What's new

FM Qureshi urges Biden administration to 'not reverse' Afghan peace process

Meengla

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 1, 2009
4,561
17
6,531
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Small troop increases for such purposes are not something Pakistan opposes. What Pakistan would have issue with is a significant increase in US troops for the purpose of escalating military actions against the Afghan Taliban, or any kind of significant increase that would push the Afghan Taliban away from peace talks.
Nope. Pakistan doesn't really want American troops in Afghanistan. It's possible that on occasion, such statements may have been made by the foreign office to (a) gauge the response and (b) cleverly project a degree of sympathy for the official position of Ghani and his government. It is "posturing" effectively and we are aware that in post-USA Afghanistan we will need to work with the Taliban AND Ghani.
These are two diametrically opposite view points as I quote here and, as often, truth somewhere lies in between. Closer to which side?? I am more in agreement with @masterchief_mirza

My **hunch** is that Pakistan doesn't want ANY American troops in Afghanistan. The days of Al-Qaida or other terrorists groups in Afghanistan are over. Every segment of the Afghan society is aware of the catastrophe brought upon their country because of those Arab fighters. And, given America's close embrace of India, even 2500 American troops are a potent resource for India!

Also I don't think Americans think that they can get more concessions out of the Talibans. The Talibans are gunning for absolute power and they sense victory. Americans killing a few thousand more of them won't stop them now after 19 years of sacrifices.

But, yes, the Pakistani FM statement was just another diplomatic 'why can't we all get along' types...
 

masterchief_mirza

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 29, 2019
9,078
15
18,965
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
These are two diametrically opposite view points as I quote here and, as often, truth somewhere lies in between. Closer to which side?? I am more in agreement with @masterchief_mirza

My **hunch** is that Pakistan doesn't want ANY American troops in Afghanistan. The days of Al-Qaida or other terrorists groups in Afghanistan are over. Every segment of the Afghan society is aware of the catastrophe brought upon their country because of those Arab fighters. And, given America's close embrace of India, even 2500 American troops are a potent resource for India!

Also I don't think Americans think that they can get more concessions out of the Talibans. The Talibans are gunning for absolute power and they sense victory. Americans killing a few thousand more of them won't stop them now after 19 years of sacrifices.

But, yes, the Pakistani FM statement was just another diplomatic 'why can't we all get along' types...
Please see my later post - I agree with the points raised by some others. There are advantages to a small US presence, mainly because of the sort of Afghanistan that would best be shaped if our interests were to be preserved in this region. I also believe those interests align with the interests of most of the Afghan people themselves.
In Reality, it's going to be hard to get rid of them fully as Biden is a full on Obama-ite. We may well have to tolerate a small contingent.

I still believe that the only way to expel them completely is if the Kabulites themselves turn against them if they see a better incentive aligning with other Asian powers (China). However, that is an unlikely outcome.
 

cloud4000

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 11, 2015
4,354
-3
4,240
Country
India
Location
United States
It’s in US’ interests to continue the Afghan peace process on its current track with the idea of withdrawing all US troops from the country. You don’t need troops on the ground foe counter-terrorism. Besides it’s in the interest of regional powers to prevent from becoming a doubt of terrorism, which will likely attack them than the US.

Besides, US main threat from terrorism is not external but internal: you have both the antifa and the alt-right sprouting like weeds, and both have violent tendencies.
 

Gangetic

FULL MEMBER
Oct 25, 2018
381
0
647
Country
United Kingdom
Location
United Kingdom
My prediction is that Biden will follow through with the peace deal and withdraw all troops by 2022. However, there will be many more drone strikes, contractors and a much greater support for the Kabul regime. The Afghan war will continue until 2026-2027, when an interim government will be formed. The Taliban will control/influence much of the Pashtun territory while the former NA will have the North/Kabul areas.
 
Last edited:

Meengla

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 1, 2009
4,561
17
6,531
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
It’s in US’ interests to continue the Afghan peace process on its current track with the idea of withdrawing all US troops from the country. You don’t need troops on the ground foe counter-terrorism. Besides it’s in the interest of regional powers to prevent from becoming a doubt of terrorism, which will likely attack them than the US.

Besides, US main threat from terrorism is not external but internal: you have both the antifa and the alt-right sprouting like weeds, and both have violent tendencies.
Boded part.
While I appreciate your personal sentiments, I sincerely doubt those sitting in New Delhi share them. When senior American Senators like Chuck Hagel (?) pointedly blame India for fomenting violence in Pakistan through Afghanistan then you should know that, even given the strong India-America strategic embrace, Americans planners know and perhaps abet the Indian role in terrorism inside Pakistan.

@masterchief_mirza : We are all guessing here. To me Pakistan would really want a total Taliban victory and control of Afghanistan with zero American troops inside Afghanistan--as was the case between 1996-2001. The only possibility of Pakistan ever accepting the American presence in Afghanistan is that the coalition govt in Kabul will fully and totally distance itself from any anti-Pakistan activities by India.

