US invite to Taliban leaves out Pak proxies

[Ultimate Warrior]

US invite to Taliban leaves out Pak proxies

WASHINGTON: The Hamid Karzai-led and US-blessed peace initiative in Afghanistan does not involve talks with the "really bad guys" including the Pakistani proxy, Taliban chief Mullah Omar, clarified US secretary of state Hillary Clinton.

In remarks that brought some perspective and clarity to the fluid but evolving situation in Afghanistan, Hillary on Friday drew the line in the sand about engaging the Taliban, saying in a radio interview, "We're not going to talk to the really bad guys because the really bad guys are not ever going to renounce al-Qaida and renounce violence and agree to re-enter society."

Hillary made it clear that Washington does not regard the Pakistan-based and –backed Mullah Omar and his Quetta shura to be in that category. "That (talks) is not going to happen with Mullah Omar and the like," she said, without naming his Pakistani hosts. "But there are so many fighters in the Taliban that are there, frankly, because it's a way to make a living in a country where the Taliban pay them more than they can make as a farmer or in some other line of work out in the countryside."

Hillary left little doubt that Washington was aiming to split the Taliban, telling the National Public Radio in London that "everyone has realized, as we did in Iraq, that you have to begin to go right at the insurgents and peel those off who are willing to renounce violence, renounce al-Qaida, agree to live by the laws and constitution of Afghanistan and re-enter society".

While Mullah Omar too has dismissed prospects of talks with the US or President Karzai pending his own laundry list of demands particularly exit of foreign forces from Afghanistan, his Pakistani handlers, including ISI frontman Col Imam, have presented the one-eyed illiterate mullah as the man to engage, as Islamabad fights to stay relevant in Afghanistan.

"If a sincere message comes from the Americans, these people (the Taliban) are very big-hearted. They will listen. But if you try to divide the Taliban, you'll fail. Anyone who leaves Mullah Omar is no more Taliban. Such people are just trying to deceive," Imam, whose real name is Brigadier ("retd") Sultan Amir Tarar, said recently, batting for the Pakistani military's proxies.

 

[Naradmuni]

Very heartening move indeed. I am sure the new developments will ceratinly favour Indias agenda in the region.

 

[forcetrip]

Lets see how far this appoach takes them. If for any instance anyone thinks there will be peace leaving Pakistan out, I welcome them to atleast try. This is how far other nations will go to create more rubble in rubble.

 

[Awesome]

Speaking purely fair and square. Pakistan would like to ensure that Pashtuns are properly represented, with not just a head of state but a proper clear majority within the parliament.

To ensure this we would want to iron out that ridiculously rigged elections process of Afghanistan that we've seen so far that brought a crook like Karzai. If Pashtun representation is manipulated then that means Pakistans enemies are being catapulted to the Afghan Parliament.

 

[Ahmad]

Speaking purely fair and square. Pakistan would like to ensure that Pashtuns are properly represented, with not just a head of state but a proper clear majority within the parliament.

To ensure this we would want to iron out that ridiculously rigged elections process of Afghanistan that we've seen so far that brought a crook like Karzai. If Pashtun representation is manipulated then that means Pakistans enemies are being catapulted to the Afghan Parliament.

It depends on which pashton pakistan means? I remember that Musharaf once said the same thing and it was feircely rejected by Pashtoon Zahir Shah as a clear interference in Afghanistan's afairs. Pakistan's ethnically oriented policies in Afghanistan hasent and will not succed.

 

[BATMAN]

LINK PLEASE? or it is another baseless crap.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

Pakistan's ethnically oriented policies in Afghanistan hasent and will not succed.

So whose policies would succeed there?? , so far the US's ethnically oriented policies revolving around the tajiks and hazars and ignoring the pushtoons have not brought fruitful results ...! Pushtoons are majority taliban , and they support taliban ..!
let the americans do there experiment of isolating mullah omer from the other talibans , success is highly unlikely ..!

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

Afghan talks offer not for Mullah Omar: US

WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Friday that while the United States backed the Taliban integration programme, the offer did not include the group’s top leadership.

Earlier, the Pentagon had expressed similar sentiments about the integration plan approved at a meeting of more than 60 nations in London on Thursday.

