INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
Britain and the United States must be ready to send troops back into Afghanistan if a withdrawal deal with the Taliban - set to be signed on
Saturday - unravels and the militant force attempts to "march on Kabul", a former British military chief has warned.If it succeeds, General
Lord Richards said the agreement would represent a draw between the two sides following almost 19 years of war."My feeling is that we don't
certainly have to be ashamed [of] this if it will work, but there is a lot of risk," Lord Richards told Sky News in an interview."We must be
prepared to do again with the Americans and our allies what might be required for another few years to remind the Taliban that there is a
line beyond which we won't go."Image:The general says we must be prepared to go back 'for another few years' if the Taliban deal
faltersAsked if he meant that Britain and it allies must be ready to send forces back into the country, the general said: "Yes - if this
deal doesn't work and the Taliban start marching on Kabul for example then we have got to help our Afghan allies and make sure the vast
majority of Afghans - who don't want that - are not ruled by the Taliban."That then would be a tragic defeat."The comments came as the
United States and its once-sworn enemy, the Taliban, prepared to sign the deal in the Qatari capital of Doha.President Donald Trump said
Mike Pompeo, his secretary of state, would be present.At the same time, defence secretary Mike Esper will travel to Kabul to sign a separate
declaration with the Afghan government, which has not been directly involved in the US-Taliban negotiations.The Taliban agreement will see a
reduction in US, British and other NATO-led forces in Afghanistan but not a complete withdrawal straight away.US-Taliban deal raises hope
for peaceIn return, the Taliban is expected agree to open formal dialogue with Afghanistan's fractious political parties, which are still
feuding over the results of a general election from last year.The aim will be to agree a permanent ceasefire across the country and to set
the conditions for some sort of power-sharing arrangement.The Taliban must also cut all ties with al Qaeda and other militant groups."If the
Taliban and the government of Afghanistan live up to these commitments, we will have a powerful path forward to end the war in Afghanistan
and bring our troops home," President Trump said in a statement."Ultimately it will be up to the people of Afghanistan to work out their
We, therefore, urge the Afghan people to seize this opportunity for peace and a new future for their country."But there are concerns that
the Taliban will renege on its commitments, including to cut ties with al Qaeda.A further drawdown of foreign troops will hinge on how this
The Taliban - which has been framing the deal as a victory - wants all foreign forces out of the country.The prospect of a Taliban revival
is a far cry from the goals of US and British forces when they invaded Afghanistan in 2001 following the September 11 attacks on the United
States.The goal was to topple the Taliban, which had harboured al Qaeda and its chief, Osama Bin Laden, who plotted the airliner
carnage.Image:US soldiers fighting in Kandahar province, southern Afghanistan, in June 2011The regime rapidly fell but an insurgency flared
in its place.Taliban guerrilla tactics of bombings, ambushes and mortar attacks ensnared rotation after rotation of an ever-increasing
footprint of US, British and other NATO-led forces.Lord Richards said opting to negotiate a deal with the enemy could still be worth the
blood and treasure."If this truce works and the Taliban have seen the light of day and can be integrated in a constructive way and there's
no hint of any more terrorist operations being mounted in Afghanistan, then I for one will say this was a necessary war that we fought well
and the result has been a draw - if not the conventional victory we might have hoped for back in 2006," he said.After toppling the Taliban,
the goals of the mission evolved.The United States and its allies said they wanted to build a democratic government in Afghanistan based
around the rule of law, women's rights and good governance
There was also an aim - led by Britain - to rid Afghanistan of its lucrative opium crop.Efforts began to build up the Afghan security forces
and government ministries.But, while gains were made in areas such as education, the coalition's ambitions had to be curbed in part because
of the insurgency, corruption and a lack of political will.More than 2,400 US military personnel and more than 450 British servicemen and
women died in the conflict, while many more were injured.Image:NATO forces are still in the country, offering support and advice to the
Afghan military and policeA far heavier price was paid by the Afghan population.Tens of thousands of security personnel have been killed
since 2001 as well as tens of thousands of civilians.By the end of 2014, NATO announced an end of its combat operations in Afghanistan, with
a significant reduction in troops.But US, British and other countries' special forces continued to work with their Afghan partners on raids
against the Taliban, al Qaeda, as well as an emerging presence of Islamic State-linked fighters.At the same time a NATO training mission
evolved to offer support and advice to the Afghan military and police.The US is by far the largest contributor with some 13,000 personnel on
Britain has about 1,100 servicemen and women in the country.Saturday's deal is expected to see these numbers fall, with the United States
set to reduce its footprint to 8,600 troops
The move could well provide a boost to President Trump in the run up to the US presidential elections.The anticipated signing ceremony comes
after both sides agreed to a week-long reduction in violence across Afghanistan that began last Saturday as a trust-building exercise.