PS. John Pilger--a notable leftist political pundit and philosopher has recently said 'The Democrats have been more rapacious about foreign wars since World War II'. This was one more reasons I broke away from the nearly 3 decades of blind support for the Dems by voting Trump in 2020.
 

masterchief_mirza

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 29, 2019
9,078
15
18,965
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
Boded part.
While I appreciate your personal sentiments, I sincerely doubt those sitting in New Delhi share them. When senior American Senators like Chuck Hagel (?) pointedly blame India for fomenting violence in Pakistan through Afghanistan then you should know that, even given the strong India-America strategic embrace, Americans planners know and perhaps abet the Indian role in terrorism inside Pakistan.

@masterchief_mirza : We are all guessing here. To me Pakistan would really want a total Taliban victory and control of Afghanistan with zero American troops inside Afghanistan--as was the case between 1996-2001. The only possibility of Pakistan ever accepting the American presence in Afghanistan is that the coalition govt in Kabul will fully and totally distance itself from any anti-Pakistan activities by India.

PS. John Pilger--a notable leftist political pundit and philosopher has recently said 'The Democrats have been more rapacious about foreign wars since World War II'. This was one more reasons I broke away from the nearly 3 decades of blind support for the Dems by voting Trump in 2020.
Pilger knows his stuff...a bit uber-lefty, but certainly well informed. No question at all that the US dems are not traditional "left of centre" like e.g. the UK labour party (although Blairism was the exception, and that hasn't been fully stamped out here either).

We're definitely guessing at present, however perhaps we were lucky these last four years that Trump wore his policies on his sleeve so as to leave no doubt.

Total Taliban control is perhaps an unattainable outcome and I do think the Pakistani position has evolved of late beyond this simplistic stance. It's too naive to expect a single group to rule a heterogenous place like Afghanistan. Pakistan has learned by watching western attempts at nation building and I honestly think Ghani remains in Islamabad's calculus these days, assuming he can be toned down in his rhetoric and weaned off Indian support.

There is also a post-Trump honeymoon that Obama-ites will exploit fully - anything Biden says at present will be accepted without question. He will only be critically appraised once that honeymoon is over. If he says anything contrary to Trump's policies - right or wrong - he will get away with it for now, including keeping troops in Afghanistan.

Unless a sudden swing to China occurs in Afghanistan and Kabul goes all in for Beijing, I think America will find justification to keep some troops there for the reasons discussed above. Pakistan's actual challenge - as you mentioned - lies in getting Delhi out of Kabul. This is why it actually makes sense to wean Ghani off them and help him reach a consensus with the Taliban. If Pakistan is too forceful against Ghani, it will push his followers further into the arms of the Panipat-revisionists.
 

Hakikat ve Hikmet

ELITE MEMBER
Nov 14, 2015
11,748
13
29,413
Country
United States
Location
United States
The White Supremacists are as dare-devil as the Tailban....

The USA needs to get rid of the worst of the White Supremacists; otherwise, the USA is gone! And, sending them to Afghanistan via "Blackwater" to get them annihilated over there looks like a Biden Administration policy!! Help from Pak is required in this regard...
.
 

ziaulislam

ELITE MEMBER
Apr 22, 2010
14,426
10
13,524
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
America at this stage cannot even afford such moves, they have their own civil war looming and economy failing.

regards
they dont have civil war failing economy but they are afraid of china

china is now a real threat

and Afghanistan holds no future in war against china

so USA will leave Afghanistan and engage in massive home se-pending spree on infrastructure as it did in 1970s ..

it spent 1 trillion dollars, wasted for no reason
 

Dark1

BANNED
Feb 29, 2020
1,536
-23
1,026
Country
India
Location
India
The Taliban ISIS nexus will prevent a total withdrawal.
The continuous killings by the Taliban means that a attempt to keep the pot boiling is on. American withdrawal from Afghanistan is not in the interest of interested parties which have become rich on American largesse.
A complete withdrawal will mean Afghanistan just becomes another Somalia with warlords at each others throats. Except drug fueled terrorism and fundamentalism to again become entrenched, a danger for all nations.
 

Pakistan Space Agency

SENIOR MEMBER
Apr 22, 2019
3,738
-26
5,762
Country
Pakistan
Location
United Kingdom
... Last year, during a debate between Democratic presidential candidates, Biden had said: "We can prevent the United States from being the victim of terror coming out of Afghanistan by providing for bases — insist the Pakistanis provide bases for us to air lift from and to move against what we know." ...
Pakistan may be in for another rough 4 years. Pakistani Military will be ready to allow 100+ drone strikes on Pakistani border areas to make America look it is still winning the war.