Secretary Clinton, who also attended the conference, told America’s National Public Radio network that she understood the military action alone was not enough to win the war in Afghanistan but the London peace proposal was not meant for senior Taliban leaders.

In her interview to NPR, Mrs Clinton acknowledged that most modern conflicts don’t end with a victory on the field of battle and therefore political and development work was essential.

“I think everyone has realised, as we did in Iraq, that you have to begin to go right at the insurgents and peel those off who are willing to renounce violence, renounce Al Qaeda, agree to live by the laws and constitution of Afghanistan and re-enter society,” Mrs Clinton said.

“That is not going to happen with (Taliban chief) Mullah Omar and the like,” she added. “But there are so many fighters in the Taliban that are there, frankly, because it’s a way to make a living in a country where the Taliban pay them more than they can make as a farmer or in some other line of work out in the countryside.”

Earlier, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell told a briefing in Washington that the US government was still working to figure out which mid-level Taliban officials it might be possible to integrate into the current Afghan political structure.

He said that top Taliban figures, like the country’s former leader Mullah Omar, would probably be what he called “a bridge too far”.

“Omar is probably the extreme,” said Mr Morrell. “The foot-soldiers are probably the other extreme. The question is what happens to the others. Can they be won over? Can they become a part of the political fabric? And that’s, I think, what we’re all trying to figure out. And I don’t know that we have an answer yet.”

Secretary Clinton’s remarks came a day after Afghan President Hamid Karzai told the London conference that he planned to convene a grand Jirga and invite low-level Taliban militants and “disenchanted brothers who are not part of Al Qaeda or other terrorist networks”.

Secretary Clinton claimed that there had already been some progress on reintegration. “There already have been Taliban who have left,” she said, adding that how the reconciliation process evolved “will be a little bit like jazz … we can’t lay it out completely”.

The secretary, however, insisted that the shift in policy towards accommodation of some fighters did not constitute an exit strategy; instead, it was one element of a comprehensive plan.

“You have to have a very tough-minded attitude about this. This is not sweetness and light,” the secretary of state said. “You’re dealing with a very difficult, complex phenomenon.”

In response to a recent remark by Mr Karzai that he expected western troops to be in Afghanistan for the next decade, Mrs Clinton said she did not think “most western troops will be in a combat role”.

“It won’t be like today, where we are putting in thousands more troops, 30,000 from our own and from other countries,” she said.

In Washington, other US officials told the media that it was up to the Afghan government to decide which Taliban leaders could be integrated.

But the Pentagon spokesman said he expected officials in Kabul to make their decisions in consultation with US President Barack Obama.

Mr Morrell indicated that senior Taliban leaders like Mullah Omar who, in his words, “has the blood of thousands of Americans on his hands”, would likely not be acceptable candidates for “reintegration”.

On Tuesday, the United Nations announced it had removed five former Taliban officials, including a former foreign minister, from its list of terrorists, ending restrictions on their travel and bank accounts. That could be a first step toward involving them in a reconciliation process.

Afghan talks offer not for Mullah Omar: US

 

[BATMAN]

so the news with link does not say Pakistan proxies.

 

[qsaark]

Funny, as far as I remember, none of the Taliban or Afghan insurgent leader ever expressed interest in negotiating with the occupation forces or the puppet and corrupt Kabul regime. "The offer did not include the group’s top leadership", who cares? Go to hell. The fact is, the Obama administration is under tremendous pressure to show some kind of a progress in some area. Domestically, the controversial health care bill is already going down the drain, so lets show some progress in the foreign policy. Just in Jan 2010, twenty nine US soldiers are reported killed, with simply no progress of any sort anywhere in Afghanistan. This is the same administration that simply refused to hold any negotiations with Taliban or other insurgent groups just a month ago. Now why so much eagerness to talk to your enemy while the enemy is not at all interested.

 

[BATMAN]

Just in Jan 2010, twenty nine US soldiers are reported killed, with simply no progress of any sort anywhere in Afghanistan.

Poor creatures doesn't know the big game thier own govt. is playing in complicity with hindus.
While US taxpayers kept paying for hindu proxy war with Pakistan for all those years.

