Archive for the ‘Afghanistan’ Category

Instant Divorce, North Korea, Afghanistan: Your Wednesday Briefing – New York Times

The new sanctions affect six individuals and 10 organizations with financial ties to Pyongyangs weapons program. We tried to answer a big question in the standoff: Can North Korea actually hit the U.S. with a nuclear weapon?

And an American soldier, James Joseph Dresnok, who defected to North Korea in 1962, died after living there for more than 50 years, two of his sons told a pro-North Korea website.

_____

The commander of the U.S. Pacific Fleet, Adm. Scott H. Swift, above, confirmed that divers found the remains of missing American sailors in the flooded compartments of the Navy destroyer John S. McCain, which collided with an oil tanker off the coast of Singapore.

The commander declined to say how many bodies had been located. Ten sailors had been missing since the accident.

A string of Navy accidents on the Pacifics western edge not only has raised doubts about its operations, but damaged U.S. prestige and deepened doubts from Asian allies about Washingtons commitment to the region.

_____

In a major victory for womens rights, Indias top court voted to outlaw a legal provision that allowed Muslim men to instantly divorce their wives by saying the word talaq Arabic for divorce three times.

Men could do the triple talaq in person, by letter or even over the phone. By contrast, a Muslim woman in India seeking a divorce must generally gain the permission of her husband, a cleric or other Islamic authorities.

_____

An expected visit by Pope Francis to Myanmar has set off intense debate about how hard-line Buddhist nationalists will react to any support he may pledge to the Rohinyga.

There had been speculation in recent weeks about whether the popes visit, which would precede his trip to Bangladesh, would include a side trip to Rakhine State and how hard-line Buddhist nationalists such as Ashin Wirathu might react.

The visit would be the first to Myanmar by any pope.

_____

And Frederik, the Crown Prince of Denmark, above left, was barred temporarily, at least from a bar in Brisbane.

The episode drew more attention to a new state law that has disappointed Australians and tourists alike by requiring that their identification be scanned to get into certain bars after 10 p.m.

China is struggling to revive its industrial heartland where unproductive, debt-laden factories are losing business as Chinas growth slows. The city of Shenyang is a crucial test.

Company names in China must now meet official criteria on taste, political sensitivity and length to win approval. Hangzhou Looking for Trouble Internet Technology could not be reached for comment.

Hackers have discovered that a central element of online security the mobile phone number is also one of the easiest to steal.

Three Chinese shoemakers must pay New Balance $1.5 million for infringing the American sportswear companys signature logo. Lawyers say is the largest trademark infringement award ever granted to a foreign business in China.

U.S. stocks were up. Heres a snapshot of global markets.

An earthquake in Italy struck near the island of Ischia, a tourist spot off the coast of Naples, killing two women and injuring dozens of other people. [The New York Times]

A Chinese human rights attorney, Jiang Tianyong, confessed to trying to overthrow the Communist Party in a trial that was choreographed as an attack on liberal political ideas. [The New York Times]

In Australia, a new chemical treatment could help wombats from scratching themselves to death because of a skin disease that is decimating populations. [ABC]

For half a century, stories have endured of an American aviator who was lost in the mountains of rural China during World War II. [The Los Angeles Times]

Wary people in Chinas Shandong Province will soon be able to use a smartphone app to hire personal bodyguards. [China Daily]

Tips, both new and old, for a more fulfilling life.

Your guide for back-to-school essentials.

Who really needs to be gluten free?

Recipe of the day: Embrace the meatless meal with roasted cauliflower and broccoli with salsa verde.

For Taiwanese, Chiang Kai-shek is a divisive figure, so debate has raged over what to do with thousands of statues of the former leader of the Republic of China.

A study suggests that an extinction crisis can be averted by linking together the worlds remaining forest islands, allowing native animals and plants to spread and become more resilient.

Finally, the deep seas are actually alive with light. Bioluminescence is so common in the oceans that it ranks as one of Earths dominant ecological traits.

They were a dissatisfied group of Americans, determined to break away.

