<p>An angry President Hamid Karzai, at times openly hostile to his American allies, has rejected the final recommendation of a four-day Afghan grand assembly that he should promptly sign a security agreement with the United States. <br /><br /></p>.<p>President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan addressed a meeting of about 2,500 Afghan tribal elders and leaders in Kabul. Even though he had convened the assembly, or loya jirga, to ratify his decision to sign the agreement, Karzai told the assembled elders that he would do so only after further negotiations.<br /><br />He also demanded that American forces cease raids on Afghan homes immediately, saying that he would nullify any bilateral security agreement if there was even one more such raid. In practical terms, that would mean an end to the last remaining combat missions American troops are regularly carrying out: raids by elite units aimed at capturing high-profile insurgents. “From this moment on, America’s searching of houses, blocking of roads and streets, military operations are over, and our people are free in their country,” Karzai said, his voice filled with emotion. “If Americans raid a house again, then this agreement will not be signed,” he said.<br /><br />Especially worrisome for American policy makers was that the Afghan president appeared to insist on putting off signing the security agreement until after Afghan elections next April; the United States has insisted that an agreement needs to be signed by the end of this year to give American and NATO forces time to plan for a new phase in Afghanistan after the combat mission concludes at the end of 2014. Western diplomats warned that Karzai was playing a risky game of brinkmanship, although some expressed hope that he could still change his mind and sign as the jirga asked him to do.<br /><br />“He’s definitely pushed too far,” one diplomat said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the dispute. “There’s a general consensus that he’s overestimated the importance to the Americans of the agreement and is thinking that they must have it at all costs. The Americans internally are very clear: that it’s not a vital strategic interest, and he doesn’t get that.” A prominent Afghan opposition leader, Abdullah Abdullah, said: “I have no doubt in my mind there are politicians thinking back in the US about the zero option” — a complete American military withdrawal — “and this will further strengthen their argument. There’s a possibility that will backfire and the price will be paid by the people of Afghanistan.”<br /><br />Karzai’s own loya jirga on Sunday endorsed the wording of the agreement and approved a resolution calling on the president to sign it by the end of this year. But its decisions were not legally binding, and Karzai made it clear that he was not ready to sign anytime soon. “On your behalf we will try to bargain more with the Americans and then we will sign this agreement,” Karzai told the jirga. “Give me a chance to do politics and don’t give this agreement for free to the Americans,” he said, adding that he would sign it “once we are sure we are on the path of peace and Afghanistan has a new president.”<br /><br />For their part, the Taliban denounced the jirga without noting the dispute between Karzai and the Americans. Calling the jirga’s decision a “historic crime,” the insurgents said the delegates “proved once again that with American guidance they are ready to sell out their country and accept any kind of disgrace.”<br /><br />Karzai seemed particularly angered by a night raid that killed twin brothers in Nangarhar Province last week and provoked protests by villagers. The Americans said it was a joint, Afghan-led raid that killed two armed insurgents after they opened fire, but they conceded that a coalition adviser was among those who killed the two men. Afghan officials said that it was a unilateral, American Special Forces raid; that the only Afghans present were American employees or mercenaries, not regular Afghan forces; and that the victims were innocent villagers.<br /><br />“I think Karzai can very easily miscalculate,” a Western official said. “Likewise, the US could too, and so there is uncertainty all around. Emotions are running high, and we need to try and not be as emotional as Karzai during this critical time.” The official also expressed concern about how Afghanistan’s huge security establishment would react to the president’s squabble with the Americans. Without a security agreement, Congress might well decide not to provide the $4 billion a year that the United States has promised to finance Afghanistan’s forces.<br /></p>
<p>An angry President Hamid Karzai, at times openly hostile to his American allies, has rejected the final recommendation of a four-day Afghan grand assembly that he should promptly sign a security agreement with the United States. <br /><br /></p>.<p>President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan addressed a meeting of about 2,500 Afghan tribal elders and leaders in Kabul. Even though he had convened the assembly, or loya jirga, to ratify his decision to sign the agreement, Karzai told the assembled elders that he would do so only after further negotiations.<br /><br />He also demanded that American forces cease raids on Afghan homes immediately, saying that he would nullify any bilateral security agreement if there was even one more such raid. In practical terms, that would mean an end to the last remaining combat missions American troops are regularly carrying out: raids by elite units aimed at capturing high-profile insurgents. “From this moment on, America’s searching of houses, blocking of roads and streets, military operations are over, and our people are free in their country,” Karzai said, his voice filled with emotion. “If Americans raid a house again, then this agreement will not be signed,” he said.<br /><br />Especially worrisome for American policy makers was that the Afghan president appeared to insist on putting off signing the security agreement until after Afghan elections next April; the United States has insisted that an agreement needs to be signed by the end of this year to give American and NATO forces time to plan for a new phase in Afghanistan after the combat mission concludes at the end of 2014. Western diplomats warned that Karzai was playing a risky game of brinkmanship, although some expressed hope that he could still change his mind and sign as the jirga asked him to do.<br /><br />“He’s definitely pushed too far,” one diplomat said, speaking on the condition of anonymity because of the delicacy of the dispute. “There’s a general consensus that he’s overestimated the importance to the Americans of the agreement and is thinking that they must have it at all costs. The Americans internally are very clear: that it’s not a vital strategic interest, and he doesn’t get that.” A prominent Afghan opposition leader, Abdullah Abdullah, said: “I have no doubt in my mind there are politicians thinking back in the US about the zero option” — a complete American military withdrawal — “and this will further strengthen their argument. There’s a possibility that will backfire and the price will be paid by the people of Afghanistan.”<br /><br />Karzai’s own loya jirga on Sunday endorsed the wording of the agreement and approved a resolution calling on the president to sign it by the end of this year. But its decisions were not legally binding, and Karzai made it clear that he was not ready to sign anytime soon. “On your behalf we will try to bargain more with the Americans and then we will sign this agreement,” Karzai told the jirga. “Give me a chance to do politics and don’t give this agreement for free to the Americans,” he said, adding that he would sign it “once we are sure we are on the path of peace and Afghanistan has a new president.”<br /><br />For their part, the Taliban denounced the jirga without noting the dispute between Karzai and the Americans. Calling the jirga’s decision a “historic crime,” the insurgents said the delegates “proved once again that with American guidance they are ready to sell out their country and accept any kind of disgrace.”<br /><br />Karzai seemed particularly angered by a night raid that killed twin brothers in Nangarhar Province last week and provoked protests by villagers. The Americans said it was a joint, Afghan-led raid that killed two armed insurgents after they opened fire, but they conceded that a coalition adviser was among those who killed the two men. Afghan officials said that it was a unilateral, American Special Forces raid; that the only Afghans present were American employees or mercenaries, not regular Afghan forces; and that the victims were innocent villagers.<br /><br />“I think Karzai can very easily miscalculate,” a Western official said. “Likewise, the US could too, and so there is uncertainty all around. Emotions are running high, and we need to try and not be as emotional as Karzai during this critical time.” The official also expressed concern about how Afghanistan’s huge security establishment would react to the president’s squabble with the Americans. Without a security agreement, Congress might well decide not to provide the $4 billion a year that the United States has promised to finance Afghanistan’s forces.<br /></p>
