you a mission that is clearly defined, and worthy of your service."

"I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan."

"After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home."

"I opposed the war in Iraq precisely because I believe that we must exercise restraint in the use of military force..."

"Years of debate over Iraq and terrorism have left our unity on national security issues in tatters..."

You seem to have forgotten this part and the message was clear.

He also said:

"Let me be clear, the speed of the troop withdrawal will certainly depend on conditions on the ground."

We wont be out of that country until we crush AQ and the Taliban.

That's right! The SPEED, not the timing. Timing is everything. Look at the date. Virtually every military person of note said this was a very bad thing to say because the TIMING is what helps the enemy the most.