Not Californians in 2017. Or Texans for decades. But on this day in 1784, settlers in western North Carolina declared an independent state. They were concerned that the state and national governments, which were in a debate over debts related to the Revolutionary War, did not have their best interests at heart.

The State of Franklin, in what is now eastern Tennessee, adopted a constitution with power divided among three branches, like the national government that its leaders hoped one day to join.

The state made treaties, levied taxes and set salaries, but not in currency. Instead, those salaries included 1,000 deer skins a year for the governor, 500 raccoon skins for the governors secretary and a single mink skin for the constable for each warrant signed, according to one account published in The Times in 1852.

Officials sought the help of Benjamin Franklin, but hopes of national recognition were never realized. The state only lasted a few years because of internal dissent and external pressure.

But it had an impact. Franklin was eventually absorbed into Tennessee, and its leader, John Sevier, became Tennessees first governor when it joined the union in 1796.

Sarah Anderson contributed reporting.

_____

We have briefings timed for the Australian, Asian, European and American mornings. You can sign up for these and other Times newsletters here.

Your Morning Briefing is published weekday mornings and updated online.

What would you like to see here? Contact us at asiabriefing@nytimes.com.

See the original post here:
Instant Divorce, North Korea, Afghanistan: Your Wednesday Briefing - New York Times

Afghanistan: 16 years, thousands dead and no clear end in …

US President Donald Trump was due to make an announcement Monday evening about his plans for the future of America's commitment in Afghanistan. Analysts believe that whatever he decides, there will be no swift end to the conflict.

The United States first invaded Afghanistan on October 7, 2001, as part of Operation Enduring Freedom.

The Bush administration accused the country's then Taliban government of sheltering al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden, who had masterminded the previous month's September 11 terrorist attacks.

The Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden for trial, but only to a third country, rather than directly to the United States. Washington refused the offer and launched air and ground attacks, joined shortly thereafter by US allies.

Although al Qaeda was quickly pushed out of Afghanistan, and the Taliban government easily removed by the end of 2001, the war dragged on.

"The focus shifted from Afghanistan to Iraq -- that was a major strategic error," Rodger Shanahan, research fellow at Sydney's Lowy Institute West Asia Program, told CNN.

"You can't fight two wars simultaneously in those two complex environments. So you could say it was an opportunity lost."

The new US President poured troops into the country -- at one point there were as many as 100,000 --- but by the time the troops started to withdraw in late 2011, the Taliban, though diminished, remained undefeated, and began once again to grow.

Now, in 2017, with fewer than 10,000 US troops left in in Afghanistan, mostly working as trainers, the war continues to drag on into its 16th consecutive year, with no end in sight.

And so the question arises, if the war has become seemingly unwinnable, why doesn't the United States just leave?

Shanahan said one of the reasons is Washington wants to avoid leaving a free space in Afghanistan for terrorists to plan and execute attacks, such as existed in the lead-up to the September 11, 2001, attacks.

"You need to destroy that safe-haven element and as part of that strategic aim, you want to build Afghan governance so that it can control the areas it supposedly has sovereignty over," he said.

"So ultimately, if you achieve the second aim, you achieve the first."

Hameed Hakimi, research associate at the London-based Chatham House Asia Program, said the US military only wanted one thing. "The military side in Afghanistan would tell you they don't want all these years to have been wasted," he said.

There was a sense of optimism in Kabul around Trump, said Hakimi, who visited Kabul earlier this year. "There was an expectation that he will do things a bit different from Obama. There was a sense in Afghanistan that (Obama) is overcautious, he's slow," he said.

A new President though does not necessarily translate into new solutions.

Shanahan said defeating an insurgency through force alone is incredibly difficult.

"They have safe areas they can transition in and out of and if you have adjoining areas that give you freedom of action, it makes it virtually impossible to wipe out an insurgency," he said.

The Taliban, he said, "can drop over the border into neighboring Pakistan and wait out whatever surge comes your way."

Michael Kugelman, deputy director and senior associate for South Asia with the Asia Program at the Woodrow Wilson Center, said Trump's options were limited. "This much is clear -- there are no good options in Afghanistan," he said.

Trump can't hope to "win," he said. "The best we can hope for is some type of negotiated end to the war, but it's hard to imagine the US, Afghanistan, or any other stakeholder offering incentives that are sufficiently enticing to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table. The Taliban is scoring big victories on the battlefield. Why would it want to quit when it's ahead?"

But Hakimi said there is a divide within the Taliban now between the older leaders, who remember the days when they were in power, and the hot-headed young fighters.

"You might be able to quite successfully reconcile a bunch of old men -- they've been in the business 20 years -- but it's a different story when you talk about a young man with a gun," he said.

All agreed a surge of US troops onto the front line would be no solution at all.

"You can't simply end it by pounding these people," Hakimi said.

Go here to see the original:
Afghanistan: 16 years, thousands dead and no clear end in ...

Trump calls out Pakistan, India as he pledges to ‘fight to win’ in Afghanistan – CNN

"America's enemies must never know our plans, or believe they can wait us out. I will not say when we are going to attack, but attack we will," said Trump, before a crowd of US troops.

While he admitted he previously favored withdrawal, Trump said doing so would dishonor the US troops who died in Afghanistan and could create a vacuum that would allow terrorist networks to expand.

In setting out what he described as a new approach to the 16-year campaign, Trump had harsh words for US ally Pakistan, saying Washington could "no longer be silent about Pakistan's safe havens for terrorist organizations."

"We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars, at the same time, they are housing the very terrorists we are fighting ... that must change immediately," Trump added.

He also called on Pakistan's regional rival India, to "help us more with Afghanistan, especially in the area of economic assistant and development."

"We appreciate India's important contributions to stability in Afghanistan but India makes billions of dollars in trade from the United States and we want them to help us more with Afghanistan, especially in the area of economic assistance and development."

In response to Trump's pledge, the Taliban issued a defiant statement, saying the US should have thought about withdrawing its troops from Afghanistan instead of prolonging the war.

"It looks like the US still doesn't want to put an end to its longest war. Instead of understanding the facts and realities, (Trump) still shows pride for his power and military forces," the statement said, vowing Taliban forces would keep fighting to free Afghanistan of "American invaders."

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani welcomed Trump's statement and his "affirmation of support for our efforts to achieve self-reliance and for our joint struggle to rid the region from the threat of terrorism."

"The US-Afghan partnership is stronger than ever in overcoming the threat of terrorism that threatens us all," Ghani said in a statement Tuesday, adding the "objective of peace is paramount."

Washington has long accused Islamabad of not doing enough in efforts to stabilize Afghanistan.

US officials believe that much of the Haqqani leadership is based in Pakistan and some analysts believe eliminating their safe havens is critical to stabilizing Afghanistan.

Trump seemed to reference this in his speech Monday, saying that "Pakistan has much to gain from partnering with our effort in Afghanistan (and) much to lose from harboring criminals and terrorists."

"Pakistan has ironclad immutable strategic interests which dictate maintaining ties to groups like the Taliban," said Michael Kugelman, deputy director and senior associate for South Asia with the Asia Program at the Woodrow Wilson Center.

"It sees them as useful tools to keep Pakistan's enemy, India, at bay in Afghanistan."

Taking a tough line on Pakistan "is not a new idea" said Lahore-based defense analyst Hasan Askari Rizvi, "(Trump) just appears to be more categorical and clearer than previous administrations."

"The future of Afghanistan is inextricably linked to the future of its neighbor, Pakistan," Obama said, calling on Islamabad to "demonstrate its commitment to rooting out al Qaeda and the violent extremists within its borders."

Trump repeatedly mentioned the 9/11 attack as the reason for US action in Afghanistan during his speech.

However, what the President will do to ensure Pakistan does change its behavior is unclear, said Kugelman. Tactics could include cutting aid and curtailing military assistance to Islamabad, he added.

