U.S. Ambassador Discusses Security Agreement

KABUL: (MEP) – James Cunningham, the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, in a press conference on Wednesday in which he spoke about the still unset Kabul-Washington security pact, looking to allay misgivings and clear up misunderstandings that have circulated around it.

Negotiations on the Bilateral Security Agreement (BSA) began over a year ago, but the question of whether or not the accord will be signed remains unanswered. Expected to lay out the details of U.S. involvement in Afghan national security affairs after the NATO combat mission ends in 2014, including the number of troops that will remain, most have acknowledged the importance of the pact and urged that it be settled soon, tolo reported.

However, after much ground was gained in negotiations during the visit of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry two weeks ago, debate over the issue of “troop immunity” remains inconclusive. And it a decision on the matter has now been deferred by Afghan President Hamid Karzai to a Loya Jirga expected to be held within weeks.

On Wednesday, Ambassador Cunningham took the opportunity to carefully disentangle the misunderstandings that have abounded over the issue of U.S. troop immunity. He reaffirmed that the U.S. does not want its soldiers to go unpunished for wrongdoings. But instead, the issue was over whether or not U.S. troops would be subject to Afghan or American judicial jurisdiction. The term “immunity,” therefore, simply refers to the soldiers’ freedom from prosecution in Afghan courts, not carte blanche.

U.S. officials have previously indicated that if their terms on the issue of jurisdiction are not met, then the entire agreement could fall apart. An uncompromising stance that experts have suggested is grounded in the fact that the U.S. Constitution mandates soldiers stationed abroad be under American jurisdiction.

When the U.S. was withdrawing from Iraq, the issue of jurisdiction proved a deal breaker when Iraqi officials rejected the condition U.S. troops being out of their jurisdiction. Virtually no American troops stayed behind in Iraq, and since then, the country has spiraled into a bloody sectarian conflict fueled by unfettered terrorist activity.

In addition to not providing troops for what has been described as a “training, advising and assistance” mission in Afghanistan post-2014, U.S. officials have said they would halt aid to Afghan security forces entirely if no pact was finalized.

Although NATO officials announced earlier this week that they endorsed a 8,000-12,000 soldier presence in Afghanistan post-2014, which was markedly lower than previous estimates, they said two thirds of that force would likely be Americans. So even if NATO continues to support Afghanistan with aid, the numbers of boots it has on the ground to oversee the use of that aid and the continued development of the Afghan forces would be substantially depleted if no BSA was put in place.

Ambassador Cunningham also spoke on Wednesday about what the BSA would mean for Afghanistan’s neighbors.

“We have tried to make clear to all of Afghanistan’s neighbors, who are the countries interested here, no one should view the BSA as a threat,” he said. “Indeed, we would argue the that the presence of U.S. forces supporting Afghan forces after 2014 is an asset for the region by promoting security in the region by promoting the security of Afghanistan.”

Although the U.S. Ambassador let slip the words “long term” to describe the U.S. presence post-2014, he quickly followed up by saying that they did not intend to have permanent bases in Afghanistan, but only stay as “guests on Afghan facilities.”

In recent weeks Pakistani officials and security experts have expressed some apprehensions about the BSA, suggesting it could providing the framework for a continued presence of U.S. troops who would operate across the fluid border in Pakistani territory. The restive areas of Baluchistan and the Federally Administered Tribal Areas along the Afghan border are a focal point for U.S. drone operations targeting insurgent and terrorist hubs at the moment.

But Ambassador Cunningham attempted to reassure those gathered at the press conference on Wednesday that the U.S. had no “intent” to use its continued presence in Afghanistan to launch assaults on other countries.

Afghan officials and security experts have time and time again emphasized the importance of a BSA being penned between Washington and Kabul. Fearful of what could happen to the progress that has been made in the past twelve years, they argue Afghanistan cannot afford abandonment.

Either way, the security transition process between coalition troops and Afghan forces marches on. Although the Afghans were applauded for their performance this year, which saw the bulk of security responsibilities around the country transferred to them, they also suffered startling casualty rates. Officials have said such heavy losses would be unsustainable in the long run.