Obama: 30,000 New Troops, Exit Begins 2011
President Obama will tell the American people Tuesday night that he will deploy 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and plans "to begin the transfer of our forces out" in July 2011.
"The 30,000 additional troops that I am announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010 - the fastest pace possible - so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers," he will say in a primetime speech from West Point, according to excerpts released by the White House. "They will increase our ability to train competent Afghan Security Forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans."
"Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011," the president plans to say. "Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan's Security Forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But it will be clear to the Afghan government - and, more importantly, to the Afghan people - that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country."
A senior administration official stressed in a conference call with reporters Tuesday afternoon that that the July 2011 date marks the beginning of a process that does not have a defined endpoint. The full withdrawal of troops, the official said, will depend on conditions on the ground.
The president will also stress that the effort in Afghanistan is an "international effort" that requires contributions from other countries.
"I have asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies," he will say. "Some have already provided additional troops, and we are confident that there will be further contributions in the days and weeks ahead. Our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in Afghanistan. Now, we must come together to end this war successfully. For what's at stake is not simply a test of NATO's credibility - what's at stake is the security of our Allies, and the common security of the world."
The rough outlines of a withdrawal plan will be part of the revamped Afghanistan strategy that Mr. Obama is announcing in a speech at 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time. He will tell Americans his planned accelerated war escalation would have the first Marines there as early as Christmas, according to senior administration officials.
With the full complement of troops to be deployed by next summer, the heightened pace of Mr. Obama's military deployment in the 8-year-old war would appear to match the 2007 troop surge in Iraq, which rushed 20,000 combat forces to quell violence there. The Afghan surge would similarly aim to reverse Taliban gains and secure population centers in the volatile south and east parts of the country.
In his primetime speech to the nation, Mr. Obama will tie the escalation to an exit strategy, laying out a rough timeframe for when the main U.S. military mission would end, and outline plans to accelerate handing over security responsibilities to Afghan forces.
Mr. Obama will try to sell a skeptical public on his bigger, costlier war plan by coupling the large new troop infusion with an emphasis on stepped-up training for Afghan forces that he says will allow the U.S. to leave.
Public opinion in this country has become increasingly divided over American participation in the stalemated war.
Obama Speech Is First "Address to the Nation"
NATO: Obama Wants up to 10,000 Soldiers
Afghan Plan Revives Nation-Building Debate
Cheney: Obama Showing "Weakness" to Adversaries
Polling Analysis: Afghanistan 2009 Vs. Iraq 2007
CBSNews.com Special Report: Afghanistan
The new infusion of troops had been envisioned to take place over a year, or even more, because force deployments in Iraq and elsewhere make it logistically difficult, if not impossible, to go faster.
Instead, Mr. Obama directed his military planners to make the changes necessary to speed up the Afghanistan additions, officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the details had not yet been announced. They said the option the president has chosen gets more troops into Afghanistan faster than any other option that had been presented to him.
Military officials said at least one group of Marines is expected to deploy within two or three weeks of Obama's announcement, and would be in Afghanistan by Christmas. Larger deployments wouldn't be able to follow until early in 2010.
The initial infusion is a recognition by the administration that something tangible needs to happen quickly, officials said. The quick addition of Marines would provide badly needed reinforcements to those fighting against Taliban gains in the southern Helmand province, and could lend reassurance to both Afghans and the U.S. public.
Thirty thousand more troops is 10,000 fewer than Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander in Afghanistan, requested, reports CBS News correspondent David Martin. The president hopes to make up at least some of the difference with contributions from NATO allies.
"I think NATO will come through with a couple thousand and so I think we'll still be somewhat short of what Gen. McChrystal proposed," Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution told CBS News.
On a conference call with reporters this afternoon, senior administration officials said that NATO would "step forward with additional contributions of troops," though they did not say how many. There are currently 40,000 troops from countries other than the United States in Afghanistan, along with 68,000 U.S. troops.
Martin reports that the commandant of the Marine Corps has said his troops will among be the first in - about 9,000 into the Taliban heartland in Southern Afghanistan. It was not immediately clear whether that contingent of 9,000 would be deployed by the end of 2009, or would be staggered.
