"The New York Times": Obama Extends Afghanistan Military Role
WHITFIELD: The U.S. military's role in Afghanistan will be extended next year despite President Obama announcing a troop draw down. According to the "New York Times" President Obama had signed an order authorizing a more expansive mission for troops in Afghanistan. Joining me right now is CNN military analyst, Retired Colonel Rick Francona and at the White House, CNN's Erin McPike. So Erin to you first, help us understand what this means.</s>ERIN MCPIKE, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Fred, first, we want to be clear that this broadens the options that U.S. troops have. It is not a big new military campaign. It's not some sort of big, new offensive. If essentially the Taliban or another group threatens troops or Afghan troops then U.S. troops can carry out missions against them. Now you may remember back in May in the Rose Garden when President Obama announced that he would be winding down the U.S. troop presence there. He said there two remaining objectives. The first was to train Afghan forces and the second was to conduct counterterrorism operations against the remnants of the al Qaeda. This morning, a senior administration official provided a statement to us that explain what is left and what is part of this new expanded role. Saying as part of this mission, the United States may provide combat and enabler support to the Afghan national security forces in limited circumstances to prevent detrimental, strategic effects to these Afghan security forces. That official goes on to say so while we will no longer total belligerence solely because they are members of the Taliban to the extent that Taliban members directly threaten United States and coalition forces in Afghanistan or provide director support to al Qaeda. We'll take appropriate measures to keep Americans safe. And what we're also hearing from the White House and other administration officials is that they learned a lesson from the decade-long campaign in Iraq that shutting the lights s off in Iraq really didn't work and created the conditions for groups like ISIS and Khorasan to be created and they don't want the same thing in Afghanistan -- Fred.</s>WHITFIELD: All right, so Colonel Francona, let me bring you into this. I wonder a more simplified of saying this, meaning simplified from the White House even though we understand this was kind of a quietly approved plan, that there is going to be military reinforcement to better secure the counterterrorism troops or personnel that are already there. LT. COL. RICK FRANCONA</s>CNN MILITARY ANALYST: That is exactly right. What the president originally wanted to do was to remove American combat forces and leave the training and advisory mission, much like we did in Iraq. And I think everybody's concern now having seen what we saw happen to the Iraqi Army, we don't want the same thing to happen to the Afghan Army when the Taliban does attack them and they will. So what the president is authorizing now is the continued combat operations and I think that is the bottom line here, continued combat operations, not just advising and supporting. It's a smart move and what the Pentagon has been pushing for. I'm just a little concern that the numbers. If he continues to draw down the numbers from where we are now down to about 9,000 that is really not a whole lot of combat force. So we're going to see a lot more American air power being used to replace troops on the ground. It is definitely a change and I think it's a welcome change.</s>WHITFIELD: It looks like that, I guess, that policy or what has been approved by the president does say there would be more air support involved. Colonel and Erin McPike from the White House, thanks to both of you for helping us collectively understand what this means. Thanks so much. All right, as the Ferguson grand jury weighs possible charges, we'll bring in our legal analysts and ask if law enforcement in Ferguson has been compromised no matter what the outcome.