December 6, 2009 12:36 PM

Gates: U.S. "Will Not Abandon Afghanistan"

By
David Morgan
(CBS)  President Obama's announced new strategy for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, which called for both an increase in troop strength and a July 2011 date for transferring forces out of the country, is the beginning of a process, not the end of it, according to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

When asked on CBS' "Face the Nation" whether the July 2011 date marks a deadline for U.S. involvement in the Afghan conflict, Gates said no.

"There isn't a deadline," Gates told host Bob Schieffer. "What we have is a specific date on which we will begin transferring responsibility for security, district by district, province by province, in Afghanistan to the Afghans. The process of that and the subsequent thinning of our forces will take place over a period of time and will happen and will be done based on conditions on the ground. And the decision on that will be made by our commanders in the field."

When asked whether the transfer of responsibility means that U.S. forces will remain but merely cede responsibility to the Afghans, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said, "No, it means that as we assess the conditions on the ground we will be transferring responsibility to the Afghans, and depending on the assessment at the time, that means some of our troops can begin coming home.

Clinton said our increased commitment to Afghanistan, to break the momentum of Taliban, take back territory, and effectively train Afghan security forces is being expedited.

Pointing to the Marines' progress in Helmand province this year, Clinton said she believes an assessment of what is happening will "very likely mean some troops can come home."

Gates said conditions on the ground will determine the pace by which troops return.

"So we get to the month, the magic month, and he might decide to bring six troops home or something like that?" Schieffer said.

"Or 6,000," Gates said.

"But it might be six!" Schieffer replied.

"Well, you know, Bob, I think it's very hard for us to be armchair generals," said Clinton. "What we've done and what the president's direction to the commanders on the ground is very clearly: we want this to move. We want it to move quickly. We want to show urgency about our aims here. And we do expect to start this transition in July 2011. And I think everybody is very clear about that. All of the generals are. We certainly are. But it's hard to sit here today in Washington and predict exactly what that pace will be."

Read the Complete "Face the Nation" Transcript (12.06.09)

When asked why a date for withdrawal was stated in the first place, Gates said the president was aiming to convey both resolve and also a sense of urgency to the Afghan government, that it must step up, for America's role in Afghanistan will be different. "And as the security component comes down, the economic, development and the political relationship will become a bigger part of the relationship.

"We are not going to abandon Afghanistan like we did in 1989," Gates said. "But the nature of the relationship will change."

"What if there's total chaos in 18 months?" Schieffer asked. "What if the government has fallen in? Does that mean that we'll still begin this process? I mean, what would we turn [responsibility] over to?"

"It's clearly a hypothetical," Gates said. "If we thought that was going to be the case I think we would've perhaps come to a different set of conclusions and the president would've made different decisions."

"Our military commanders are confident that they will have clear understanding by that time of whether the strategy is working or not. And if it's not, then we obviously will have to reconsider the whole approach. But our commanders have the confidence and bought into this date as a realistic date in terms of when they will be able to make a judgment and begin this process of handing over security responsibility."

When asked if even mentioning a date for withdrawal might embolden the Taliban, or might cause the Afghan government to seek to accommodate militants as they anticipate America's departure, Gates disputed the notion.

"The reality is the Taliban read the newspapers," he said. "They know what popular opinion is in Europe. They know what popular opinion is in the United States. Whether you announce a date or not, they can tell as easily from reading the news media about political support for these kinds of undertakings themselves and they always believe that they can outlast us. The reality is tough - what are they going to do? Are they going to get more aggressive than they already are? We don't think they can. If they lie low, that's great news for us because it gives us some huge opportunities in Afghanistan."

When asked to describe the terms of American success in Afghanistan, Clinton said it would be achieving our primary goal there: "To disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda. It is also being able to stand-up an Afghan security force so that they can defend themselves, and partnering with the Afghan government and people so that they will not once again become a safe haven for terrorists."

"Part of our very careful deliberation over the last months was to ask ourselves really hard questions, like, 'Okay, who is the enemy? Is it every young boy who is coerced into joining the Taliban or who decides he can make more money being a fighting member of the Taliban than he can being a member of the Afghan security army?' You know, we thought hard about that. And no, we don't think so. We think those are people that actually - if we reverse and break the momentum of the Taliban, which we think can very well happen with the strategy that we're pursing - that a lot of these people are going to come back over."

Copyright 2009 CBS. All rights reserved.
  • David Morgan

    David Morgan is a senior editor at CBSNews.com and cbssundaymorning.com.

Add a Comment See all 43 Comments
by searingtruth December 7, 2009 2:56 AM EST
War is more than a word my friends, it is horror. We must refrain from its constant utterance, and invocation.
ST

"The blood. All of that blood. Dried and brittle and bound to her skin. To act as if I did not notice, as if I did not care. To search, to salvage, to endure, to live. To return. Broken."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave
Reply to this comment
by 50BMS13 December 7, 2009 12:06 AM EST
Dear Mr. Karzai,

We will not abandon you my friend. I promise you that the United States of America is with you and the war in Afghanistan. We will be there until hell freezes over. Yes, I know....you heard my speech where I said we would leave after 18 months. Don't let that concern you my friend. I need the support of the left and liberals in my country and they would be upset if I did not hold out to them a date for withdrawal. Michael Moore is throwing a fit. I threw them a bone....it should buy us some time. I need to win re-election in 2012 so I will say we are withdrawing but you and I know that isn't going to happen. We will Expand our war efforts. Heck, once I'm re-elected I may even invoke the Draft. My Secretary of Defense is onside with this so "mums" the word. Play along my friend. We won't leave you. I need to say we are to buy time and appease the left and Michael Moores in my country. All is well my friend.

