Afghan President Hamid Karzai is sticking with his claims that the United States and Taliban are working together to lengthen the former’s occupation of Afghanistan, even as negotiations to get Western forces out continue.

On Sunday, Karzai first voiced the accusation that the two enemies were working together to achieve the same goals while delivering a nationally televised speech. Karzai doubled down on that rhetoric in a speech on Tuesday to tribal leaders in the Helmand Province, rebuking a recent Taliban attack while still suggesting cooperation between foreign forces and the former Afghan government:

“You announce that you show your power to America by killing an 8-year-old Muslim child and civilians,” Mr. Karzai said. “I don’t think so. You are serving for them.”

He also suggested that recent Taliban propaganda footage of attacks in the strategic Wardak province near Kabul was likely filmed by foreign helicopters, and distributed by foreigners in order to exaggerate the insurgency’s strength and justify a continued foreign presence.

The new spate of sharp rhetoric from Karzai comes as the United States and other NATO countries are negotiating the withdrawal of their combat forces from Afghanistan, currently due to be completed by the end of 2014. In his Helmand speech, Karzai insisted that he would not be in favor of any foreign troops remaining within Afghanistan post-2014, encouraging them to provide financial aid instead. Gen. James Mattis, head of U.S. Central Command, told the Senate last week that he envisioned a remainder force of 20,000 troops after the pullout, a number that has yet to be made official by the Obama administration.

What is clear, however, is that the vast majority of foreign forces will be gone from Afghanistan in 2015, leaving Karzai in need of domestic support and desiring to shore-up his legacy as President:

Interviews with tribal elders, business leaders, political analysts and diplomats here paint an image of a leader who is desperately trying to shake his widely held image as an American lackey by appealing to nationalist sentiments and invoking Afghanistan’s sovereignty. [...]

Many Afghan observers say that Mr. Karzai is trying to keep himself politically potent during the last year of his term by playing to at least three Afghan constituencies: his ethnic Pashtun base; ethnic Tajik and Hazara leaders in his government; and, notably, the Taliban, who have rejected negotiations with him.

Inflammatory statements against the West have become a staple of Karzai’s at key times during his Presidency. Amid questions of corruption following the 2009 Presidential election, Karzai lashed out at “foreign interference” in the balloting. When under pressure in 2010 to institute reforms in his government, he threatened to join the Taliban himself.

Karzai’s original statements were met with shock and anger by U.S. officials, having come during a visit by U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, and served to highlight tensions between Afghanistan and the United States despite twelve years and billions of dollars spent in the country. Taliban officials also did not take kindly to the linkage, issuing a statement reminding Karzai of the inglorious fate of Afghan leaders who worked with the Soviet Union.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai, never one to mince words, on Sunday told the press that the United States and Taliban were each colluding to keep foreign troops in Afghanistan, albeit for different reasons.

Several explosions ripped through Afghanistan over the weekend during U.S. Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel’s visit, killing 19 civilians and highlighting security concerns that continue apace ahead of a U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2014.

According to Karzai, the attacks by the Taliban were meant to show that international forces will still be required after the 2014 deadline passes. Karzai chose a curious time to air his theory, putting it forward while delivering a speech on Afghan women:

“The explosions in Kabul and Khost yesterday showed that they are at the service of America and at the service of this phrase: 2014. They are trying to frighten us into thinking that if the foreigners are not in Afghanistan, we would be facing these sorts of incidents” he said.

Defense Department officials quickly cancelled a planned joint press conference after Karzai’s statements, denying the cancellation had anything to do with Karzai’s statements. The head of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) — the coalition headed by the U.S. in Afghanistan — strongly denounced the idea that the U.S. would work with the Taliban to keep U.S. forces in the country. “We have fought too hard over the past 12 years. We have shed too much blood over the past 12 years. We have done too much to help the Afghan Security Forces grow over the last 12 years to ever think that violence or instability would be to our advantage,” said Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford.