Concerns in Islamabad will be heightened not only by Trump's criticism of Pakistan, but also his reaching out to India.

But Trump seemed to indicate that friendship would not be without conditions Monday. "India makes billions of dollars in trade from the United States, and we want them to help us more with Afghanistan," he said.

Trump had similar expectations for other powers. "We will ask our NATO allies and global partners to support our new strategy with additional troop and funding increases in line with our own," he said.

"Since taking office, I have made clear that our allies and partners must contribute much more money to our collective defense, and they have done so."

In a statement Tuesday, India's Ministry of External Affairs said New Delhi welcomed Trump's "determination to enhance efforts to overcome the challenges facing Afghanistan and confronting issues of safe havens and other forms of cross-border support enjoyed by terrorists."

"We are committed to supporting the government and the people of Afghanistan in their efforts to bring peace, security, stability and prosperity in their country," the statement said. "We have been steadfast in extending reconstruction and development assistance to Afghanistan in keeping with our traditional friendship with its people."

However, Rizvi in Lahore warned giving India a bigger role in Afghanistan could backfire on Washington by reducing Islamabad's willingness to contain terror groups based in Pakistan.

"Under the present circumstances, tensions between India and Pakistan will increase," he said.

Greater Indian involvement in Afghanistan doesn't only put it in competition with Pakistan, but also China, which has been investing heavily in both countries as part of its "One Belt, One Road" economic program.

Trump did not mention China once during his speech Monday.

Trump has previously expressed reservations about the seemingly endless US military commitment in Afghanistan and questioned the objectives of staying there.

The President reached a decision on the future of the US strategy in Afghanistan on Friday after months of deliberation.

Trump's decision comes as Taliban militants have been resurgent in recent months, posting a series of recent gains against Afghan government forces, which are backed by a US-led coalition of NATO allies.

The United States first invaded Afghanistan on October 7, 2001, as part of Operation Enduring Freedom.

The Bush administration accused the country's then Taliban government of sheltering al Qaeda leader Osama Bin Laden, who had masterminded the previous month's September 11 terrorist attacks.

The Taliban offered to hand over Bin Laden for trial, but only to a third country, rather than directly to the United States. Washington refused the offer and launched air and ground attacks, joined shortly thereafter by US allies.

CNN's Steve George, Sophia Saifi, Ben Westcott and Jeremy Diamond contributed to this report.

More:
Trump calls out Pakistan, India as he pledges to 'fight to win' in Afghanistan - CNN

‘We Are Not Nation-Building Again,’ Trump Says While Unveiling Afghanistan Strategy – NPR

The White House via YouTube

Updated at 9:45 p.m. ET

President Trump declared that a hasty withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan "would create a vacuum" and that America is "not nation-building again; we are killing terrorists."

In a nationally broadcast address from Fort Myer in Virginia, Trump said he shares the American people's "frustration" with the long-running war in Afghanistan and that his "original instinct was to pull out." But he said the security threats the U.S. faces are "immense."

Speaking before a largely military audience, Trump said, "From now on, victory will have a clear definition: attacking our enemies, obliterating ISIS, crushing al-Qaida, preventing the Taliban from taking over the country, and stopping mass terror attacks against Americans before they emerge."

Trump said the U.S. will "shift from a time-based approach to one of condition" and that he will not talk about numbers of troops or plans for future military activities.

Trump is expected to deploy about 4,000 more troops to Afghanistan and try to tighten expectations on its government and that of neighboring Pakistan, senior U.S. officials told NPR ahead of the speech.

The president's decision follows months of deliberation with top U.S. commanders, political advisers and even enlisted veterans of the nearly 16-year war.

As expected, Trump did not include any end date to the stepped-up American presence, the way President Barack Obama did when he announced a surge in troops there.

When asked before the speech how long the U.S. presence could remain in Afghanistan, a senior U.S. official responded, rhetorically, "How long have we been in Korea?"

