We've heard from the Obama White House that July 2011 is "etched in stone" for beginning of withdrawal from Afghanistan. At the time that statement was released, I took comfort in the fact that an Obama stone usually operates like an Etch-a-Sketch, so there would remain a chance at changed strategy if the conditions on the ground didn't allow for Obama's initial promise. The anti-war Left, already upset about the Afghanistan troop surge, will likely not be pleased with the wiggle room the administration gave itself on the Sunday shows this week, with Clinton and Gates being very nuanced indeed about whether the deadline is hard or soft, immediate or gradual, conditions-based or absolute. I've excerpted the segments of "Meet the Press," "Face the Nation," and "This Week" that deal with deadlines. They're a bit long, but pretty easy reads. The "Face the Nation" one is probably the most interesting, with Gates saying flatly, "There isn't a deadline," and Schieffer asking what happens if the conditions on the ground are very bad in 18 months, but they're all worth a read. Meet the Press:
GREGORY: Secretary Gates, is this a deadline? GATES: It's the beginning of a process. In July 2011, our generals are confident that they will know whether our strategy is working, and the plan is to begin transferring areas of responsibility for security over to the Afghan security forces with us remaining in a tactical and then strategic overwatch position, sort of the cavalry over the hill. But we will begin to thin our forces and begin to bring them home. But the pace of that, of bringing them home, and where we will bring them home from will depend on the circumstances on the ground, and those judgments will be made by our commanders in the field. GREGORY: Regardless of the circumstances, though, what you're saying is that withdrawal will take place at that point. GATES: It will begin in July of 2011. But how -- how quickly it goes will very much depend on the conditions on the ground. We will have a significant number of forces in there for some considerable period of time after that.
Gregory went on to confront Gates and Clinton with past statements about how certain deadlines for withdrawal could endanger the mission in Iraq:
GREGORY: You both, of course, this week have taken tough questions about this issue of a deadline and whether that's a bad thing to signal up front. Three years ago, Secretary Gates, you were asked on Capitol Hill about another war, another debate, another timeline. That was about Iraq. And, Secretary Clinton, you were asked, as senator back in 2005, the same question about Iraq and timelines for withdrawal. This is what you both said back then. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C.: Do you believe, if we set timetables or a policy to withdraw at a date certain, it would be seen by the extremists as a sign of weakness, the moderates would be disheartened and it would create a tremendous impediment to the moderate forces coming forward in Iraq? GATES: I think a specific timetable would give -- would essentially tell them how long they have to wait until we're gone. (END VIDEO CLIP) (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) CLINTON: We don't want to send a signal to the insurgents, to the terrorists, that we are going to be out of here at some, you know, date certain. I think that would be like a green light to go ahead and just bide your time. (END VIDEO CLIP) GREGORY: That was about Iraq. Why are your views different when it comes to Afghanistan? CLINTON: Because we're not talking about an exit strategy or a drop-dead deadline. What we're talking about is an assessment that in January 2011 we can begin a transition, a transition to hand off responsibility to the Afghan forces. That is what eventually happened in Iraq. You know, we're going to be out of Iraq. We have a firm deadline, because the Iraqis believe that they can assume and will assume responsibility for their own future. We want the Afghans to feel the same sense of urgency. We want them to actually make good on what President Karzai said in his inaugural speech, which is that by five years from now they'll have total control for their defense. GREGORY: But this is a time certain. Secretary Gates, you just said that the withdrawal will begin regardless of conditions, the pace of withdrawal could be affected. This is a date certain. And when it came to Iraq, you thought that was a bad idea. GATES: I was opposed to a deadline in Iraq and, if you'd listen to what I said, that that was a date certain to have all of our forces out of Iraq. I'm opposed to that in Afghanistan as well. But I believe that there is an important element here of balancing, sending a signal of resolve, but also giving the Afghan government a sense of urgency that they need to get their young men recruited, trained and into the field partnering with our forces and then on their own. And so I think that the beginning of this process in July 2011 makes a lot of sense, because the other side of it is open.
