What's new

Afghan peace talks should not cross 'red lines': India

From C.Asia through Afghanistan to Chahabar port in Iran.

Keeping the current Iran's situation with International Community would that be a feasible choice to use that road....???


Good to know but what after Karzai scenario.......???

through Afganistan these trade routes are connected.


Yap but again with Iran....passing through Kandahar....???
 
Keeping the current Iran's situation with International Community would that be a feasible choice to use that road....???



Good to know but what after Karzai scenario.......???




Yap but again with Iran....passing through Kandahar....???

India is waiting for Taliban peace deal :cheers:
 
so at some stage.......India will also negotiate with Talibans Terrorist

and what about Iran....???

India will support any Taliban who want to participate in Afghan Democracy :cheers:

I think Iran also supports Afghan peace process :cheers:
 
India will support any Taliban who want to participate in Afghan Democracy :cheers:

So India will support Good Talibans and would confront with bad Taliban.......???

I think Iran also supports Afghan peace process :cheers:

I am asking about Iran's tension with International Community.......particularly about sanctions...scenario...???
 
Rumbling and Grumbling in Dehli?
After reading this I will say what RescueRanger sir said the other day "SNAFU". a very interesting read and new things have been highlighted. Right now US is only concerned for its same withdrawal. I was reading today, how US sub contractors area threatening NATO to pay their bills or they will kidnap the westerners in Afghanistan. So things are pretty effed up for US.
India's concern for Afghanistan are genuine as they have invested, but at a very low price.
Another interesting thing to read was Taliban Cadre joining ANA, now that will be a messy thing as most of them are NA/ tajiks and both of them never get along very well. On the other hand whatever and whoever supply military equipment to Afghanistan will be to sure that they do not end up at the wrong corner. I believe this is the reason India didn't approve of Karzai's wish list.
On the other hand Pakistan need to present itself as neutral and keep its hand clean., they need to have a independent policy and emphasis on Regional stability.
I wonder why Talibans are still counting on PA support for kabul? did we make any promises?
 
Kerry's India visit may revive languishing ties;)
NEW DELHI — With a host of issues in need of attention, from Afghanistan to immigration reform to market access, Secretary of State John F. Kerry arrives in India this weekend in an effort to inject some energy into what's widely seen as sluggish U.S.-Indian relations.

"There is a widespread sense that U.S.-India relations are at something of a standstill," said Dhruva Jaishankar, a transatlantic fellow at the German Marshall Fund in Washington. "Both countries remain inwardly focused, and the state of both economies hasn't spurred either side to take any bold initiatives or offer concessions."

The Obama administration's upcoming talks with the Afghan Taliban militants are expected to be among the topics on the agenda when Kerry meets with Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Foreign Minister Salman Khurshid, analysts said. India is concerned that those negotiations might expand the influence in the region of its archrival, Pakistan, especially with foreign troops preparing to leave Afghanistan next year.

Kerry will land in New Delhi on Sunday after a two-day stop in Doha, the capital of the Persian Gulf nation of Qatar, where he is to meet with a group of foreign ministers to discuss Syria. The Taliban talks are also in Doha, although it's not clear whether they will start while he's there or whether he would attend.

His first trip to India as secretary of State will focus on the fourth round of the U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue, a mechanism launched in 2009 to foster ties. The visit comes as the views of New Delhi and Washington on Pakistan appear closer than in any previous rounds, given Washington's growing frustration and fatigue with Pakistan and that country's approach to militants in its territory.

India and the United States are both taking a wait-and-see attitude on newly elected Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, including whether he can craft a good working relationship with his nation's army and intelligence community. The security establishment, which some say is the true power in Pakistan, mounted a coup against Sharif in 1999 that ended his second stint as prime minister. Any easing of regional tension would be welcome.

Analysts on both sides of the Pacific said they didn't expect many significant "deliverables," diplomat-speak for formal agreements, out of this round.

"India and the U.S. aren't working on signing deals; the idea is to work positively to resolve issues," said Ronen Sen, a New Delhi-based analyst and former ambassador to the United States.

India is likely to seek assurances that U.S. immigration reform won't work against Indian companies and that India will get preferential access to U.S. liquefied natural gas exports, analysts said.

Key concerns for the Americans include access to Indian markets — especially for U.S. civilian nuclear technology — and easing of Indian bureaucratic impediments in areas such as patent protection, defense acquisition and the insurance and retail sectors.

"Most of these are changes India needs to make for its own sake, to improve the investment climate," said Jaishankar, the German Marshall Fund fellow. After years of stalled economic reform and declining foreign reserves, and with the value of the rupee falling, India has been keen to attract overseas investors.

"But there's a danger that American lobbying will increase the sense in India that such reforms are being foisted upon the government by exploitative foreign corporations," Jaishankar said. "In that sense, American leverage is limited."

Kerry will also participate in a dialogue on education, deliver a policy speech on bilateral and regional issues and meet with young Indians to discuss energy, climate change, science and poverty alleviation.