U.S. troops have been posted south of the Demilitarized Zone since the end of hostilities there in 1953. U.S. forces have been fighting in Afghanistan since the 2001 invasion that followed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.

Trump is said to have dreaded arriving at the decision to deploy more U.S. troops. The Pentagon recommended new deployments earlier this summer, but Trump has delayed making that official.

Although he rarely mentioned Afghanistan as a presidential candidate, Trump was critical of the war effort before running for president and said the United States should cut its losses.

Trump has remained deeply skeptical about new deployments since his inauguration.

The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. John Nicholson, warned Congress early this year that the war is in "stalemate," and he and Defense Secretary James Mattis have both acknowledged that Russia has begun supporting Taliban insurgent forces in the north.

But Trump's political advisers are said to have argued that increasing the American commitment to Afghanistan after nearly 16 years and a peak of more than 100,000 troops under Obama would amount to throwing good money after bad.

Mattis, national security adviser H.R. McMaster and White House chief of staff John Kelly, whose son was a Marine officer killed in Afghanistan, are understood to have strenuously made the opposite case. The Pentagon and the U.S. intelligence community have long warned that withdrawing American support for the Afghan government would hasten its collapse.

The Afghan government cannot afford the security apparatus the U.S. and other international donors have helped build since 2001. Also the Taliban and other insurgent forces have long been able to seek refuge outside Afghanistan's borders in Pakistan, where the leadership of the Taliban continues to make its headquarters.

The Taliban are pressing gains against Afghanistan's forces, especially in the south and east, and Nicholson says more troops are necessary to backstop them. More U.S. troops also will make it possible to train more local troops to replace those lost in combat; the Afghan rate of attrition is heavy.

NPR correspondent Tom Bowman contributed to this report.

Originally posted here:
'We Are Not Nation-Building Again,' Trump Says While Unveiling Afghanistan Strategy - NPR

Full Transcript: Donald Trump Announces His Afghanistan Policy – The Atlantic

In primetime remarks Monday night, President Trump unveiled the broad strokes of a new U.S. strategy for the war in Afghanistan without offering details about changes to troop levels.

The announcement marks a turnabout for Trump, who as a private citizen once advocated for full U.S. withdrawal. Since launching his campaign in 2015, Trump has been far less vocal publicly about how the United States can best approach the now-16-year-old conflict. As my colleague Krishnadev Calamur has reported, even Afghanistan experts have been conflicted about what to do in the country, where the conflict between the Afghan government and the Taliban is at a stalemate, where corruption continues to hamstring governance, and where regional and ethnic loyalties often trump loyalties to the central government.

After months of deliberation, the administration finalized its Afghanistan plan on Friday at a meeting between the president and national-security officials at Camp David in Maryland. An announcement about increased troop levels had been expected, but Trump said in his remarks Monday that the administration would no longer reveal such information. Earlier this year, Trump had authorized Defense Secretary James Mattis to send nearly 4,000 additional troops to the area, but they have not yet been deployed.

Here, a full transcript of the presidents remarks.

Vice President Pence, Secretary of State Tillerson, members of the Cabinet, General Dunford, Deputy Secretary Shanahan, and Colonel Duggin. Most especially, thank you to the men and women of Fort Myer, and every member of the United States military at home and abroad. We send our thoughts and prayers to the families of our brave sailors who were injured and lost after a tragic collision at sea, as well as to those conducting the search-and-recovery efforts.

I am here tonight to lay out our path forward in Afghanistan and South Asia. But before I provide the details of our new strategy, I want to say a few words to the service members here with us tonight, to those watching from their posts, and to all Americans listening at home.

Since the founding of our republic, our country has produced a special class of heroes whose selflessness, courage, and resolve is unmatched in human history. American patriots from every generation have given their last breath on the battlefield for our nation and for our freedom. Through their lives, and though their lives were cut short, in their deeds they achieved total immortality. By following the heroic example of those who fought to preserve our republic, we can find the inspiration our country needs to unify, to heal, and to remain one nation, under God. The men and women of our military operate as one team, with one shared mission and one shared sense of purpose. They transcend every line of race, ethnicity, creed, and color to serve together and sacrifice together in absolutely perfect cohesion.