Watch CBS News' David Martin on Obama's Plans
In Kabul, Lt. Gen. William B. Caldwell, the new head of a U.S.-NATO command responsible for training and developing Afghan soldiers and police, said Tuesday that although the groundwork is being laid to expand the Afghan National Army beyond the current target of 134,000 troops, to be reached by Oct. 31, 2010, no fixed higher target is set.
There is a notional goal of eventually fielding 240,000 soldiers and 160,000 police, but Caldwell said that could change.
"Although that is a goal and where we think it could eventually go to, it's not a hard, firm, fixed number," he said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.
Mr. Obama began rolling out his decision Sunday night, informing key administration officials, military advisers and foreign allies in a series of private meetings and phone calls that stretched into Monday. In the past 24 hours he has spoken to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari and others about his plans.
Mr. Obama's announcement comes near the end of a year in which the war has worsened despite Mr. Obama's previous infusion of 21,000 forces.
With U.S. casualties in Afghanistan sharply increasing and little sign of progress, the war Mr. Obama once liked to call one "of necessity," not choice, has grown less popular with the public and within his own Democratic party. In recent days, leading Democrats have talked of setting tough conditions on deeper U.S. involvement, or even staging outright opposition.
Mr. Obama also deliver a deeper explanation of why the U.S. must continue to fight more than eight years after the war's start in his address, emphasizing that Afghan security forces need more time, more schooling and more U.S. combat backup to be up to the job on their own. He will make tougher demands on the governments of Pakistan and, especially, Afghanistan, and will provide a fresh path toward disengagement.
In Afghanistan, rampant government corruption and inefficiency have made U.S. success much harder. Mr. Obama was expected to place tough conditions on Karzai's government, along with endorsing a stepped-up training program for the Afghan armed forces along the outline recommended this fall by U.S. trainers.
The displeasure on both sides of the aisle was likely to be on display when congressional hearings on Mr. Obama's strategy get under way later in the week on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Obama briefed dozens of key lawmakers Tuesday afternoon, just before he left the White House for the speech against a military backdrop at West Point.
Military officials said the speech is expected to include several references to Iraq, where the United States still has more than 100,000 forces. The strain of maintaining that overseas war machine has stretched the Army and Marine Corps and limited Mr. Obama's options.
You can watch the speech on your CBS station at 8 p.m. ET or online at CBSNews.com.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. "The 30,000 additional troops that I am announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010 - the fastest pace possible - so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers," he will say in a primetime speech from West Point, according to excerpts released by the White House. "They will increase our ability to train competent Afghan Security Forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans."
"Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011," the president plans to say. "Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan's Security Forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But it will be clear to the Afghan government - and, more importantly, to the Afghan people - that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country."
A senior administration official stressed in a conference call with reporters Tuesday afternoon that that the July 2011 date marks the beginning of a process that does not have a defined endpoint. The full withdrawal of troops, the official said, will depend on conditions on the ground.
The president will also stress that the effort in Afghanistan is an "international effort" that requires contributions from other countries.
"I have asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies," he will say. "Some have already provided additional troops, and we are confident that there will be further contributions in the days and weeks ahead. Our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in Afghanistan. Now, we must come together to end this war successfully. For what's at stake is not simply a test of NATO's credibility - what's at stake is the security of our Allies, and the common security of the world."
The rough outlines of a withdrawal plan will be part of the revamped Afghanistan strategy that Mr. Obama is announcing in a speech at 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time. He will tell Americans his planned accelerated war escalation would have the first Marines there as early as Christmas, according to senior administration officials.
With the full complement of troops to be deployed by next summer, the heightened pace of Mr. Obama's military deployment in the 8-year-old war would appear to match the 2007 troop surge in Iraq, which rushed 20,000 combat forces to quell violence there. The Afghan surge would similarly aim to reverse Taliban gains and secure population centers in the volatile south and east parts of the country.
In his primetime speech to the nation, Mr. Obama will tie the escalation to an exit strategy, laying out a rough timeframe for when the main U.S. military mission would end, and outline plans to accelerate handing over security responsibilities to Afghan forces.
Mr. Obama will try to sell a skeptical public on his bigger, costlier war plan by coupling the large new troop infusion with an emphasis on stepped-up training for Afghan forces that he says will allow the U.S. to leave.