Some in Washington have criticized India for the slow progress in strengthening ties with Washington, variously attributed to New Delhi's desire to maintain some distance from the U.S. and to the relatively limited capacity of India's foreign service. The South Asia nation has just 800 diplomats at a time of growing importance in world affairs, a fraction of the United States' 15,000, China's 6,200 and Brazil's 3,000.

One Indian Foreign Ministry official countered that the figure underrepresented the work by staff members not officially recognized as diplomats. Others said it's important to look at the overall direction of U.S.-India relations, not the speed.

"That is not a fair criticism. Delays depend on issues, and both countries are democracies and should understand how things function in a democratic nation," Sen said. "India and the U.S. share an important relationship. There will be differences between nations. Only a saint or an idiot can agree on every issue."

Afghan peace bid on hold over Kabul-Taliban protocol row

(Reuters) - A fresh effort to end Afghanistan's 12-year-old war was in limbo on Thursday after a diplomatic spat about the Taliban's new Qatar office delayed preliminary discussions between the United States and the Islamist insurgents.

A meeting between U.S. officials and representatives of the Taliban had been set for Thursday in Qatar but Afghan government anger at the fanfare surrounding the opening of a Taliban office in the Gulf state threw preparations into confusion.

The squabble may set the tone for what could be arduous negotiations to end a conflict that has torn at Afghanistan's stability since the U.S. invasion following the September 11, 2001 al Qaeda attacks on U.S. targets.

Asked when the talks would now take place, a source in Doha said, "There is nothing scheduled that I am aware of."

But the U.S. government said it was confident the U.S.-Taliban talks would soon go forward.

"We anticipate these talks happening in the coming days," said State Department spokesman Jen Psaki, adding that she could not be more specific. James Dobbins, the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan "is packed and ready to go with his passport and suitcase," she said.

One logistical complication is a visit by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to Doha on Saturday and Sunday.

Kerry will discuss the Afghan peace talks with the Qatari hosts, senior U.S. officials said, but does not plan to get immersed in any talks himself or meet with Taliban representatives. A major part of his meeting will be devoted to talks on the Syrian civil war.

The opening of the Taliban office was a practical step paving the way for peace talks. But the official-looking protocol surrounding the event raised angry protests in Kabul that the office would develop into a Taliban government-in-exile. A diplomatic scramble ensued to allay the concerns.

Kerry spoke with Afghan President Hamid Karzai on Tuesday and again on Wednesday in an effort to defuse the controversy.

NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen appeared to side with Karzai by pointing out that alliance leaders at NATO's Chicago summit last year had made clear that the peace process in Afghanistan must be "Afghan-led and Afghan-owned".

"Reconciliation is never an easy process in any part of the world," Rasmussen told reporters in Brussels.

A Taliban flag that had been hoisted at the Taliban office in Qatar on Tuesday had been taken down and lay on the ground on Thursday , although it appeared still attached to a flagpole.

A name plate, inscribed "Political Office of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan":lol: had been removed from the outside of the building. But a similar plaque fixed onto a wall inside the building was still there on Thursday morning, witnesses said.

Asked whether the Taliban office had created any optimism about peace efforts, the source replied: "Optimism and pessimism are irrelevant. The most important thing is that we now know the Taliban are ready to talk, and sometimes talk is expensive."

Word of the U.S.-Taliban talks had raised hopes that Karzai's government and the Taliban might enter their first-ever direct negotiations on Afghanistan's future, with Washington acting as a broker and Pakistan as a major outside player.

Waging an insurgency to overthrow Karzai's government and oust foreign troops, the Taliban has until now refused talks with Kabul, calling Karzai and his government puppets of the West. But a senior Afghan official said earlier the Taliban was now willing to consider talks with the government.

"It's hard to talk and fight at the same time," said Marc Grossman, Dobbins' predecessor as the U.S. envoy for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

The talks will be "really" difficult, said Grossman, now vice chairman at The Cohen Group consulting firm. He added that he was heartened that the protocol dispute, which he called "the first bump" in the process, was being worked out.

PRISONER SWAP

Pakistan's powerful military played a central role in convincing the Taliban to hold talks with Washington, U.S. and Pakistani officials said, a shift from widely held U.S. and Afghan views that it was obstructing peace in the region.

A prisoner swap is seen as likely to happen as the first confidence-building measure between the two sides, said one Pakistani official, who declined to be named.

But he said there were many likely spoilers in the peace process who would want to maintain the status quo to continue to benefit from the war economy and the present chaotic conditions.

"The opening of a Taliban office and the American readiness to hold talks with the Taliban is a forward movement. What happens next depends on the quality of dialogue and political will of the interlocutors," he said.

Pakistan has been particularly critical of Karzai, seeing him as an obstacle to a peace settlement.

In its talks with the U.S. officials, the Taliban was expected to seek the return of former commanders now held at the Guantanamo Bay military prison in Cuba, as well as the departure of all foreign troops.