 

[S-2]

" Pushtoons are majority taliban..."

Wrong. By themselves the pashtu don't constitute a majority. Please learn the FACTS about your immediate neighbors to the west. It will require only the most minimal research, I promise.

"...and they support taliban ..!"

You don't know this nor can prove such. The fact is, however, the taliban made every effort this last election to prevent those pashtu of the south from voting.

Bloc representation is the refuge of the narrow-minded although, perhaps, an unsophisticated beginning which marks a beginning. Clearly Barack Obama would not have been elected in America, as example, if he'd relied solely on the african-American vote.

Afghanistan, like Pakistan, must learn how to conduct elections on a scheduled basis, with electoral campaigns and sufficient fairness and transparency to accept the outcomes as legitimate. Lack of elections or unfairness is nothing new to central and south Asia but must start somewhere and sometime.

Cries of mis-representation are reasonable within limits but without evaluating the candidates professional qualifications for the office are simply an attempt to impose one segment of society upon others.

This is a PROCESS and will require time, repetition, and education. It will also require PARTICIPATION. If pashtus, like african-Americans self-select out of the process, they will find themselves on the outside looking in.

The taliban have found wide acceptance in any village where they can point their weapons but there's sufficient cause to believe it ends there. The most important evidence of such is Omar's flat refusal to accede to elections.

He knows better. He'd lose.

Thanks.

 

[Ahmad]

So whose policies would succeed there?? , so far the US's ethnically oriented policies revolving around the tajiks and hazars and ignoring the pushtoons have not brought fruitful results ...! Pushtoons are majority taliban , and they support taliban ..!
let the americans do there experiment of isolating mullah omer from the other talibans , success is highly unlikely ..!

Best of luck if that makes you successful. Alineiating a clear 60% of the populatin and also even pashtoons dont trust pakistan because of Durand line. one more thing, you guys need to make sure to learn about afghanistan, its people, history, ethnic composion, culture, language, etc, because i at least can see alot of mis information about afghanistan in here.

 

[qsaark]

 

[blain2]

Best of luck if that makes you successful. Alineiating a clear 60% of the populatin and also even pashtoons dont trust pakistan because of Durand line. one more thing, you guys need to make sure to learn about afghanistan, its people, history, ethnic composion, culture, language, etc, because i at least can see alot of mis information about afghanistan in here.

Pashtuns are not the majority, but they are the single largest ethnic block. And I think Pakistan has always felt that since we have more Pashtuns in Pakistan and have the need to maintain stability within the Pashtun community across the border regions, Pashtuns have to be well represented.

Now I know that Pashtuns are not missing from the Karzai government, but the concern for Pakistan is that as soon as peace and stability comes in Afghanistan, the issue of Durrand line will come to the fore. Pakistan cannot and will not give way here. This is bound to cause more friction and if the Indians are there to egg on the Afghan side, as has been done in the past during the Zahir Shah days, then for Pakistan this entire proposition is lose-lose.

The reality of this situation is that if Afghanistan is to find peace, both India and Pakistan would have to back off. Pakistan is willing to do this, for as long as Afghans are willing to scale back Indian presence. In the short-term, these folks (the real Afghan Taliban) will get ignored (probably not), but this instability will continue which in turn will create more militancy in Pakistan as well.

I understand that Pakistan bears a lot of responsibility for the Taliban affair in Afghanistan and is blamed for it. However in many cases this responsibility is unjustly put on us because others have used Afghanistan to further their own goals and Russia, Iran, other CAR states and now India and the US are among them. Pakistan also had no choice but to back warlords after the world forgot about a thing called "Rebuilding". In Pakistan's case, our warlords were able to beat out everyone else's warlords. While not a great thing, however had someone else's guys had won out, these issues would have gone on.

While I respect the Secretary of state's comments and inclinations to leave certain groups out, interestingly enough, our Chief had a very decent discussion with NATO leadership about our concerns and his message was received fairly well so I am not sure about all these reports circulating. Coming from Indian press, it would make sense for them to make it look like Pakistan is out, but I think the real signals coming from the neighbourhood point otherwise.