1- INTRODUCTION

NATO leaders in chicago hv signed Obama's plan for exit strategy from Afghnstn , aimed at reducing US-led mltry trps from 90000 to 20000 in afghanistan. The plan clls for an end to combat operations in afghanistan. handing over security responsibilities to Afghan forces in 2013 and the withdrawal of the U.S-led international military troops by the end of 2014. After that, a new and different NATO mission will advise,train and assist the expected 352,000-strong Afghanistan force. Obama has said "I don't think that there's ever going to be an optimal point where we say - this is all done, this is perfect, this is just the way we wanted it and now we can wrap up all our equipment and go home. This is a process, and it's sometimes a messy process, just as it was in Iraq". Yet a final round of negotiations remains & the plan has to be finalized.

2- IMPEDIMENTS TO SUCCESSFUL AFGHAN "END-GAME" NEGOTIATIONS

3- ROLE OF PAKISTAN IN FINAL NEGOTIATIONS- pak wants & should be given a role.....

4- POST-2014 IMPLICATIONS FOR PAKISTAN

5- CONCLUSIONS

@Add implications for Afghanistan

@Add green on blue attacks and their implications

__________________
Sangdil Riwajoon ki ya Imart-e-Kohna Toot bhi Tou Skti hay
Yeh Aseer Sehzadi Choot bhi tou Skti hay

Dear your introduction seems less appealing, so please try to make it attractive and attention getter by quoting some historical facts regarding various rulers tried to conquer Afghan Nation and the degree of their success and also include a Cost-Benefit Analysis of this so-called war against Terrorism.

And while winding up for conclusion you should add the fact that War is by no means a solution to disturbances rather negotiation has the only way

Happy to grab more info to the topic " US-Theykhta from afghanistan",
thanks @ "call for change" & "Abdul Q".

__________________
"Success is not final, failure is not fatal: it is the courage to continue that counts" Winston Churchill