Afghanistan Times
Related Articles
AT Monitoring Desk-KABUL: Amid a fierce fighting in Afghanistan, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Paul Ryan hailed success on the battlefield by Afghan forces against terrorists and insisted that President Trump’s strategy must be given a chance to succeed in drawing the insurgents to the negotiations table and, ultimately, allowing an end to the country’s longest war, Zamannews reported.
“It is clear to me the president’s South Asia strategy must be given an opportunity to succeed,” said Ryan on the conclusion of his two-day visit to Afghanistan.
Although the Afghan government believes too that Trump’s strategy for Afghanistan is working, such claims are often met with skepticism with the society considering the fact that insecurity is aggravating and economy downsizing.
The US House Speaker extolled the success Afghan special forces have gained in curbing the scourge of terrorism in the beleaguered country.
“I was heartened to hear of the progress that Afghan special mission units, including the commandos, have made in degrading the threat of terrorism,” Ryan concluded. “The future of Afghanistan will be written by their security services,” he said.
He boldly enthused that fighting terrorism in the region remained in US national interests. “It is clear the current momentum of our military campaign is underpinning our diplomatic efforts to set the conditions for reconciliation,” he remarked.
Accompanied by House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mac Thornberry, he met US troops, senior Afghan and coalition officials, the speaker’s office said. Ryan visited multiple US military bases to thank troops for their continued service.
The Trump administration has been under growing pressure to show that its year-old South Asia strategy is gainfully improving the situation in Afghanistan—a seemingly interminable conflict that has claimed thousands of U.S. lives and could soon be older than some of its American participants. Senior military leaders over the years have claimed evidence of “progress,” an assessment that often appeared premature in hindsight and which some critics have come to see as naive.
