Washington Sketch: Afghan withdrawal timeline is more aspiration than commitment

President Obama's 18-month deadline for starting the Afghanistan pullout didn't survive its first 18 hours.

In his speech to West Point cadets and to the nation on Tuesday night, Obama said he planned, conditionally, "to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011" -- a gesture aimed to assuage the antiwar left. But in questioning top administration officials Wednesday morning, the Senate Armed Services Committee quickly learned that this withdrawal timeline was less a commitment than an aspiration.

First, Defense Secretary Robert Gates offered this qualifier to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.): "Our current plan is that we will begin the transition . . . in July of 2011. We will evaluate in December 2010 whether we believe we will be able to meet that objective."

Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) found more softness in the pullout promise when he asked Gates if the deadline "may not include immediately a withdrawal of our forces."

"That is correct," the secretary said, adding that "we're not just going to throw these guys into the swimming pool and walk away."

The 18-month deadline was fast expiring, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) delivered the coup de grace. "Is it possible," he asked, "to reach the conclusion it is not wise to withdraw anyone in July 2011?"

"The president, as commander in chief, always has the option to adjust his decisions," Gates answered.

"The president has choices," agreed Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"I do not believe we have locked ourselves into leaving," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton concurred.

The trio left themselves so much wiggle room that it's a wonder they didn't slip out of their chairs.

The snap analysis of Obama's Afghanistan surge portrayed it as giving something to both sides: 30,000 more troops for the hawks and a withdrawal schedule for the doves. But Wednesday's testimony made clear that while the troop increase is solid, the pullout plans are mushy.

In that sense, Obama gave the Republican opposition substantially more than he gave the liberals in his party. He showed a style of pragmatic leadership, and a willingness to defy his political base, that his predecessor never displayed. It was, depending on your perspective, either brave or foolhardy -- the sort of defiance a renegade like Lieberman could appreciate.