Public opinion in this country has become increasingly divided over American participation in the stalemated war.
Obama Speech Is First "Address to the Nation"
NATO: Obama Wants up to 10,000 Soldiers
Afghan Plan Revives Nation-Building Debate
Cheney: Obama Showing "Weakness" to Adversaries
Polling Analysis: Afghanistan 2009 Vs. Iraq 2007
CBSNews.com Special Report: Afghanistan
The new infusion of troops had been envisioned to take place over a year, or even more, because force deployments in Iraq and elsewhere make it logistically difficult, if not impossible, to go faster.
Instead, Mr. Obama directed his military planners to make the changes necessary to speed up the Afghanistan additions, officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the details had not yet been announced. They said the option the president has chosen gets more troops into Afghanistan faster than any other option that had been presented to him.
Military officials said at least one group of Marines is expected to deploy within two or three weeks of Obama's announcement, and would be in Afghanistan by Christmas. Larger deployments wouldn't be able to follow until early in 2010.
The initial infusion is a recognition by the administration that something tangible needs to happen quickly, officials said. The quick addition of Marines would provide badly needed reinforcements to those fighting against Taliban gains in the southern Helmand province, and could lend reassurance to both Afghans and the U.S. public.
Thirty thousand more troops is 10,000 fewer than Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the commander in Afghanistan, requested, reports CBS News correspondent David Martin. The president hopes to make up at least some of the difference with contributions from NATO allies.
"I think NATO will come through with a couple thousand and so I think we'll still be somewhat short of what Gen. McChrystal proposed," Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution told CBS News.
On a conference call with reporters this afternoon, senior administration officials said that NATO would "step forward with additional contributions of troops," though they did not say how many. There are currently 40,000 troops from countries other than the United States in Afghanistan, along with 68,000 U.S. troops.
Martin reports that the commandant of the Marine Corps has said his troops will among be the first in - about 9,000 into the Taliban heartland in Southern Afghanistan. It was not immediately clear whether that contingent of 9,000 would be deployed by the end of 2009, or would be staggered.
Watch CBS News' David Martin on Obama's Plans
In Kabul, Lt. Gen. William B. Caldwell, the new head of a U.S.-NATO command responsible for training and developing Afghan soldiers and police, said Tuesday that although the groundwork is being laid to expand the Afghan National Army beyond the current target of 134,000 troops, to be reached by Oct. 31, 2010, no fixed higher target is set.
There is a notional goal of eventually fielding 240,000 soldiers and 160,000 police, but Caldwell said that could change.
"Although that is a goal and where we think it could eventually go to, it's not a hard, firm, fixed number," he said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press.
Mr. Obama began rolling out his decision Sunday night, informing key administration officials, military advisers and foreign allies in a series of private meetings and phone calls that stretched into Monday. In the past 24 hours he has spoken to Afghan President Hamid Karzai, Pakistan President Asif Ali Zardari and others about his plans.
Mr. Obama's announcement comes near the end of a year in which the war has worsened despite Mr. Obama's previous infusion of 21,000 forces.
With U.S. casualties in Afghanistan sharply increasing and little sign of progress, the war Mr. Obama once liked to call one "of necessity," not choice, has grown less popular with the public and within his own Democratic party. In recent days, leading Democrats have talked of setting tough conditions on deeper U.S. involvement, or even staging outright opposition.
Mr. Obama also deliver a deeper explanation of why the U.S. must continue to fight more than eight years after the war's start in his address, emphasizing that Afghan security forces need more time, more schooling and more U.S. combat backup to be up to the job on their own. He will make tougher demands on the governments of Pakistan and, especially, Afghanistan, and will provide a fresh path toward disengagement.
In Afghanistan, rampant government corruption and inefficiency have made U.S. success much harder. Mr. Obama was expected to place tough conditions on Karzai's government, along with endorsing a stepped-up training program for the Afghan armed forces along the outline recommended this fall by U.S. trainers.
The displeasure on both sides of the aisle was likely to be on display when congressional hearings on Mr. Obama's strategy get under way later in the week on Capitol Hill.
Mr. Obama briefed dozens of key lawmakers Tuesday afternoon, just before he left the White House for the speech against a military backdrop at West Point.
Military officials said the speech is expected to include several references to Iraq, where the United States still has more than 100,000 forces. The strain of maintaining that overseas war machine has stretched the Army and Marine Corps and limited Mr. Obama's options.
You can watch the speech on your CBS station at 8 p.m. ET or online at CBSNews.com.
Popular in Politics
- For GOP, scandals could be an electoral plus - or minus 304 Comments
- IRS targeting overlooked biggest soft money groups
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 317 Comments
- Republicans use IRS scandal to tar Obamacare
- Where is the Benghazi cover-up Republicans promised? 403 Comments
- Ousted IRS chief: "I did not mislead" the American people 261 Comments
- Why Obama should worry that current scandals might impact 2016 236 Comments
- Immigration deal reached in House
I suggest you talk to the Russians about that...find out how theirs' worked out!
If it could have been done, they would have done it!
As a result of this action, he's lost the respect and trust of a majority of the public, Democrats will be voted out of office in 2010, and...fortunately, he'll be a one-term president!
______________
George W. Bush did on June 1, 2002.
"In every corner of America, the words 'West Point' command immediate respect," he told the graduating class. "This place where the Hudson River bends is more than a fine institution of learning."
Bush's 2002 Speech
Read a transcript and listen to audio from the former president's speech to the graduating class at West Point.
As he spoke to the cadets, Bush was upbeat about the war in Afghanistan, launched just weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks the previous year.
"Our war on terror is only begun, but in Afghanistan it was begun well," he said.
Political scientist and military specialist John Mearsheimer of the University of Chicago says it was a widespread and reasonable view at the time. And because the Afghanistan war was seen as going so well, he says, the Bush administration already had begun to shift its attention to the next war ? with Iraq.
"At that point in time," Mearsheimer says, "[the Bush administration] felt that it had won a stunning victory in Afghanistan, and it had, in effect, found the magic formula for winning wars against countries in the Middle East, and therefore it was 'on to Iraq,' where they believed we would win another stunning victory."
But, Mearsheimer, himself a West Point graduate, immediately adds what we all know now: "Of course, not only did the war in Afghanistan go south, but we jumped into a quagmire in Iraq."
During his speech at West Point in 2002, Bush also introduced what would later be known as "the Bush doctrine": the assertion that the U.S. can launch preemptive war against a country, such as Iraq, that is perceived to be threatening the U.S., even if that threat is not believed to be immediate.
"If we wait for threats to fully materialize, we will have waited too long," he said.
And as he spoke, he used the word "preemptive" for the first time in a major speech.
"And our security will require all Americans to be forward-looking and resolute, to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives," he said.
All through last year's campaign, President Obama was critical of the Bush doctrine. As president, Obama often calls Iraq a war of choice. Still, he has yet to lay out his own national security strategy, which is expected to come following a quadrennial review of military posture currently under way at the Pentagon.
On Tuesday night, more than seven years after Bush's positive assessment of Afghanistan, Obama faces a much more difficult situation there. His own commanding general has told him the U.S. strategy there is failing. The new president may have inherited the war, but the choices he announces at West Point will make it his own.
_____________________
So let it be recorded!
It's no longer 'Bush's war'!
Obama has MADE it his...when he could have ended it!
So, HE bears responsibility for it now.
And, the mindless Dems in Congress that allow him to escalate it!
_________________
"The 30,000 additional troops that I am announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010 - the fastest pace possible - so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers. They will increase our ability to train competent Afghan Security Forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans."
"Because this is an international effort, I have asked that our commitment be joined by contributions from our allies. Some have already provided additional troops, and we are confident that there will be further contributions in the days and weeks ahead. Our friends have fought and bled and died alongside us in Afghanistan. Now, we must come together to end this war successfully. For what's at stake is not simply a test of NATO's credibility - what's at stake is the security of our Allies, and the common security of the world."
"Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011. Just as we have done in Iraq, we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground. We will continue to advise and assist Afghanistan's Security Forces to ensure that they can succeed over the long haul. But it will be clear to the Afghan government - and, more importantly, to the Afghan people - that they will ultimately be responsible for their own country."