Karzai has a lengthy history of inflammatory statements, usually intended to provide himself some form of leverage when dealing with his Western counter-parts or bolster himself domestically. In 2010, Karzai threatened to join Taliban after coming under pressure to launch reforms in the Afghan government. Karzai also warned against the continuation of NATO airstrikes in 2011, saying that NATO risked becoming an occupying force, adding that “history shows what Afghans do with trespassers and with occupiers.”

Tensions between the U.S. and Afghans stretch beyond difficulties in relations with Karzai. Reports on Monday say an Afghan police officer opened fire killing two U.S. troops and three of his fellow officers. These “green on blue” attacks — in which Afghan allies turn on their Western counterparts — have proved to be an ongoing impediment to lasting trust between U.S. and Afghan forces. Gen. John Allen, then the U.S. commander in Afghanistan, told 60 Minutes that coalition troops were willing to sacrifice for the Afghan campaign, but unwilling to be murdered.

Last month, Afghan President Hamid Karzai denied Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) entry into Afghanistan because, a spokesperson for the Afghan government said, the California congressman “speaks against the good of Afghanistan and tries to interfere in our internal affairs.”

Rohrabacher reportedly tried to push Karzai to incorporate warlords into his government and urged the Afghan president to institute a “federalist decentralization of power.”

Last night on CNN during an interview with host Wolf Blitzer, who was incensed that Karzai blocked Rohrabacher from entering Afghanistan, Karzai said he wouldn’t be changing his mind on the issue:

BLITZER: So you’re not going to let him back into your country, Dana Rohrabacher?

KARZAI: Definitely not.

BLITZER: Ever, ever?

KARZAI: Until he changes his [inaudible], until he shows respect to the Afghan people, to our way of life and to our constitution. No foreigner has a place asking another people, another country, to change their constitution.

Blitzer asked Karzai about “the concept of freedom of speech.” “The freedom of speech is good,” Karzai said, adding, “But the freedom of speech with regard to other countries is another issue.” Watch the clip:

Rohrabacher complained last month that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “should have stoop up” to Karzai, whom he referred to as a “prima donna,” and fought to get him into Afghanistan.

President Obama and the U.S.’s NATO allies, meeting at a summit in Chicago, committed to a complete withdrawal of international forces from Afghanistan by December 2014. The withdrawal will be coupled with the “irreversible” handover of security responsibilities to the Afghans next summer.

A declaration from heads of state at the NATO summit emphasized that the handover will be completed by the end of 2014 but that NATO member countries may remain in a training and advisory capacities:

By the end of 2014, when the Afghan Authorities will have full security responsibility, the NATO-led combat mission will end. We will, however, continue to provide strong and long-term political and practical support through our Enduring Partnership with Afghanistan. NATO is ready to work towards establishing, at the request of the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, a new post-2014 mission of a different nature in Afghanistan, to train, advise and assist the [Afghan National Security Forces], including the Afghan Special Operations Forces.

In remarks delivered at the summit today, Obama emphasized the progress made in Afghanistan during the U.S.’s decade-long war. “Our forces broke the Taliban’s momentum,” said Obama. “More Afghans are reclaiming their communities. Afghan security forces have grown stronger.”

Public war weariness has been a growing pressure on the White House and NATO member countries as Europeans and Americans express frustration with the long war and the associated human and financial costs. While NATO forces will maintain an active presence in Afghanistan through 2014, France’s new president, François Hollande, announced that France would withdraw troops by the end of the year.

Standing next to Afgan President Hamid Karzai yesterday, Obama recognized the sacrifices made by both Afghans and Americans over the past ten years. “[President Karzai] recognizes the enormous sacrifices American troops have made,” said Obama. He added, “We recognize the hardships that Afghans have been through during these many many years of war.”

President Obama, speaking last night from Kabul, told an American audience that the new Strategic Partnership Agreement signed by him and Afghan President Hamid Karzai will usher in a “future in which war ends, and a new chapter begins.” The speech acknowledged the sacrifices made in the decade long war in Afghanistan which has become increasingly unpopular in recent months and taken the lives of 1,957 Americans.

