WASHINGTON, Nov. 5 (Xinhua) -- The United States is set to withdraw all troops from Iraq by the end of 2011 while continuing war efforts in Afghanistan and Pakistan (AfPak) despite recent high-profile attacks in all these countries, an expert said.
IRAQ, AFPAK "SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT"
"I want to draw a very strong distinction between what is going on in Iraq and then what is going on in AfPak," Thomas Sanderson, Deputy Director of the Transnational Threats Project at Washington thinktank Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) told Xinhua in a recent interview.
"I think the Iraq bombings are related to internal matters in Iraq and not to the United States," he said.
"In Afghanistan and Pakistan, those attacks are much more closely associated with U.S. and Pakistani efforts to destroy insurgents and terrorists, which is al-Qaida," said the expert.
Recently, a series of high-profile violent attacks rocked Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, which raised doubts on U.S. President Barack Obama's ongoing efforts to shift U.S. counterterrorism focus from Iraq to AfPak.
However, Sanderson pointed out that the wars in Iraq and AfPak are "significantly different" and there is no turning-back for Obama to reverse his course in the two regions.
Asked about whether the attack in Iraq would affect Obama's policy in AfPak, the expert replied with "not at all."
"The fact that the bombings took place in Iraq doesn't necessarily impact our near-term issues in AfPak," he said.
IRAQ WITHDRAWAL DELAY "UNLIKELY"
"The bombing in Iraq, I believe, is about a power struggle within Iraq," said Sanderson.
"The United States is going to leave (Iraq) at the end of 2011 regardless of whether this kind of attacks will continue," he said, referring to the agreement reached by U.S. and Iraqi governments on withdrawing all U.S. troops from Iraq by Dec. 31, 2011.
"The United States can't remain in that country simply because there are battles between Sunnis and Shiites factions," the expert added.
He said the scenario that U.S. withdrawal would be delayed by bombing is "unlikely to be true."
"In the minds of Americans, we are finished in Iraq. We are moving out. I don't think at all that American people would consider extending our stay in Iraq. People believe we are finished there and we are in the process of leaving," said Sanderson.
"To reverse that would be a dramatic political development and very damaging to those in the U.S. government who would support that," he noted.
The bombing could impact tactical decisions on the grounds, but it will not prevent U.S. troops from pulling out of Iraq at the end of 2011, the expert added.
AFPAK ATTACKS SHOW "U.S. PROGRESS"
Sanderson said recent attacks in AfPak don't necessarily mean a setback for Obama in that region.
Instead, he argued, the attacks probably show that "Obama's policies are working well enough that caused the enemy to strike harder because they are losing."
"I think the violence we are seeing there is a result of increased U.S. efforts against Taliban. This is a clear-cut example of the group reacting violently in the face of more aggressive American and Pakistani operation," the expert said.
In fact, the bombings are expected to happen because the U.S. military is "making progress against Taliban and we will not move back simply because they respond with bombings," according to him.
Sanderson acknowledged that heavy civilian casualties caused by these attacks would be a concern for the United States, for it is "of great propaganda value" to Taliban.
What the U.S. military would do, is to "continue to strike and continue to minimize civilian casualty."
But "we will not stop, nor the Pakistanis, stop the campaign against insurgents even there is civilian casualties," said Sanderson.
TWO FACTORS FOR TROOP DECISION
As some U.S. observers began to worry if Obama could end up in Afghanistan like how his predecessor fared in Iraq, Sanderson said that is not the case.
Although U.S. public support for Afghan war is eroding, the expert said he doesn't think "that is at the point where you have it in Iraq."
"Afghanistan is the place where al-Qaida is based and where they coordinated on the 9/11 attacks. So for Americans there is a very distinct legitimate reason for fighting in Afghanistan," he said.
"I think that would sustain and war effort in Afghanistan will continue for quite a bit time," said the expert.
Two factors will affect Obama's pending decision on whether to send more troops to Afghanistan, according to him.
"Number one, if the president believes that the Pakistani military will meet with significant success against insurgents."
"Number two, if he believes the Afghan election will bring some legitimacy to the Afghan government."
If both happens, "then he will commit very significant number of additional forces, at least 25,000," said Sanderson.
If only one goal is met, he believes the troop increase will be below 5,000.
If both fall short, "I think the president will have a very legitimate reason for minimizing the increase of troops to Afghanistan," according to the expert.
But in any cases, he believes that there will be a heavy emphasis on sending trainers to more rapidly develop the Afghan army "because it is where the stakes are."