Rewards for the Pakistani military might be F-16s and Zulus after the beating is complete. Just my opinion. I hope this is incorrect.
 

jupiter2007

BANNED
Feb 19, 2007
4,230
-1
2,967
We still need to compete the fencing with Iran border to make sure that Terrorists can’t enter Pakistan from both Afghanistan and Iran. We need security cameras and drones monitoring the border.
 

cloud4000

SENIOR MEMBER
Oct 11, 2015
4,354
-3
4,240
Country
India
Location
United States
Boded part.
While I appreciate your personal sentiments, I sincerely doubt those sitting in New Delhi share them. When senior American Senators like Chuck Hagel (?) pointedly blame India for fomenting violence in Pakistan through Afghanistan then you should know that, even given the strong India-America strategic embrace, Americans planners know and perhaps abet the Indian role in terrorism inside Pakistan.
When it comes to human rights, all countries are hypocrites, taken only at face value. Of course, the US knows what India is doing in Afghanistan and why: China. And since China and Pakistan are allied against India, the US looks the other way.

It's just odd that Pakistan is complaining about India using Afghanistan to launch terrorist attacks against Pakistan when it did the same to India during the late 80s and 90s: funneling Afghan jihadis into Kashmir and hosting pro-Khalistan groups.

It seems terrorism in Afghanistan cuts both ways.
 

bahadur

FULL MEMBER
Jul 27, 2020
661
-5
239
Country
Nepal
Location
India
FM Qureshi urges Biden administration to 'not reverse' Afghan peace process - Pakistan - DAWN.COM



FM Qureshi urges Biden administration to 'not reverse' Afghan peace process
Dawn.comPublished January 22, 2021Updated about 2 hours ago
Facebook Count
Twitter Share

13
Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi says US President Joe Biden should realise there is an opportunity in Afghanistan. — PID/File

Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi says US President Joe Biden "should realise there is an opportunity in Afghanistan". — PID/File












Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has urged the Biden administration to "persevere" with the Afghan peace deal which was signed in Doha between the United States and Taliban last year and "not reverse things".

The foreign minister made the remarks in an interview with Al Jazeera that was published on Thursday. He said that Joe Biden, who was sworn in as America's president on Wednesday, "should realise there is an opportunity in Afghanistan".
“Push them forward, because, after a long time, we have started moving in the right direction," Qureshi said.
Pakistan has played the role of mediator during the peace talks between the Afghan Taliban and the US, which led to a landmark deal signed in Doha in February last year. According to a joint statement released by the parties at the time, a full withdrawal of all US and coalition forces would occur within 14 months of the deal getting signed, if the Taliban hold up their end of the agreement.

The US had committed to reducing the number of its troops in Afghanistan from 13,000 to 8,600 within 135 days of signing the deal, and working with its allies to proportionally reduce the number of coalition forces in Afghanistan over the same period. Currently, there are 2,500 US troops in Afghanistan.
However, Biden's nominee for state secretary, Anthony Blinken, hinted earlier this week that an increase in violence in Afghanistan may lead to US retaining some of it troops.
"We want to retain some capacity to deal with any resurgence of terrorism, which is what brought us there in the first place," Blinken said in his confirmation hearing. “We have to look carefully at what has actually been negotiated. I haven't been privy to it yet."
US President Biden has stated that while he would reduce the number of combat troops in Afghanistan, he would not withdraw US military presence.
Last year, during a debate between Democratic presidential candidates, Biden had said: "We can prevent the United States from being the victim of terror coming out of Afghanistan by providing for bases — insist the Pakistanis provide bases for us to air lift from and to move against what we know."
Biden's nominee for defence secretary Gen Lloyd J Austin, meanwhile, identified Pakistan as an "essential partner" in the Afghan peace process during his confirmation hearing earlier this week.
“We are concerned because we feel violence can vitiate the climate,” Qureshi said in his interview with Al Jazeera yesterday. “Pakistan has done a lot, we have really bent backwards to create an environment to facilitate the peace process.”
The foreign minister further said that there were "spoilers" within Afghanistan who "have benefited from the war economy" and did not want the peace process to be successful. He also cautioned that there were "elements from outside who do not share our vision, which is a peaceful, stable, prosperous Afghanistan".
Ultimately, Qureshi said, it was the Afghan leadership's responsibility to ensure that the peace process succeeds.
"It's their country, it's their future."
Pakistan's relationship with the previous US administration had started out as thorny after former President Donald Trump ended the security assistance to Pakistan. However, relations improved after Pakistan assisted talks between US and the Afghan Taliban.
Islamabad has repeatedly emphasised that Pakistan has much to gain from peace in Afghanistan, which should be "Afghan-led and Afghan-owned".
“They (Biden administration) should be supportive of what, I feel, is a convergence of interests,” said Qureshi in the interview.
“Our approach, thinking, objectives and shared visions are very much in line with the priorities of the new administration. And that convergence can be built further.”
Qureshi also said that the US should not view Islamabad's close relations with China as a "zero-sum game".
“They [the US] should come, compete and invest
,” Qureshi said, while referring to China's investment in Pakistan. The foreign minister further said that Pakistan was also willing to mediate between US and China if need be.
“Pakistan traditionally has had the opportunity and has built bridges between the two. In this environment, where there is a change […] Pakistan can be a bridge-builder,” said Qureshi. He was referring to Islamabad's mediation efforts between Washington and Beijing in 1972 in order to facilitate then US President Richard Nixon's historic visit to China.
america should keep interest of afghans on top , should not leave afghanistan for extremist taliban.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom