WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Frustrated about prospects of getting Afghan President Hamid Karzai to sign a long-term security deal, the United States is considering waiting until he leaves office before completing the pact and deciding on a troop presence beyond 2014, the Wall Street Journal reported on Monday. 
 
 "If he's not going to be part of the solution, we have to have a way to get past him," the Journal quoted a senior U.S. official as saying. "It's a pragmatic recognition that clearly Karzai may not sign the (deal) and that he doesn't represent the voice of the Afghan people." 
 
 The White House, asked about the report, said it was standing by its previous comments on the issue. 
 
 The United States would like to leave more than 10,000 troops in Afghanistan for counterterrorism and training of Afghan forces after U.S. forces formally withdraw at the end of this year following a 13-year mission in Afghanistan begun after the September 11, 2001, attacks. 
 
 But Karzai has refused so far to sign a bilateral security agreement that Washington insists must be approved before it will agree to leave the troop contingent behind. 
 
 The White House says that in the absence of a bilateral agreement, all U.S. forces will withdraw at the end of the year, and that a decision by Karzai is needed within weeks 
 
 Karzai has called that an empty threat and suggested any security deal could wait until after the April elections. 
 
 NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen said earlier this month that Karzai was unlikely to sign a pact and would probably leave the choice for his successor. 
 
 The Journal said the revised schedule for drawing down troops was based on a plan presented by the Pentagon in January that involves keeping 10,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan after this year at a limited number of bases. 
 
 The plan would draw down those troops in two years and enable the removal of all U.S. troops by the end of President Barack Obama's second term in early 2017, other than military personnel at the U.S. Embassy, the Journal said, citing officials. 
 
 According to the Journal, the revised plan would allow the U.S. military to accommodate having either 10,000 troops in Afghanistan after 2014 or an order to remove all the troops by the end of the year. 
 
 The top U.S. military officer, General Martin Dempsey, told reporters last December that the U.S. military could wait months for a political decision on whether troops remain in Afghanistan or leave, but that delaying a security pact would damage the confidence of Afghan forces and undermine NATO's plans. 
 
 (Reporting by Peter Cooney; Additional reporting by Jeff Mason; Editing by Eric Walsh) 

 WASHINGTON—The U.S. military has revised plans to withdraw troops from Afghanistan to allow the White House to wait until President Hamid Karzai leaves office before completing a security pact and settling on a post-2014 U.S. troop presence, officials said. 
 
 The option for waiting reflects a growing belief in Washington that there is little chance of repairing relations with Mr. Karzai and getting him to sign the bilateral security... 

 For years, a debate has raged in Washington: Is Hamid Karzai on another planet? 
 
 Lately, those who think Afghanistan’s mercurial president has left this earthly plane have had the upper hand. Much recent reporting paints a picture of a paranoid man sequestered in his palace, fuming over American slights, threatening to release dozens of terrorist suspects from prison and plotting to join forces with the Taliban. 
 
 All this comes against the backdrop of U.S.-Afghan preparations to make 2014 the year of transition to full Afghan control of their own destiny, a goal President Karzai has repeatedly embraced. A key first step would be endorsing the already completed U.S.-Afghan Bilateral Security Agreement permitting a modest number of American troops to stay beyond the 2014 withdrawal deadline—but Karzai has adamantly refused to sign. Meanwhile, Karzai’s fulminations comparing the United States to a “colonial power” and his denunciation of NATO have drawn warm praise from the Taliban. All this for a man through whom the United States has funneled nearly $100 billion in aid, to say nothing of the billions that have been spent trying to stabilize his country. 
 
 So, what is Karzai up to? 
 
 To answer that question, let’s first remember that Hamid Karzai is a politician. And while he’s not running in the Afghan presidential campaign that began Monday, Feb. 3, he does seem to be maneuvering for future relevance, drawing on his period in office and on his tribal status as leader of the important Pashtun Popalzai tribe in southern Afghanistan. Karzai may see the predominantly Pashtun Taliban gaining strength after the U.S. withdrawal, reckoning that he has much to gain and little to lose by bashing America. And becoming a more vocal critic of the United States obfuscates the American support that lifted him into the presidency after 9/11. 
 
 All of the leading contenders to replace Karzai criticize his anti-American course. His former foreign ministers Abdullah Abdullah and Zalmay Rasoul; his former close advisor and finance minister Ashraf Ghani; and his older brother, Qayyum Karzai, have all declared that they would sign the troop deal with the United States. Each seeks to separate himself from the president, stressing that Afghanistan must maintain a strategic partnership with the West. 
 
 Karzai in Sochi, Russia for the opening ceremony of the Olympics. | AP Photo 
 
 But Karzai’s unlikely to change direction. He is probably attempting to position himself as a future bridge between the Taliban and the next Afghan government. He may hope to be seen as an elder tribal leader and international statesman deserving respect and deference by the winning candidate, and by Afghan political, tribal, ethnic and religious leaders generally—including the Taliban. He might decide to tone his anti-Americanism down a notch now that the presidential campaign is underway and, constitutionally, he is a lame duck. And while the U.S.-led coalition should not count on it, Karzai might even deputize a cabinet minister to sign the troop agreement on his behalf before his successor takes office. But don’t expect him to keep quiet. 
 
 Unfortunately, the Obama administration’s threats and serial deadlines for a troop deal are playing into Karzai’s hands. So is President Obama’s constant refrain that, for America, the Afghan war is over. And former Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s bald admission that the Obama administration attempted to downgrade or even remove Karzai from office has probably only hardened the Afghan leader’s resolve to hew to his anti-American approach.
– The US military is changing its Afghan exit strategy to give President Obama a chance to negotiate a security deal with whoever succeeds Hamid Karzai, the Wall Street Journal reports. Obama is increasingly frustrated with Karzai, with whom he pointedly hasn't spoken since last summer. "If he's not going to be part of the solution, we have to have a way to get past him," a senior US official tells the Journal. "It's a pragmatic recognition that clearly Karzai may not sign the BSA (bilateral security agreement)." For months, the US has been insisting it needs a deal ASAP. Karzai has insisted on leaving it up to his successor, in what Politico sees as an attempt to remain politically relevant after he leaves office. The new president might not take office until as late as August. The US official described it as a "game of chicken," adding, "We're just pulling our car off the side of the road." Obama will ask the military to start planning for a full withdrawal, but the schedule will allow the US to keep 10,000 troops in the country as planned should it reach a late deal. Asked to comment on the Journal report, the White House stuck to its previous comments on the matter, Reuters reports.