Excerpts from other Sunday shows on deadlines, below the fold: Face the Nation:
SCHIEFFER: But since he has said that, Mr. Secretary, you have said what the president has announced is the beginning of a process, not the end of a process. You have said this will be a gradual process and based on conditions on the ground, so there is no deadline for the withdrawal of American forces in Afghanistan. So what's going on? GATES: Well I think what the president has done here is balanced and signaling our commitment and, now thanks to Secretary Clinton's and others' good work, NATO's commitment to reenergize our efforts and reverse the momentum. SCHIEFFER: But Mr. Secretary, is there a deadline or is there not? GATES: There isn't a deadline. 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. SCHIEFFER: But does that mean, MadameSecretary, that American forces will still be there as we start… That they're not going to start bringing the troops home? That we'll just begin handing over responsibility? CLINTON: No, it means that as we assess the conditions on the ground we will betransferring responsibility to the Afghans. And depending on the assessment at the time, that means some of our troops can begin coming home. I think that… SCHIEFFER: Can begin coming home? CLINTON: Absolutely, can begin coming home. SCHIEFFER: But not will begin coming home? CLINTON: Well, you know Bob, I really believe that the president was very clear in his speech. He said that we want to evidence both resolve and urgency at the same time. You know, this is a very big commitment. The president engaged in a deliberative process that led to this decision. And he is resolved to what he can with these new troops to break the momentum of Taliban, to begin taking back territory, to stand up the Afghan security forces in an effective way ona faster timetable. And that we believe, based on everything that is going on, that marines that are in southern Helmand province got there in July of this year, they will have been there for two years, as Secretary Gates can tell you they're making progress. So it's not an arbitrary time. It is an assessment based on what we see happening that yes, we will be able to transfer responsibility and that will very likely mean some troops can come home. SCHIEFFER: But in other words, there's not a deadline. Isthat what you're saying? That we'll look at what's going on on the ground and then we'll decide where to go from there? GATES: Let's be clear that the date in, of July 2011 to begin transferring security responsibility and thinning our troops and bringing them home is firm. What is conditions based is the pacing at which our troops will come home and the pace at which we will turn over responsibility to the Afghans. And that will be based on conditions on the ground. SCHIEFFER: So we get to the month, the magic month and he might decide to bring six troops home or something like that and that would mean… that's what he's talking about. GATES: Or 6,000. SCHIEFFER: But it might be six. CLINTON: Well you know Bob, I think it's very hard for us to be armchair generals. SCHIEFFER: Well, precisely. 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. SCHIEFFER: Well that's why I wondered why he put out this deadline because… GATES: I'll tell you why because… SCHIEFFER: If there's one thing we know it's that you can't predict what's going to happen in a war. GATES: The reason that we did, and I started to make this point earlier, is he was balancing a demonstration of resolve with also communicating a sense of urgency to the Afghan government that they must step up to plate in terms of recruiting their soldiers, training their soldiers and getting their soldiers into the field, first to partner with us and our ISAF partners and then on their own. So it's an effort to try and let the Afghans know that while we intend to have a relationship and support them for a long time, the nature of that relationship is going to begin to change in July of 2011. 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. But the nature of the relationship will change. CLINTON: And that also, Bob, is in keeping with what President Karzai said at his inauguration. Because he said that he wanted to see Afghan troops taking responsibility for important parts of the country within three years and to have the total responsibility within five. SCHIEFFER: Well let me just ask you this. What if there's total chaos in 18 months? What if the government has fallen in? Does that mean that we'll still begin this process? I mean what would we turn it over to? GATES: I think the key here is, first of all, it's a clearly a hypothetical. 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. SCHIEFFER: Let me ask you this. Former Vice President Cheney says anytime you start talking about leaving, that just emboldens the enemy. It causes the Afghans to begin accommodate the enemy because they get the idea that the bad guys are still going to be there, but we're going to leave. GATES: The reality isthe Taliban read the newspapers. Okay. 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 forthese 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 great news for us because it gives us some huge opportunities in Afghanistan. We think that we have the opportunity to engage these guys with the additional force we're sending in, make a significant difference in 18 months, get enough additional Afghan troops and police trained that we can begin this gradual process of transitioning security.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Just two months ago, you seemed to agree with that sentiment. You called the notion of timelines and exit strategies a strategic mistake. What changed? ROBERT GATES, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE: Well, first of all, I don't consider this an exit strategy. And I try to avoid using that term. I think this is a transition... STEPHANOPOULOS: Why not? GATES: This is a transition that's going to take place. And it's not an arbitrary date. It will be two years since the Marines went into southern Helmand and that two years that our military leaders believe will give us time to know that our strategy is working. They believe that in that time General McChrystal will have the opportunity to demonstrate decisively in certain areas of Afghanistan that the approach we're taking is working. Obviously the transition will begin in the less contested areas of the country. But it will be the same kind of gradual conditions-based transition province by province, district by district, that we saw in Iraq. STEPHANOPOULOS: We've heard that phrase a lot... GATES: But it begins -- but it begins in July 2011. STEPHANOPOULOS: No, I understand that. But you about this conditions-based decision-making. And I guess that it's fairly vague term. So if the strategy is working, do the troops stay? If it's not working, do they leave? How -- how is the decision-making process going to go? GATES: Well, from my standpoint, the decision in terms of when a district or a cluster of districts or a province is ready to be turned over to the Afghan security forces is a judgment that will be made by our commanders on the ground, not here in Washington. And we will do the same thing we did in Iraq, when we transitioned to Afghan security responsibility. We will withdraw first into tactical overwatch, and then a strategic overwatch, if you will, the cavalry over the hill in case they run into trouble.