Obama, speaking from Bagram Air Base, said:

My fellow Americans, we have traveled through more than a decade under the dark cloud of war. Yet here, in the pre-dawn darkness of Afghanistan, we can see the light of a new day on the horizon. The Iraq War is over. The number of our troops in harm’s way has been cut in half, and more will be coming home soon. We have a clear path to fulfill our mission in Afghanistan, while delivering justice to al Qaeda.

The speech emphasized the growing responsibilities shouldered by Afghan Security Forces as 23,000 U.S. soldiers return home this summer. “Nearly half the Afghan people live in places where Afghan Security Forces are moving into the lead,” said the President.

U.S. and other foreign troops will continue to train, advise, assist and, as needed, fight alongside Afghan forces as the U.S. military shifts into a support role. “As we do, our troops will be coming home. [...] And as our coalition agreed, by the end of 2014 the Afghans will be fully responsible for the security of their country,” said Obama.

The speech, while acknowledging the ongoing role to be played by U.S. forces in Afghanistan until 2014, also touched on the domestic challenges facing the U.S. and the toll of a nearly decade-long war in Afghanistan and eight year U.S. presence in Iraq, where the last U.S. troops departed on December 18:

As we emerge from a decade of conflict abroad and economic crisis at home, it is time to renew America. An America where our children live free from fear, and have the skills to claim their dreams. A united America of grit and resilience, where sunlight glistens off soaring new towers in downtown Manhattan, and we build our future as one people, as one nation.

Watch the full speech:

The Mitt Romney campaign issued a statement welcoming Obama’s comments from Afghanistan. “I am pleased that President Obama has returned to Afghanistan. Our troops and the American people deserve to hear from our President about what is at stake in this war,” said the statement. But former Republican presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty, who has since endorsed Romney, told CNN that Obama was putting “arbitrary deadlines” on the Afghan drawdown and that Romney would have “taken a different approach” and “feels it’s important to define the mission ahead in terms of strategic outcomes, not in terms of days or months on the calendar.”

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) was refused a visa and prevented from boarding a flight in Dubai to Afghanistan on Friday, Afghan officials said. Rohrabacher has been critical of corruption in President Hamid Karzai’s government and has openly called for a more decentralized government in Afghanistan, which, according to the BBC, led Karzai to request that Rohrabacher be denied entry into the country:

Afghan officials told the BBC that in addition to his criticisms of the president, Mr Rohrabacher was being shunned because of meetings he had held in Berlin with Afghan politicians about the creation of a decentralised form of government.

According to our correspondent, Afghan officials view that as tantamount to interference in the country’s internal affairs.

“Anyone who speaks against the good of Afghanistan and tries to interfere in our internal affairs is ineligible for an Afghan visa,” one official told our correspondent.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton relayed Karzai’s message to Rohrabacher who, according to his spokesperson, obliged “out of respect.”

According to the Guardian, Rohrabacher “has been in discussion with Afghan leaders for several months about a less centralised form of government” and Afghan government officials in January criticized Rohrabacher for meeting with Afghan opposition leaders in Berlin.

According to a State Department cable released by Wikileaks, Rohrabacher as early as 2003 pushed Karzai to incorporate more warlords into his government, telling the Afghan president that he preferred “a federalist decentralization of power.” The Guardian reports that Rohrabacher “became personal friends with many of the commanders” fighting the Soviet Union in the 1980s.

Last June, Iraqi government officials kicked Rohrabacher out of Iraq after the Californian Republican said Iraq should repay the United States for the war President Bush started there in 2003. While members of his own party criticized him for the remarks, Rohrabacher remained unapologetic. “There’s nothing wrong with suggesting that the people who have benefited from our benevolence should consider repaying us for what we have given them,” he said.

With the NATO summit coming up next month in Chicago largely focusing on Afghanistan, one senior diplomat in Kabul said of the newest Rohrabacher incident: “This doesn’t look great.”

A video that surfaced Wednesday that allegedly depicts a group of U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan urinating on corpses that they called “dead Taliban” could complicate nascent peace talks in the decade-long war there. The act portrayed on the video faced universal condemnation from the military, politicians, and the Afghan president Hamid Karzai.

