US to reduce troops from 13,000 to 8,600 in Afghanistan: US officials
Washington: The US will complete its troop withdrawal from Afghanistan within 14 months with the initial drawdown of forces from a total of 13,000 to 8,600 happening in the next 4 months, according to the landmark deal signed between America and the Taliban in Doha on Saturday to bring lasting peace in the war-torn country.
Under the agreement, in the first 135 days, the US will reduce the number of US forces in Afghanistan to 8,600 and proportionally bring reduction in the number of its allies and coalition forces.
The US is committed to withdraw from Afghanistan all military forces of the United States, its allies, and coalition partners, including all non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel within 14 months following announcement of this agreement, it said.
The United States, its allies, and the coalition will withdraw all their forces from five military bases.
In part two of the landmark agreement, the US, its allies, and the coalition will complete withdrawal of all remaining forces from Afghanistan within the remaining nine and a half months.
The United States, its allies, and the coalition will withdraw all their forces from remaining bases, the agreement said.
The peace agreement is aimed at bringing an end to 18 years of war in Afghanistan and allowing US troops to return home from America's longest war.
The withdrawal of troops and the agreement itself move in parallel processes, a senior administration official said as the US signed the landmark agreement with the Taliban in Doha in presence of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and a host of foreign diplomats including those from India.
"Our withdrawal is aligned with this agreement and is conditions-based. If the political settlement fails, if the talks fail, there is nothing that obliges the United States to withdraw troops," said an official here, who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
"That's not to say that the President doesn't have prerogatives as Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America to make any decision that he feels appropriate as our President, but there is no obligation for the United States to withdraw troops if the Afghan parties are unable to reach agreement or if the Taliban show bad faith in the course of this negotiation," the official said.
Responding to questions, the official noted that the withdrawal of troops will not be immediate.
The reduction of troops to 8,600 is part of the initial agreement and it will play out over several months.
"It doesn't happen immediately. It takes a while to get out. It's not going to happen overnight. But that is the commander on the ground's recommendation, that is the President's intention, and that's in the agreement," said the official.
According to another senior administration official, America's commitment to act on the pullout is tied to the Taliban's action on their commitments in the agreement, which includes in detail counter-terrorism commitments, because that was US' priority concern, and also their engagement in these negotiations.
As far as the long-term goal is concerned, the President's aspiration remains ultimately to bring a political settlement here, end the war, and end the US military commitment to Afghanistan, the official said.
"The President does not seek a permanent commitment of US forces to a war in Afghanistan. There are a lot of ways that we can and will continue to work with the Afghan Government in the aftermath of a political settlement, and there's many venues of cooperation between us and them, but it is the President's ambition to reach a political settlement and have the United States forces leave and end the fight. That is his goal," the official said.
"Now, in the course of the agreement, it requires us to reach a political settlement that will create the conditions under which we do that. And if we're unable to reach a political settlement, if for any reason this process doesn't work, there's nothing that obligates the President to take that course," the official said.
The 18-year-long Afghan war has killed tens of thousands of civilians and Afghanistan remains one of the poorest countries in the world. Some 2.5 million Afghans are registered as refugees abroad and another two million are displaced within their country.
The war has cost the US taxpayer more than USD 1 trillion in military and rebuilding costs since the US-led invasion of 2001.
More than 100,000 Afghan civilians have been killed or injured over the past decade, according to the United Nations.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
'Go hang yourself' not necessarily abetment of suicide: Karnataka HC
Bengaluru: Karnataka High Court has declined to categorise the statement 'go hang yourself' as abetment of suicide.
Justice M Nagaprasanna addressed the complexity of determining abetment of suicide in cases involving contentious statements.
The recent ruling stemmed from a petition involving allegations of abetment of suicide against a man in connection with the death of a priest in a church in Udupi in coastal Karnataka.
The petitioner was accused of triggering the priest's suicide by allegedly urging him to "go hang himself" during a conversation about the priest's alleged relationship with the petitioner's wife.
The defence counsel argued that the statement was made out of anguish upon discovering the alleged affair, and the priest's decision to end his life was influenced by the affair becoming known to others, rather than solely by the accused's words.
The opposing counsel contended that the priest took his own life due to the accused's threatening language about exposing the affair.
However, the single judge bench, drawing on precedents set by the Supreme Court, emphasised that such statements alone might not constitute abetment to suicide.
The court acknowledged the multifaceted reasons behind the priest's suicide, including the alleged illicit relationship he had despite his role as a father and priest.
Recognising the complexities of human psychology, the court underscored the challenge of deciphering the human mind and declined to categorise the accused's statement as abetment to suicide.
Consequently, the court quashed the case, emphasising the intricate nature of human behaviour and the inability to fully unravel the motivations behind such tragic incidents.
