20120523 Follow Me 377 U.S. and NATO Finalize Pacts on Ending Afghan War

相似文件 换一批

是 否 +2 论坛币

k人 参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群

赵安豆老师微信：zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

立即领取

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币！

+2 论坛币

U.S. and NATO Finalize Pacts on Ending Afghan War

The United States and its allies in NATO finalized agreements on Wednesday to wind down the war in Afghanistan, paving the way for President Obama to announce at a NATO summit meeting in Chicago next month that the unpopular, nearly 11-year-old conflict is close to an end.But many of the most critical details remained unresolved, chief among them who would pay billions of dollars a year to support the Afghan security forces.

After a day of meetings at NATO headquarters here in Brussels, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta said the allies had formalized three crucial commitments: to gradually move the Afghans into a lead combat role; to keep some international troops in Afghanistan beyond 2014, the year American forces are supposed to be home; and to pay billions of dollars a year to help support the Afghan security forces.

Although Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Panetta sought to display American and NATO solidarity, there was a great sense of war weariness here, as the NATO meetings on Afghanistan have now entered their second decade. Major concerns also remain over attacks like those mounted by the Haqqani network of the Taliban on Sunday, when dozens of attackers crossed hundreds of miles to strike at seven secured targets.

Mrs. Clinton characterized the attacks as part of the inevitable “setbacks and bad days,” and she praised the Afghan security forces’ response as “fast and effective.” Nonetheless, questions intensified about who was actually going to pay for the forces. One thing was clear: The Afghans cannot afford the $4 billion a year that is expected to be needed to support their own army and police force.

The $4 billion in spending is for after 2014, when the Afghan security forces are expected to shrink to 230,000 members, down from a peak of 352,000 they are to reach this year. American officials have acknowledged that the reduction is driven largely by financial constraints on Afghanistan and its allies. The United States and its partners now spend about $6 billion a year on Afghanistan’s security forces.

President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan threw a wrench into the deliberations over the cost of the security forces on Tuesday when he said in Kabul that he wanted a written commitment of $2 billion a year from the United States. Mr. Panetta quickly batted that aside. “You have to deal with Congress when it comes to what funds are going to be provided,” he said. “And we don’t have the power to lock in money for the Afghans.”

Also unresolved at the NATO meetings was how many international troops, both from the United States and its allies, would remain in Afghanistan after 2014. American officials and Mr. Karzai say they are committed to having United States forces there, but their number and role have to be negotiated.

---

了解Follow Us版
https://bbs.pinggu.org/thread-1130480-1-1.html
英文网址，欢迎补充！
https://bbs.pinggu.org/thread-1410923-1-1.html
Follow Us 发帖指南、常见问题及意见征集

https://bbs.pinggu.org/thread-1131076-1-1.html

关于Follow Us 版面建立官方群
https://bbs.pinggu.org/thread-1212960-1-1.html

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

分享2 收藏0 回帖

关键词：follow ending final Acts fina next conflict critical meetings

地图很好。

Don't know how much will be spent if the sodiers retire from the army. Is the military spending almost the same when the troops are positioned in Afghanistan as when deployed in the native country?

Frankly, the United States needs to find someone to share the military expenditure.But it can't easily retreat.The United States launched and pay attention to the war in Afghanistan, and in fact is the focus on Afghanistan geopolitical strategic value, use a strategic platform for Afghanistan, attempt to realize the restriction to Russia, India, Iraq and other countries , and seek the  American dominant position in east Asia.

Not all countries are willing to pay for that, and the return is limited. On the contrary, US may be keen on that, and want other countries to pay for part of the costs. It is a game of countries.

In daily international report ,Afghan will appear in the headline with no doubt.Afghan fully reflects a theory,geopolitics.It's strategic position that decides it becoming the focus of international affairs,'911' is just an abudant excuse.It's a tragedy for Afghans.It only bring endless war,big risk of their lives and property.Afghans still live in extreme poverty.International organization may offer them some aid ,but it's just a drop in the bucket.They need a stable environment,which maybe just a daydream .And now  Afghan is facing a catastrophic flood.
Afghan is a long slog for U.S.,which have spent too much money.When the economy is weak,it becomes increasing obvious.

It's hard to understand that in such a state as democratic as US, its people have been allowing their tax, as much as $4 billions, to be spent on a country as irrelevant as Afghanistan to them.

Am I wrong to say Afghanistan is irrelevant to US?  After all, US government started the war in the aim of cracking down Taliban which is a great threat to uncle sam.

It is for sure that if US troop leave Afghanistan suddenly, even gradually, Afghanistan will fall into a mess.

So is it justified for US to leave while taking no responsibility by pay nothing at all? After all, even before American started the war. Afghanistan is in a mess itself.

Politicians and entrepreneurs in US have been addressing speeches advocating US should bear the responsibility to make the whole world a better place. For instance, there are starvation and disease in Africa, so Unite State should help people there to survive by investing in the purpose of making it prosperous ,or even give food and medicine directly. Democracy is absent in North Korea, so it's Unite States' responsibility to help people there by promoting democracy and science.

Based on above perspective which dominates US upper class and political class.  US cannot leave Afghanistan alone and just watch it to fall into a mess.

So now, it’s really hard for uncle sam.  After all,  it's $4 billion a year.  What if he is the sole to bear?

that's a new topic

呵呵 不错哈