With the U.S. expected to begin talks soon with the Afghan Taliban insurgency, all parties were quick to distance themselves from the act. The Marines said in a statement that the actions “are not consistent with our core values and are not indicative of the character of the Marines in our Corps.” In a separate statement, the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) said a criminal probe was being launched and added:

This disrespectful act is inexplicable and not in keeping with the high moral standards we expect of coalition forces.

ISAF strongly condemns the actions depicted in the video, which appear to have been conducted by a small group of U.S. individuals, who apparently are no longer serving in Afghanistan.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta said of the incident, “I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.” Panetta has ordered an investigation to the matter.

Afghans offered across-the-board condemnation as well. “It was inhuman and despicable, an unforgivable act which we condemn in the strongest terms,” said a Taliban spokesman. Karzai called the act “completely inhumane” and asked that those found responsible by an investigation get the “most severe punishment” possible.

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who served in the U.S. military, said:

Here’s a handful of obviously undisciplined young people of the hundred and some thousand Marines that we have. And it makes me so sad. There should be an investigation and these young people should be punished, but it does great damage. It makes me so sad.

Not everyone, however, was saddened by the events. Anti-Muslim activist Pam Geller wrote in favor of the incident. “I love these Marines,” she said, adding, “Perhaps this is the infidel interpretation of the Islamic ritual of washing and preparing the body for burial.” A former Republican National Committee researcher tweeted wondering, “this is a story?” He added: “I could care less. Liberal media at work.” Michael Goldfarb, a neoconseravtive Republican operative (a former McCain campaign spokesman), lobbyist and, as of recently, chairman of a new conservative online media venture, retweeted the comments from the RNC researcher.

GOP presidential hopeful Herman Cain may not be able to name the leaders of foreign countries, but that doesn’t mean leaders of foreign countries don’t know who Cain is.

The New York Times reports that in a meeting between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Karzai raised comments made by Cain proudly professing ignorance about Uzbekistan and mocking the country’s name. Cain said a few weeks ago he didn’t know the “president of Ubeki-beki-beki-beki-stan-stan,” then categorized the Central Asian country — a crucial supply route in the U.S.-led war to support Karzai’s government in Afghanistan — as “small and insignificant.”

The Times reports that in Karzai’s meeting with Clinton:

Mr. Karzai was asking Mrs. Clinton about remarks Mr. Cain made recently in a television interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network. [...]

“He’s a former pizza company owner,” she said to Mr. Karzai.

“Is he that?” He replied, speaking in English.

“Oh, yes. He started something called Godfather’s pizza,” she said.

“Yes, I see, I see,” Mr. Karzai said.

Mrs. Clinton then turned to the American ambassador, Ryan C. Crocker, and went on, laughingly. “The president was saying he saw a news clip about how Mr. Cain had said I don’t even know the names of all these presidents of all these countries, you know, like whatever …”

“All the ’stans whatever,” Mr. Karzai interjected, referring to the countries of Central and Southern Asia, including his.

“All the ’stans places,” Mrs. Clinton repeated.

Mr. Karzai did not seem to take offense, displaying what appeared to be an astute understanding of campaigning in a democratic country. “That wasn’t right,” he said, “but anyway, that’s how politics are.”

Cain later laughed off his Uzbekistan comment, bizarrely blaming liberal African-American commenters Harry Belafonte and Cornel West for not “want(ing) a lot of people to wake up, especially black people.”

After a series of gaffes like the “Ubeki-beki-beki-stan-stan” comment, Cain’s faced scathing criticism about his foreign policy bona fides. But he still insists that he’s “not as foreign policy dumb as they think,” and that really he is just lying in wait to — at some undetermined time in the future — wow everyone with knowledge from his months of studying crucial international issues.

But if his statements are so outlandish that even foreign leaders are picking up on them and declaring, “That wasn’t right,” a potential future President Cain may already be causing relationships with U.S. allies to deteriorate.