Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Afghanistan

US, NATO must fulfill UN mandate in Afghanistan

2012-03-20

[Pak Daily Times] Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on Sunday said that US-led NATO
...the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. A collection of multinational and multilingual and multicultural armed forces, all of differing capabilities, working toward a common goal by pulling in different directions...
troops must not withdraw from Afghanistan until local forces are able to ensure security for the country. Lavrov told a local television channel that it was a point of "international law" that the Afghan government must "possess the capabilities to maintain law and order" before international forces leave.

And there's no one more acquainted with law and order than a Russian foreign minister...

"The presence of the international stabilisation force in Afghanistan has been mandated by the UN Security Council. The mandate is clear. They must fulfill this mandate before they leave," he said.

After more than 10 years of war there are still about 130,000 NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) troops in fighting against an ongoing Taliban insurgency. Foreign combat troops are due to leave by the end of 2014 and increasing efforts have been made to train the Afghan army and police to take responsibility for their country's security. Meanwhile,
...back at the shattered spaceship, Fffflirgoll the Arcturan slithered stealthily toward the control room, where the humans had barricaded themselves...
Washington is negotiating a strategic partnership agreement with Kabul, and looking at the issue of permanent US bases in Afghanistan post-2014. Lavrov said it was "strange" to insist on the withdrawal of troops while at the same time "Washington is discussing with Afghanistan very purposefully about establishing four or five military bases for the post 2014 period".

Posted by:Fred

#7 Read, US-NATO IN POST-2014 AFGHAN/AFPAK = NO JIHAD IN TAIJIKISTAN + KYRGYZSTAN, AKA MAMA RUSSIA'S UNDERBELLY.

Lavrov has officially denied that any Russian Warships are even near Syria, let alone docked there wid alleged on-board Russ SpecFors = Anti-Terror Troops - YET, AFTER ALL THAT, THIS AM RUSSIA IS SUDDENLY NOW WILLING TO SUPPORT A UN MANDATE AGZ BABY ASSAD [Fox News].

Posted by: JosephMendiola 2012-03-20 22:11

#6 Glad I have translators. Ohh, do not forget SE Asia.

Posted by: newc 2012-03-20 14:01

#5 Russia can't afford to build the outposts B. So the US will, as shared use sites. Launch points, listening posts, staging areas, etc. Border 'stans squeezed between Russia and the outposts, a good viewpoint for the Saudi/Iran containment war, excellent drop point for orbital intel of Africa and eastern China, premier interdiction position for the Pak/India conflict, oil line defense forces for the pipes from Russia to Europe, the list goes on and on.
IMHO.

Posted by: Skidmark 2012-03-20 11:45

#4 Translation: retreat through trashkanistans is not available.

Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2012-03-20 05:46

#3
Stop acting like no one sees you for what you are, Russia.

Posted by: newc 2012-03-20 04:33

#2 STFU Russia. I could also cite plenty you "MUST" with your Upside down history. So, America is in Afghanistan to help Russia? You never knew?
And to get train lines, and invade an ally while we are working at YOUR soft underbelly.

You should have been FAR more helpful asshole.
Now, this will be ends.

And if you dick me with Israel, I will have so many fudge packing Moslems in your nest you may never sleep again.

The USA gets help finishing and leaving Afghanistan. Do It, Russia.

Posted by: newc 2012-03-20 04:12

#1 Lavrov said it was "strange" to insist on the withdrawal of troops while at the same time "Washington is discussing with Afghanistan very purposefully about establishing four or five military bases for the post 2014 period".

Strange indeed since we can only marginally protect and sustain the bases there now. I cannot imagine a Taliban government permitting such an undertaking.

Posted by: Besoeker 2012-03-20 02:59

00:00