So the tell me that (bit you) instead of giving me some militaristic yet nebulous victory metric.
I don't even understand what this is saying...
But anyhow, the basis for success in Afghanistan should hinge on a few things, namely the formation of a relatively-stable central Afghan government (debatable, but it's up), a self-sufficient civilian military apparatus (somewhat done), and the cessation of insurgent and Taliban attacks on the government. I'm probably missing a few...
Unfortunately, the last one is the biggest as it directly interferes with the success of the other two.
Trump will say one thing but he may make something else happen. The Chiefs of Staff have seen the lowing amount of casualties in the past few years as peacekeeping forces and I'm sure they will want to keep it the same, but in correlation with our soldiers being peacekeepers the areas under Taliban control have increased. We need a balance here.
I think his approach to India and Pakistan here is the nation building. He wants India to take the bill for nation building, which they've already proceeded to give billions to Afghanistan for that very reason.
I do think that the military approach is what he's using against the hardliners in the Taliban and we have to see what Pakistan does on it's side of the border but he did speak about bringing certain parts of the Taliban to a political settlement. There are several Taliban commanders who have been in negotiations with the Afghan government in the past 16 years but the US refused in the past due to "all Taliban being the same." The tribes must come to a political agreement but that is still a possibility.
How many tribal leaders will negotiate with the Taliban though? I was under the impression that neither like each other very much.