Mon, Oct 14, 2013 - Page 7 News List

US-Afghan security pact stuck on troops immunity

TRYING ISSUE:For Washington, the deal hinges on US citizens who break the law in Afghanistan being tried at home, a matter Kabul insists is the Afghan public’s to decide

Reuters, KABUL

US Secretary of State John Kerry, right, looks down at a joint press conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai, unseen, in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Saturday.

Photo: EPA

US Secretary of State John Kerry and Afghan President Hamid Karzai ended two days of talks on a bilateral security pact on Saturday without a deal because they could not agree on the issue of legal immunity for US troops.

The pact would determine, among other things, how many US troops remain in Afghanistan after next year, when most foreign combat troops are due to exit.

US officials had previously said they wanted the pact finalized by the end of this month. Kerry’s visit was seen as a last-ditch effort to push the deal through before then.

Washington is insisting it cannot agree to a deal unless it is granted the right to try US citizens who break the law in Afghanistan at home.

Karzai said that was beyond the scope of his government to decide on the issue, calling it a question of “jurisdiction,” and that it would have to be put to the country’s Loya Jirga — an assembly of elders, leaders and other influential people.

“We need to say that if the issue of jurisdiction cannot be resolved, then unfortunately there cannot be a bilateral security agreement,” Kerry said at a news conference, stressing an agreement was otherwise essentially in place.

Karzai said the talks had focused on protecting Afghan sovereignty and that major differences had been resolved, including a US request to run independent counterterrorism missions on Afghan territory.

Such operations carried out by the US have long infuriated the Afghan president, who had been demanding that Washington agree to share intelligence instead.

Karzai said the US’ snatching of senior Pakistani Taliban commander Latif Mehsud was an example of the kind of action that Afghanistan wanted to avoid.

“This is an issue that we have raised in earnest with the United States in the past few days, as we have all previous occasions of such arrests in which the Afghan laws were disregarded,” Karzai said, referring to the capture of Mehsud. “Therefore, our discussion today in particular has been focused on making sure that through the bilateral security agreement such violations are not repeated.”

Kerry attributed the complaint to a misunderstanding.

“We followed the normal procedures that the United States follows ... we did what we are supposed to do,” he said.

Kabul rejected an initial US proposal on immunity at the start of the year and it has been a sticking point ever since. The failure to reach a deal could prompt Washington to pull all its troops out after next year, an outcome known as the “zero option.”

It was considered almost unthinkable a few months ago, but US officials have since raised the possibility, with an implicit warning that Afghan security forces are not ready to fight the Taliban-led insurgency without their help.

The collapse of similar talks between the US and Iraq in 2011 — which was partly due to the issue of immunity — led to Washington completely ending its forces’ mission there rather than maintaining a significant presence.

US officials had said earlier that Kerry did not intend to close a deal on the bilateral security agreement during the visit, but Washington is concerned that as Afghan election campaigning intensifies, it will be harder to broker a deal.

Karzai’s brothers last week began their campaign to take power and plan to offer the outgoing president, who is constitutionally barred from running again, a position in their government.

This story has been viewed 2200 times.

Comments will be moderated. Keep comments relevant to the article. Remarks containing abusive and obscene language, personal attacks of any kind or promotion will be removed and the user banned. Final decision will be at the discretion of the Taipei Times.

TOP top