Dempsey Says ‘Zero Option’ on the Table for Afghanistan As Karzai Balks

Soldiers board an Air Force C-130 bound for Joint Base Lewis-McChord

U.S. Navy photo by Lt. Chad A. Dulac

AA Font size + Print

Soldiers board an Air Force C-130 bound for Joint Base Lewis-McChord

While the Afghan president continues to play politics with a post-2014 troop deal, Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey says the ‘zero option’ is on the table. By Stephanie Gaskell

Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey said there’s still a chance that the U.S. military in Afghanistan will pack up and go home next year, as the erratic Afghan President Hamid Karzai hesitates to sign a deal that would allow thousands of U.S. troops to stay in Afghanistan past the 2014 withdrawal.

Dempsey’s comments on Wednesday reflect an increasingly frustrated Obama administration. His remarks at a Pentagon press conference came as Secretary of State John Kerry began publicly seeking a path around Karzai’s authority, trying to see if the bilateral security agreement can be signed instead by Afghan Defense Minister Bismillah Khan Mohammadi. Dempsey and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said that they’d be willing to have just about anyone sign the deal, as long as it’s legally binding.

Even though a BSA has been reached, there’s growing concern that Karzai’s unexpected series of demands will derail the whole thing. He’s refusing to sign the deal (even though a powerful group of Afghan elders, or loya jirga, approved it) before next April’s presidential election to replace him. The U.S. and Afghanistan agreed last year to have a deal signed this year, however, in part because military planners wanted to be able to plan for a post-war presence in Afghanistan. If the BSA is not signed, the war will end next year and coalition troops may just start packing up and go home. Hagel said last month that if Afghanistan delays signing the agreement, he would advise President Obama to halt planning for military operations beyond 2014.

“I have not been told to plan for a zero option, but clearly, I understand that it is a possibility given the current impasse,” Dempsey told reporters during a press briefing with Hagel at the Pentagon. Dempsey has long stressed that he is not planning to pull all U.S. troops out of Afghanistan.

Karzai said on Wednesday that he would not permit any of his ministers to sign the deal, according to Reuters. The Afghan Parliament would still have to approve the deal, but with cabinet approval that would likely happen.

“The loya jirga enthusiastically, strongly endorsed that text, that agreement, and strongly recommended to President Karzai to sign it. Every public official we’ve heard from in Afghanistan has strongly supported the signing of that agreement,” Hagel said.

“Now, the issue of who has the authority to speak for the sovereign nation of Afghanistan, I suppose the lawyers can figure that out. What we would be interested in, certainly as secretary of defense, is whatever document is agreed to, and as you know it has to go to their parliament for ratification, not unlike our Senate and a treaty. And if it’s ratified by their parliament, then whether it’s the minister of defense or the president, someone who has the authority to sign on behalf of Afghanistan — I suspect — I suspect that would fulfill the kind of commitment we need. But I don’t want to veer too much further into legal territory until I have a further understanding of what exactly the authorities are,” he said. 

Close [ x ] More from DefenseOne

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Federal IT Applications: Assessing Government's Core Drivers

    In order to better understand the current state of external and internal-facing agency workplace applications, Government Business Council (GBC) and Riverbed undertook an in-depth research study of federal employees. Overall, survey findings indicate that federal IT applications still face a gamut of challenges with regard to quality, reliability, and performance management.

  • PIV- I And Multifactor Authentication: The Best Defense for Federal Government Contractors

    This white paper explores NIST SP 800-171 and why compliance is critical to federal government contractors, especially those that work with the Department of Defense, as well as how leveraging PIV-I credentialing with multifactor authentication can be used as a defense against cyberattacks

  • GBC Issue Brief: Supply Chain Insecurity

    Federal organizations rely on state-of-the-art IT tools and systems to deliver services efficiently and effectively, and it takes a vast ecosystem of organizations, individuals, information, and resources to successfully deliver these products. This issue brief discusses the current threats to the vulnerable supply chain - and how agencies can prevent these threats to produce a more secure IT supply chain process.

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Information Operations: Retaking the High Ground

    Today's threats are fluent in rapidly evolving areas of the Internet, especially social media. Learn how military organizations can secure an advantage in this developing arena.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.