President Obama has agreed to slow the pace of troop drawdown plans for Afghanistan and clear the way for a larger portion of today's force of about 10,000 to stay beyond the end of this year, according to several officials familiar with the plan.

The new withdrawal plan will not require force levels to fall to about 5,000 by the end of this year, a milestone that Obama committed to last May when he laid out a schedule for ending the 14-year military mission.

The result will give U.S. military commanders more flexibility as they work toward the goal of bringing all U.S. troops home by the time Obama leaves the White House in January 2017.

The top commander in Afghanistan, Army Gen. John Campbell, will be able to keep a larger force into 2016, potentially into the spring and summer fighting season.

Campbell may also be authorized to keep some U.S. troops at facilities outside the capital Kabul next year, one defense official said. Obama previously said he wanted to limit the U.S. support mission to the Kabul area after this year.

Obama will officially announce the changes to the drawdown schedule when Afghan President Ashraf Ghani visits the White House on March 24, according to several U.S. officials familiar with the plan.

It is latest adjustment for the Afghanistan timeline that Obama laid out in May 2014, when he said that the U.S. force would be down to 9,800 troops for this year, drop to about 5,000 in 2016 before completely ending the military mission by the end of next year.

Obama has been unable to adhere to that plan. In December, he agreed to allow slightly more than 9,800 troops to remain in Afghanistan, ostensibly to fill personnel gaps for allied nations who were unable to provide additional troops.

The U.S. force level currently remains at about 10,000, defense officials say.

The drawdown timeline is changing for several reasons, officials say. The new Afghan president is a far more reliable ally than his predecessor, Hamid Karzai, who left office late last year.

The rise of Islamic State extremists in Iraq has fueled fears that an aggressive withdrawal from Afghanistan could result in a resurgence of the Taliban or other militants who could threaten the fledgling government in Kabul.

And many Afghanistan experts say the local army is not ready to handle the mission independently.

"No one expects the Afghan forces to be self-sufficient and ready to tackle terrorism challenges in the region on their own," said Ahmad Majidyar, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

"While the Afghan security forces have made significant progress both in terms of size and capabilities, they remain reliant on the coalition for support roles, especially air power, logistics and intelligence," Majidyar told Military Times.

For U.S. troops, it's unclear whether the policy change will result in a new round of deployment orders.

Many of the troops scheduled to deploy later this year will have nine-month and 12-month deployment orders. A new policy change could mean that those troops will actually remain deployed for the duration of those orders rather than returning home early.

The troops who will remain in Afghanistan into 2016 will likely include combat trainers, intelligence specialists and special operations troops.

Ending the 14-year military mission in Afghanistan, a long-standing campaign promise from Obama, is proving to be a challenge.

U.S. officials declared the Afghanistan War to be officially over in December, but Obama and his military advisers agreed to extend the support mission for an additional two years.

Slowing the withdrawal's pace will raise questions about whether Obama will be able to bring the military mission to a close by the end of next year.

"I think we have to constantly assess where we are, and we can continue to have discussion on where we are a year from now," Gen. Ray Odierno, the Army's chief of staff, told lawmakers on Capitol Hill on March 18.

"And then have a discussion on, you know, are we [leaving at] the end of '16, which is the current plan? Will we pull out? And if not, then I think the joint chiefs and General Campbell will ... give their best military advice to the president of whether that's appropriate or not," Odierno said.

About Andrew Tilghman

Andrew Tilghman is the executive editor for Military Times. He is a former Military Times Pentagon reporter and served as a Middle East correspondent for the Stars and Stripes. Before covering the military, he worked as a reporter for the Houston Chronicle in Texas, the Albany Times Union in New York and The Associated Press in Milwaukee.

Share:
In Other News
Load More