The recent visit of President Karzai along with some other key government officials to Washington to discuss about unresolved issue is interpreted as success by Kabul. President Karzai has had three visible achievements: President Obama agreed to equip Afghan Nation Security Forces (ANSF) with advanced weaponry; focus on their training; change the combating role of US force to supporting role, months before the set schedule; hand over the responsibilities of prisons to Afghans and finally support the Afghan-led peace negotiation, particularly, opening an office in Qatar.

Of course listing the above issues, President Karzai returned with full hands back to Afghanistan. Till now he has not made it clear whether he finally agreed to provide legal immunity for the presence of US soldiers and let them to carry out attacks on specific terrorist targets.

In his speech in George Town University, he said that his government had no problem with the numbers of US soldiers beyond 2014, but the issue was framework of their activities. The issue has remained unclear because it is linked to national sovereignty.

Indeed, linking the issue of national sovereignty caused foreign allies to retreat. Initially, the issue of foreign prisons was raised just as other political issues, but step by step, the color of national sovereignty got highlighted. As in the case of Bagram prison, the issue went that far away that choice remained as violation of national sovereignty or handing over the detention to Afghan security forces.

Same technique is somehow played in the case of legal immunity for US soldiers. Certainly, Afghanistan is better than some regional countries where the US has military bases and their soldiers have legal immunity, yet no one talks about violation of the so-called national sovereignty.

The sovereignty can be violated if a country forces another to allow establish bases, while presence of soldiers of an ally does not bear such thing, rather this issue bears much more similarity to diplomatic immunity conferred to diplomats of country.

In fact, it is a very normal thing in the present military alliance among nations. US military presence is aligned with national interests. Even their symbolic presence sends a message to armed oppositions and regional networks that try to destabilize the country that the US would not leave the country alone.

Such message is of high importance as militants will lose hope of recapturing the country, and regional players will stop dreaming to continue their dominance through supporting militants. Thus, it is highly appreciating if the military coordination becomes deeper between the two countries.