That is because all service members are brothers and sisters. Theyre all part of the same family. Its called the American family. They take the same oath, fight for the same flag, and live according to the same law. Theyre bound together by common purpose, mutual trust, and selfless devotion to our nation and to each other. The soldier understands what we as a nation too often forget: that a wound inflicted upon a single member of our community is a wound inflicted upon us all. When one part of America hurts, we all hurt. And when one citizen suffers an injustice, we all suffer together. Loyalty to our nation demands loyalty to one another. Love for America requires love for all of its people. When we open our hearts to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice, no place for bigotry, and no tolerance for hate. The young men and women we send to fight our wars abroad deserve to return to a country that is not at war with itself at home. We cannot remain a force for peace in the world if we are not at peace with each other.

Trump's Depressingly Normal Speech About Afghanistan

As we send our bravest to defeat our enemies overseasand we will always winlet us find the courage to heal our divisions within. Let us make a simple promise to the men and women we ask to fight in our name: that when they return home from battle, they will find a country that has renewed the sacred bonds of love and loyalty that unite us together as one.

Thanks to the vigilance and skill of the American military, and of our many allies throughout the world, horrors on the scale of September 11thnobody can ever forget thathave not been repeated on our shores. But we must acknowledge the reality Im here to talk about tonight: that nearly 16 years after the September 11th attacks, after the extraordinary sacrifice of blood and treasure, the American people are weary of war without victory. Nowhere is this more evident than with the war in Afghanistan, the longest war in American history, 17 years. I share the American people's frustration. I also share their frustration over a foreign policy that has spent too much time, energy, money, and most importantly lives, trying to rebuild countries in our own image instead of pursuing our security interests above all other considerations.

That is why shortly after my inauguration, I directed Secretary of Defense Mattis, and my national-security team, to undertake a comprehensive review of all strategic options in Afghanistan and South Asia. My original instinct was to pull out, and historically, I like following my instincts. But all my life I've heard that decisions are much different when you sit behind the desk in the Oval Office. In other words, when you're president of the United States. So I studied Afghanistan in great detail, and from every conceivable angle. After many meetings, over many months, we held our final meeting last Friday at Camp David with my Cabinet and generals to complete our strategy. I arrived at three fundamental conclusions about America's core interests in Afghanistan.

First, our nation must seek an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the tremendous sacrifices that have been made, especially the sacrifices of lives. The men and women who serve our nation in combat deserve a plan for victory. They deserve the tools they need and the trust they have earned to fight and win.

Second, the consequences of a rapid exit are both predictable and unacceptable. 9/11, the worst terrorist attack in our history, was planned and directed from Afghanistan, because that country was ruled by a government that gave comfort and shelter to terrorists. A hasty withdrawal would create a vacuum that terrorists, including ISIS and Al-Qaeda, would instantly fill just as happened before September 11th. And as we know, in 2011, America hastily and mistakenly withdrew from Iraq. As a result, our hard-won gains slipped back into the hands of terrorist enemies. Our soldiers watched as cities they had fought for, and bled to liberate, and won, were occupied by a terrorist group called ISIS. The vacuum we created by leaving too soon gave safe haven for ISIS to spread, to grow, recruit, and launch attacks.

We cannot repeat in Afghanistan the mistake our leaders made in Iraq. Third and finally, I concluded that the security threats we face in Afghanistan, and the broader region, are immense. Today 20 U.S.-designated foreign terrorist organizations are active in Afghanistan and Pakistan. The highest concentration in any region, anywhere in the world. For its part, Pakistan often gives safe haven to agents of chaos, violence, and terror. The threat is worse because Pakistan and India are two nuclear-armed states whose tense relations threaten to spiral into conflict. And that could happen. No one denies that we have inherited a challenging and troubling situation in Afghanistan, and South Asia. But we do not have the luxury of going back in time and making different or better decisions. When I became president, I was given a bad and very complex hand. But I fully knew what I was getting into: big and intricate problems. But one way or another, these problems will be solved. I'm a problem solver, and in the end, we will win.

We must address the reality of the world as it exists right now, the threats we face, and the confronting of all of the problems of today, and extremely predictable consequences of a hasty withdrawal. We need look no further than last week's vile, vicious attack in Barcelona to understand that terror groups will stop at nothing to commit the mass murder of innocent men, women, and children. You saw it for yourself, horrible. As I outlined in my speech in Saudi Arabia, three months ago, America and our partners are committed to stripping terrorists of their territory, cutting off their funding, and exposing the false allure of their evil ideology. Terrorists who slaughter innocent people will find no glory in this life or the next. They are nothing but thugs and criminals and predators, and that's rightlosers. Working alongside our allies, we will break their will, dry up their recruitment, keep them from crossing our borders, and yes, we will defeat them, and we will defeat them handily. In Afghanistan and Pakistan, America's interests are clear. We must stop the resurgence of safe havens that enable terrorists to threaten America. And we must prevent nuclear weapons and materials from coming into the hands of terrorists, and being used against us, or anywhere in the world for that matter. But to prosecute this war, we will learn from history.

As a result of our comprehensive review, American strategy in Afghanistan and South Asia will change dramatically in the following ways. A core pillar of our new strategy is a shift from a time-based approach to one based on conditions. I've said it many times how counterproductive it is for the United States to announce in advance the dates we intend to begin or end military options. We will not talk about numbers of troops or our plans for further military activities. Conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables, will guide our strategy from now on. America's enemies must never know our plans, or believe they can wait us out. I will not say when we are going to attack, but attack we will.

Another fundamental pillar of our new strategy is the integration of all instruments of American powerdiplomatic, economic, and militarytoward a successful outcome. Some day, after an effective military effort, perhaps it will be possible to have a political settlement that includes elements of the Taliban in Afghanistan, but nobody knows if or when that will ever happen. America will continue its support for the Afghan government and the Afghan military as they confront the Taliban in the field. Ultimately, it is up to the people of Afghanistan to take ownership of their future, to govern their society, and to achieve an ever-lasting peace. We are a partner and a friend, but we will not dictate to the Afghan people how to live or how to govern their own complex society. We are not nation building again. We are killing terrorists.

The next pillar of our new strategy is to change the approach in how to deal with Pakistan. We can no longer be silent about Pakistans safe-havens for terrorist organizations, the Taliban and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond.

Pakistan has much to gain from partnering with our effort in Afghanistan. It has much to lose by continuing to harbor criminals and terrorists. In the past, Pakistan has been a valued partner. Our militaries have worked to together against common enemies. The Pakistani people have suffered greatly from terrorism and extremism. We recognize those contributions and those sacrifices. But Pakistan has also sheltered the same organizations that try every single day to kill our people. We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars. At the same time, they are housing the very terrorists that we are fighting. But that will have to change. And that will change immediately. No partnership can survive a countrys harboring of militants and terrorists who target U.S. service members and officials. It is time for Pakistan to demonstrate its commitment to civilization, order, and to peace. Another critical part of the South-Asia strategy for America is to further develop its strategic partnership with India; the worlds largest democracy, and a key security and economic partner of the United States. We appreciate Indias important contributions to stability in Afghanistan, but India makes billions of dollars in trade with the United Statesand we want them to help us more with Afghanistan, especially in the area of economic assistance and development.

We are committed to pursuing our shared objectives for peace and security in South Asia and the broader Indo-Pacific region. Finally, my administration will ensure that you, the brave defenders of the American people will have the necessary tools and rules of engagement to make this strategy work, and work effectively, and work quickly.

Ive already lifted restrictions the previous administration placed on our warfighters that prevented the secretary of Defense and our commanders in the field from fully and swiftly waging battle against the enemy. Micromangement from Washington, D.C., does not win battles. Theyre won in the field, drawing upon the judgment and expertise of war-time commanders and front-line soldiers acting in real time with real authority and with a clear mission to defeat the enemy. Thats why we will also expand authority for American armed forces to target the terrorists and criminal networks that sow violence and chaos through Afghanistan. These killers need to know they have nowhere to hide, that no place is beyond the reach of American might and American arms. Retribution will be fast and powerful as we lift restrictions and expand authorities.

Were already seeing dramatic results in the campaign to defeat ISIS, including the liberation of Mosul in Iraq. Since my inauguration we have achieved record-breaking success in that regard. We will also maximize sanctions and other financial and law-enforcement actions against these networks to eliminate their ability to export terror. When America commits its warriors to battle, we must ensure they have every weapon to apply swift, decisive, and overwhelming force. Our troops will fight to win. We will fight to win. From now on victory will have a clear definition: Attacking our enemies, obliterating ISIS, crushing Al Qaeda, preventing the Taliban from taking over Afghanistan, and stopping mass terrorist attacks against America before they emerge.

We will ask our NATO allies and global partners to support our new strategy with additional troop and funding increases in line with our own. We are confident they will. Since taking office I have made clear that our allies and partners must contribute much more money to our collective defense. And they have done so. In this struggle, the heaviest burden will continue to be borne by the good people of Afghanistan and their courageous armed forces. As the prime minister of Afghanistan has promised, we are going to participate in economic development to help defray the cost of this war to us. Afghanistan is fighting to defend and secure their country against the same enemies who threaten us. The stronger the Afghan security forces become, the less we will have to do.

Afghans will secure and build their own nation and define their own future. We want them to succeed, but we will no longer use American military might to construct democracies in faraway lands, or try to rebuild other countries in our own image. Those days are now over. Instead we will work with allies and partners to protect our shared interest. We are not asking others to change their way of life, but to pursue common goals that allow our children to live better and safer lives. This principled realism will guide our decisions moving forward. Military power alone will not bring peace to Afghanistan or stop the terrorist threat arising in that country, but strategically applied force aims to create the conditions for a political process to achieve a lasting peace. America will work with the Afghan government as long as we see determination and progress. However, our commitment is not unlimited and our support is not a blank check. The government of Afghanistan must carry their share of the military, political, and economic burden. The American people expect to see real reforms, real progress, and real results. Our patience is not unlimited. We will keep our eyes wide open in abiding by the oath I took on January 20. I will remain steadfast in protecting American lives and American interests. In this effort, we will make common cause with any nation that chooses to stand and fight alongside us against this global threat. Terrorists, take heed: America will never let up until you are dealt a lasting defeat. Under my administration, many billions of dollars more is being spent on our military and this includes vast amounts being spent on our nuclear arsenal and missile defense. In every generation, we have faced down evil and we have always prevailed. We have prevailed because we know who we are and what we are fighting for.

Not far from where we are gathered tonight, hundreds of thousands of Americas greatest patriots lay in eternal rest at Arlington National Cemetery. There is more courage, sacrifice, and love in those hallowed grounds than in any other spot on the face of the Earth. Many of those who have fought and died in Afghanistan enlisted in the months after Sept. 11, 2001. They volunteered for a simple reason: They loved America and they were determined to protect her. Now we must secure the cause for which they gave their lives.

We must unite to defend America from its enemies abroad. We must restore the bonds of loyalty among our citizens at home. And we must achieve an honorable and enduring outcome worthy of the enormous price that so many have paid. Our actions, and in months to come, all of them will honor the sacrifice of every fallen hero, every family who lost a loved one, and every wounded warrior who shed their blood in defense of our great nation. With our resolve, we will ensure that your service, and that your families, will bring about the defeat of our enemies, and the arrival of peace. We will push onward to victory with power in our hearts, courage in our souls, and everlasting pride in each and every one of you. Thank you. May God bless our military, and may God bless the United States of America. Thank you very much. Thank you.

Read this article:
Full Transcript: Donald Trump Announces His Afghanistan Policy - The Atlantic