Jay Carney: Afghan Policy 'Remains Unchanged' Following Bin Laden's Death

WASHINGTON -- White House Press Secretary Jay Carney reiterated on Thursday that the killing of Osama bin Laden would not alter the president’s policy with respect to the war in Afghanistan.

Speaking to reporters en route to the president’s Ground Zero visit, Carney said that strategy regarding the Afghan war “remains unchanged.”

“In many ways,” he elaborated, “while the mission against bin Laden was a singular event, it was part of a general intensification of our focus on the AfPak region, on the need to disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda, which was the primary goal of the president’s policy in the AfPak region, and it was reflective of a general success that we've been having in taking out al Qaeda members and terrorists in the region.”

The public line is at odds with several reports that have surfaced in the immediate aftermath of bin Laden’s death in Pakistan. The Washington Post’s Rajiv Chandrasekaran, one of the most respected reporters on the beat, wrote on Tuesday evening that the Obama administration was “seeking to use the killing of Osama bin Laden to accelerate a negotiated settlement with the Taliban and hasten the end of the Afghanistan war.”

Several anti-war lawmakers, meanwhile, have heightened their calls for a more precipitous withdrawal of troops -- the process of which is set to begin in July 2011. At least one aide to an on-the-fence congressmember said that bin Laden’s death would encourage his boss to at least re-think his position. Another, Rep. Cliff Stearns (R-Fla.), has acknowledged that he is readjusting his position.

The death of bin Laden would, indeed, seem like an opportune break point at which the Obama administration could make major readjustments in its AfPak strategy without eliciting domestic criticism. A drawdown of forces would be a logical option. So too would be readjusting budget priorities to reflect the growth of al Qaeda’s presence in Pakistan.

Inside the White House, however, there is a sense that bin Laden’s death is not an end point but an affirmation.

“I think its way too hasty to say the death of UBL means we’ll draw down faster,” one administration official told the Huffington Post, via email. “What it says is that or broader regional approach to fight al Qaeda is working.”

Comments

[Card-Carrying American]

06:39 PM on 05/15/2011

We are fighting in Afghanistan to ensure the Taliban can never again rule the country. Taliban rule is intolerable because they hosted/protected/supported al Qaeda who used that base and freedom to launch attacks against the US. There is little reason to believe that they would not do the same thing again, given a second chance.

The only way we could possibly tolerate a Taliban regime in Kabul is if al Qaeda is not only destroyed, but incapable of reconstituting given Taliban protection in Afghanistan.

AQ, was never a one man show. Bin Laden's #2 man for years is Ayman al-Zawahiri who had built his own capable and dangerous terrorist organization prior to merging it with al Qaeda. Speaking of 9/11, Montassar al-Zayyat, a former close associate and biographer of Zawahiri, says, "I am convinced that he [Zawahiri] not bin Laden is the main player in these events." Zawahiri, of course, is still at large.

Too many questions remain open for us including:

--Will al Qaeda retain the ability fund and recruit at a level needed for significant operations without bin Laden?
--Does Zawahiri have the ability to reconstitute al Qaeda to be a major threat?

Until those questions are answered (hopefully over time) we must pursue the current strategy. If the Taliban never again rule Afghanistan (victory), the answers to the above questions are irrelevant.

-Card-Carrying American
http://cardcarryingamerican.blogspot.com/
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Card-Carrying-American/149565408390518

[noam4prez]

09:36 AM on 05/06/2011

The US Afghan policy remains unchanged because it was never about “getting Bin Laden” or the “War on Terror”.

The US empire inherited from the British empire after WWII, its role in a centuries-long struggle for control of Afghanistan. This three-way struggle, known to historians as the “Great Game”, is a competition between Russia/USSR, Persia/Iran, and Great Britain (now the US).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Anglo-Afghan_War (1839-1842)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Anglo-Afghan_War (1878-1880)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Anglo-Afghan_War (1919)
< pause for WWI and WWII >
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan (1979-1989)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001-present)

The US has always planned a permanent occupation of Afghanistan, and will remain there until it is forced out, or the US empire collapses, as the British and Soviet empires before them.

[Card-Carrying American]

06:06 PM on 05/15/2011

"The US has always planned..." A strange comment, given the fact that when the Soviets departed, the US virtually abandoned all engagement in the country at all. The US engagement in Afghanistan in the 50's was a full scale invasion compared to the abandonment that followed the end of the Soviet war.

I'm afraid history doesn't bear out your hypothesis. Unless by "always" you mean something more recent.

-Card-Carrying American
http://cardcarryingamerican.blogspot.com/
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Card-Carrying-American/149565408390518

[AZreb]

08:53 AM on 05/06/2011

"....broader regional approach...." - scary words. Increase the number of countries where we will use unmanned, armed drones as we have just done in Yemen? Increase the number of countries where we will send our troops? Increase Pentagon actions and MIC influence?

What do those three words really mean?

[Chezzo]

08:42 AM on 05/06/2011

See, the Obama administration needs to spin this like, "YEAH! We got him! Slam dunk! Touchdown! Good game everybody. Now let's get our boys home, we just gotta clean up some stuff. We'll be out starting July and totally out in 18 months."

[opsudrania]

07:28 AM on 05/06/2011

Change if any, should be moore aggrressive and relentless pursuit in fight against terror. We also should wait for stories to develop maturity for better versions.
God bless
Dr. O. P. Sudrania

[daylex2]

04:09 AM on 05/06/2011

WASHINGTON ....HUSSIN RAMAN DISCOVERS PREHISTORIC CHICKEN BONES BEHIND WHITE HOUSE....STATES THAT BY NUMBER OF BONES IT STOOD OVER 6FT TALL AND FEED OFF WATERMELON

[NancyY]

03:56 AM on 05/06/2011

Our troops need to be on the southern border to protect this country from the drug cartels. The mess in Mexico has proven a more clear and present danger to this country, especially the states of Texas, Arizona, New Mexico and California, than Afghanistan ever has.

[kizzie]

02:49 AM on 05/06/2011

' Afghan Policy 'Remains Unchanged' Following Bin Laden's Death '
Of course it remains unchanged. The main objective is still there----OIL Pipeline that had been planned before 9/11
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/forum/forumnew41.php

[Bill Hummel]

02:46 AM on 05/06/2011

Boy this brings out a lot of comment.

[lulu0510]

12:28 AM on 05/06/2011

So Bush was right. Osama was only one man and there were other priorities after 9/11. Like restoring the economy which took a serious dive after the destruction of the WTC and preventing further terrorist attacks. Bush's initial strategy of neutralizing. Afghanistan with B-52's dropping 2000 pound daisy-cutters drove the Taliban and al Queda into hiding without a large committment of ground forces. Obama now wants the glory of eliminating Bin Laden after using the information obtained by methods he criticized before and is now allowing the CIA members who formulated the techniques to be criminally prosecuted.
SIC TRANSIT EMPTY SUITS.

[ICU64]

12:02 AM on 05/06/2011

The neutralizing of Osama Bin Laden was not carried out for the benefit of any political party, and I say this for the following reason. The United States was sending a global message to all countries of the world that we, the people of the United States, have vowed to meet head on, with any and all terroristic threats. We venture into foreign lands to help out in whatever way that we can, because that is what America is all about, the help support FREEDOM for all people. This help sometimes has a financial impact on not only the countries that we go into to help, but our own economy as well. If all Americans join together in unity, we can get through these hardships again, because we have done it before during worse conditions than what is happening right now, and I am referring to the DEPRESSION ERA. Those people stood together, and the problem was fixed. I want to suggest that all politicians, from all political parties, please just start to listen to your constituents, because they stood behind your beliefs that helped you get the positions that you occupy now. Many of your fellow Americans do have good ideas that have net worth, and just might help you all to find answers that you need right now . United We Stand For The Good Of All People !

[landskroon]

02:17 AM on 05/06/2011

The use of the word "neutralizing instead of execution of Osama explains your view.
How sweet and, a bit naïve. 99.9% of all terroristic threats to America are the result of American behaviour over the border. America is not interested in Freedom for all people, it is interested in the profits for its companies (that finance politicians). There is a list with 100 interventions of America in other coutries over the last century mostly driven by American Fruit, American Big Oil and other companies.
I`ll wait for justice for the Palestinians supported by the USA, as long as that does not happen America is not interseted in Freedom and Democracy for all people. By the way, your own Freedom has decreased with 75% last decades, all to serve Corporate America.
Stll wish you a peacefull day.

[Card-Carrying American]

06:23 PM on 05/15/2011

"99.9% of all terroristic threats to America are the result of American behavior..."

Well, for al Qaeda, at any rate, your statement is not true. Just review the following al Qaeda statements (which fortunately do not reflect the opinions of the majority of Muslims):

"The matter is summed up for every person alive: Either submit, or live under the suzerainty of Islam, or die."

"...dialogue among civilizations...This is an infidel notion imported from the West verbatim."

"The good of the people is found in Islam; and Islam is spread with the sword alone..."

I want to say again that the above statements are heartily rejected by most Muslims as NOT representative of their beliefs. However, it is what bin Laden and his followers believe(d).

I won't argue that America has made many short-sighted foreign policy decisions that have ended up harming, rather than enhancing, national security. I just wanted to point out that it is not the driving factor behind our most deadly enemies. They say so themselves.

-Card-Carrying American
http://cardcarryingamerican.blogspot.com/
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Card-Carrying-American/149565408390518

[verflixed]

11:22 PM on 05/05/2011

does somebody have a baseball bat?

[lewisclew]

10:15 PM on 05/05/2011

Lets send our troops home, let them work with privite contractors and start rebuilding America. We can use all the money we are wasting in other counties, time to bring resources home. More than ever Americans, united we stand devited we fall. It's time to remeber who we are the greatest nation in the world. So lets pull it togeter and show are streghts.

[lqw]

09:52 PM on 05/05/2011

So why are we going to continue to fight a war now that OBL has died?
Bring the troops home.

[jbw1948]

09:56 PM on 05/05/2011

I agree but this is a bad time for a drawdown as the spring offensive for the taliban is just getting underway. I think we should wait until the bad weather starts and pull all the troops before the Afghan winter.

[lqw]

08:15 AM on 05/06/2011

This sounds like the 'Days not weeks".........excuses to keep us in Afghanistan and Iraq.

[ICU64]

11:06 PM on 05/05/2011

OBL is just one link in a chain of many Al Qaeda operatives located throughout the Middle East, and probably in the U.S. also. I am afraid for all of us Americans that are here in the United States.I had written before here that I wish that someone from Huffington Post would join in here to give us their opinions too, but maybe they aren't allowed to, I don't know. At this current period in the situations going on in the United States, we need all of the advice that we can get. I also worry for all of our men and women serving in our armed forces everywhere too, as the rest of America does, but in any event, we must back each one of them 100% !

[tpshd1981]

09:37 PM on 05/05/2011

Send our troops home. Close the borders.

[Bill Hummel]

02:47 AM on 05/06/2011

Lets get started.