Sincerely Yours,
Barack Hussein Obama
President of the
United States of America
Reply to this comment
by nextgenman09 December 7, 2009 3:33 AM EST
PS: Its a shame the hoot bumpkin Conservitards failed here in Afghanistan for 8 years and left me this mess.
by 50BMS13 December 7, 2009 5:14 AM EST
nextgenman09
LOL...you are very "witty" today lol
by vietnamwar December 6, 2009 11:41 PM EST
YOU LIE.....WE LIE
Reply to this comment
by vietnamwar December 6, 2009 11:40 PM EST
Gates: U.S. "Will Not Abandon Afghanistan"

Funny eh...we abandon Vietnam in 1973....
Reply to this comment
by mljohns00 December 6, 2009 11:24 PM EST
Why doesn't Gates understand?
There is no more money for this nonsense. It's gone. All gone.

There's no money to defend Afghanistan for ten more years. No money to rebuild the place and provide education and healthcare for the people. We are bankrupt.
Reply to this comment
by Ordflyer December 6, 2009 9:52 PM EST
Honestly - WE DON'T CARE ABOUT AFGHANISTAN!!!

Let's just bomb the crap out of the terrorist training camps and get the hell out!!!

We need to spend our money on our new Cold War with China!!
Reply to this comment
by hungry1968-17 December 6, 2009 10:43 PM EST
He didn't say that we were pulling out in 18 months.

Your handlers at Fox and GOP headquarters are lying to you.
by wfw3536 December 6, 2009 9:51 PM EST
On Tuesday night Obama says were pulling out of Afghanistan in 18 months and now a few day later his handlers are saying he isn't. Does this administration know what they are doing. Why vote for Obama and now he is becaming another war crazy president. This isn't what I voted for and the last time I trust Obama.
Reply to this comment
by wyodutch December 6, 2009 8:46 PM EST
"To disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda. It is also being able to stand-up an Afghan security force so that they can defend themselves, and partnering with the Afghan government and people so that they will not once again become a safe haven for terrorists."
Robert Gates - 2009
...
..
.
"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on
a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of
it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country."
Herman Goering - 1946
.
.
At least Goering was honest.
Reply to this comment
by YoureSoWrong10 December 6, 2009 8:58 PM EST
And unlike some, he wasn't a coward. But very much like some, was a racist and a courtesan. I hope you feel better for the clarification.
by debinok1 December 6, 2009 8:31 PM EST
There are only two legitimate reasons to be in Afghanistan. 1) Trying to get Osama Bin Laden, we haven't had any intel on his location in years, so that is one down. 2)To bring Democracy to Afghanistan, something the majority of Afgans DO NOT WANT, so that is two down. Time to pack up and move out, we have no reason to be there, no reason to risk the lives of our soldiers. Do the smart thing and leave now.
Reply to this comment
by jimmyc1955 December 6, 2009 8:39 PM EST
Your comment implies that if you get OBL you will quash al Quida - which is just naive at best. If you take out al Quida and crush the Taliban than what ever government comes into power in Afghanistan has a chance to keep the nation from being a base for terrorist training and breeding.

So - I don't believe your highly simplifed rational is accurate and I believe we have a very good reason to be there. If they are trying to survive on their home base they have no ability to attack the US and kill thousands of civiliand or maybe more - if Iran gets the bomb.
by stn_sage December 6, 2009 9:14 PM EST
To jimmyc1955:

First, 'D's' comment DOES NOT imply that if we got OBL that Al Queda would be smashed! Where does he say that? He doesn't! But...even if he had...it is NOT his rationale! It is the rationale pushed by Bush, Cheney, Rice, Gates, Clinton, Obama, and most other politicians who WANT us to STAY there! And, obcourse, it is FALSE, because...!

Second, true terrorist organizations form and reform and the "leadership" can change simultaneously or instantly depending on circumstances! Which, is great for the politicians, who will then always have an 'enemy' to present to the public as a raison d'etre!

Third, YOU assume that 'if we can crush the Taliban'...which, is a HUGE assumption, that a 'righteous' govt will come into power there, which, is another HUGE assumption, that that justifies our presence there!

Fourth, I do NOT believe that 'D's' analysis is 'simplified'...but rather it is ACCURATE and VALID.

Fifth, I believe the CONCLUSION of same is ACCURATE and VALID.

And, in summary I am compelled to agree with him and not you, that it would be wise for us to withdraw from there...and the sooner, the better!
by 50BMS13 December 6, 2009 8:12 PM EST
Obama is to be praised for continuing the policies of the Bush Administration! We are still in Iraq. We still have Guantanamo. We have ESCALADED the war in Afghanistan. "YES WE CAN?" You bet! We can win the war in Afghanistan! "CHANGE YOU CAN COUNT ON?" You bet! For a change, a war will be won in Afghanistan!
Reply to this comment
by Ordflyer December 6, 2009 9:53 PM EST
"Escaladed?" Are we bombing them with Cadillac SUVs??
by 50BMS13 December 6, 2009 10:49 PM EST
lol...I knew I spelled it wrong....was hoping no one noticed lol Escalated
See all 43 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook