Leaving Afghanistan

"Our message to the Taliban remains the same, but today, it may have even greater resonance: you cannot wait us out. You cannot defeat us. But you can make the choice to abandon al Qaeda and participate in a peaceful political process." US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton addressed the public with resolve on May 2, a day after the death of Osama bin Laden.

She vowed America's determination to continue to hunt down al Qaeda operatives, isolate terrorists and continue to support the Afghan government. She also reiterated that the handover of security matters to the Afghan authorities will continue as planned. Experts agree that bin Laden's death is first and foremost of symbolic meaning. Michael Werz, expert on international security at the "Center for American Progress" says that is because al Qaeda has no longer played a major role in Afghanistan, "and in the past few years, Osama bin Laden himself no longer played a large role in militant attacks."

The symbolic meaning of the death caused by US military forces cannot be underestimated. For one reason, it marks the end of a long chapter in US foreign policy and has also silenced critics of the American president, who believed his counter terrorism efforts were not strong enough.

Change of course

Gideon Rose, foreign relations expert at the Council on Foreign Relations and former member of the US National Security Council under President Clinton, believes that bin Laden's death will give the president more political leverage. Rose says that the president can now continue his previous course if he wishes, but he can also change it. Either way, he will be able to "sell" his policies "more easily now because he won’t have to worry about being told, 'oh well, there’s bin Laden still out there waiting to take advantage.'"

Whatever the course Obama decides to chose, Rose believes bin Laden's death will have an impact on the US strategy and intelligence in the war on terror. "Because if it turns out that the intelligence that allowed this strike to succeed didn’t have anything to do with the larger presence, then it seems like they would prefer a smaller footprint, a lighter footprint counter-terrorism approach."If, on the other hand, there is some case to be made that the operation was the product of a much larger set of operations, Rose adds, "then it doesn’t necessarily answer that long-running debate."

Since taking office in 2008, President Obama has tripled the number of US troops in Afghanistan. He has also criticized his predecessor, President George W. Bush for losing sight of the actual perpetrators of 9/11 by conducting war in Iraq.

Now, Washington is busy debating the role of American troops in Afghanistan after 2014, when American troops are due to withdraw. US Special Envoy Marc Grossman was recently in Afghanistan to discuss just that with the Afghan government. Experts say it all depends on the security situation in the country; if the American military were to completely withdraw before Afghan security forces are ready to take on security tasks themselves, a civil war could break out. That is why Felbab-Brown, expert at the Brookings Institution, is skeptical that US troops will be gone by 2014.

Pakistan in the middle

Experts agree that the military operation north of Islamabad has pushed US-Pakistan relations into the focal point. Though the American operation was carried out in Pakistan, American forces had not notified Pakistan beforehand, possibly out of fear that information would be leaked. Now Islamabad has to explain itself: did Pakistani authorities know bin Laden was living in the country? If so, then the American distrust is justified. If Pakistani authorities, on the other hand, were not aware that bin Laden was living right under their noses, that casts a bad light on the intelligence of America's ally in the war on terrorism.

Werz hopes that the discussion on US-Pakistan relations helps Pakistan to realize that supporting terrorism is not internationally accepted. He believes that understanding will bring stability to the country. But if that doesn't happen, Wurz adds, "then the question of the importance of US-Indian relations might become more prevalent, as it has been in the past few days."

John Brennan, chief counterterrorism advisor to US President Obama hinted at Pakistan in his speech on May 2, when he explained why bin Laden's death is a turning point: "What we’re doing now is going to try to take advantage of this opportunity that we have to demonstrate to the Pakistani people, to the people in the area that al Qaeda is something in the past. And we’re hoping to burry the rest of al Qaeda along with bin Laden."

Author: Christina Bergmann (sb)
Editor: Ziphora Robina