The United States wants the return of the only known U.S. prisoner of war from the conflict, Sergeant Bowe Bergdahl, who is believed to be held by the Taliban.

Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, reiterated Washington's desire to free Bergdahl and acknowledged that the Taliban are likely to raise their detainees at Guantanamo early in any talks.

"The exchange of detainees is something the Taliban has raised in the past and we certainly expect they will raise it," she said. "We are open to discussing this issue as part of the negotiations."

U.S. President Barack Obama cannot transfer the Taliban detainees from Guantanamo without a written notification to the U.S. Congress, where some lawmakers vigorously oppose that move.

The Doha protocol dispute burst into the open on Wednesday when Karzai said his government would not join U.S. talks with the Taliban and would halt negotiations with Washington on a post-2014 troop pact.

Officials from Karzai's government, angered by the official-sounding name the Taliban chose for its political office in Doha, said the United States had violated assurances it would not give official status to the insurgents.

A statement on Qatar's foreign ministry website late on Wednesday said that the office was called the "Political Bureau for Afghan Taliban in Doha".

The source familiar with the matter said: "The Taliban have to understand that this office isn't an embassy and they are not representing a country."
 
Have any of the geniuses here figured out why the US has a need to talk with the taliban and the haqqani?

specially after spending billions on the present Afghan Government and army training and equiping them, and after losing hundreds of US troops to the taliban and haqqani.

They are leaving Afghanistan for good, then why bother with the taliban or any peace talks without the presence of the main party - the Afghan Government? I dont think they are stupid to not involve the main protagonists.

@muse, @mafiya.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Afghan peace talks should not cross 'red lines': India


Baghdad, June 20: India has cautioned Afghanistan over peace talks with the Taliban, saying the new initiative should not violate the "red lines" drawn up by the international community.
"We have from time to time reminded all stakeholders about the red lines that are drawn by the world community and certainly by the participants should not be touched, should not be erased and should not be violated," External Affairs Minister Salman Khurshid told reporters.


Khurshid's comments came a day after the Afghan Taliban announced opening of its political office in Qatari capital Doha and expressed willingness to hold peace talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai's government and other stakeholders. "The talks are (being held) between the high peace council and the chosen representatives of Taliban. Of course, the US had its role in encouraging this, perhaps even in precipitating this," said Khurshid, who is in Baghdad on a two-day official visit.

"But ultimately, it's between sovereign government of Afghanistan and citizens of Afghanistan who happen to pursue the ideology of the Taliban," he said. "We have also said ultimately it is for Afghanistan to take their own decisions and to ensure that the peace initiative should be Afghanistan-own and Afghanistan-driven. I will expect that the latest initiative would not depart from position," he said last evening.

The Afghan Taliban and its ally Haqqani network have been blamed for deadly suicide attacks on Indian embassy in Kabul in 2008 and 2009, that killed 58 and 16 people respectively. The militant group, which has waged over a decade long insurgency against the US-led NATO forces in Afghanistan, said it was willing to use all legal means to end what it called the occupation of Afghanistan.

The group, which has killed hundreds of US and Afghan soldiers and has been blamed for series of deadly attacks inside Afghanistan, however, did not say whether they would stop fighting or not. The Taliban's decision followed handover of security in Afghanistan to Afghan forces by the US-led NATO coalition. The Afghan government, yesterday, suspended talks with the US and threatened to boycott prospective contacts with the insurgents in Qatar, angry over the name given to a new Taliban office in Qatar that is meant to facilitate peace negotiations.


Afghan peace talks should not cross 'red lines': India - Oneindia News

so India is hell scared because all off their games have failed and they are feeling the heat off Taliban and power off Pakistan so don't worry India your friend USA is running away but you would face hell soon
 
Have any of the geniuses here figured out why the US has a need to talk with the taliban and the haqqani?

specially after spending billions on the present Afghan Government and army training and equiping them, and after losing hundreds of US troops to the taliban and haqqani.

They are leaving Afghanistan for good, then why bother with the taliban or any peace talks without the presence of the main party - the Afghan Government? I dont think they are stupid to not involve the main protagonists.

@muse, @mafiya.
my dear you need to read the history of these talks, from the moment they invited them for negotiations, and that makes it 2002.
Afghan Taliban do not have problem with Afghan Govt but Karzai and his stooges. They have clearly refused to accept his presidency. Now for last 2 years US did try to have talks with Karzai on board but that didn't work out well/ So the last resort was to go along without them. there are some members of High Peace council involved in the process too but they keep a low profile
 
Last edited by a moderator:
India has told that and kerry has assured Haqqani network will be kept out of talks.:)

this shows level off Indians and their intelligence Mr haqqani network is Taliban they are not different from Taliban they are same sir and as they are Taliban with mullah Omar their leader they are already part off talks so wake up and feel the music you already have lost and your games failed
 
haqqani network is in contact and fighting for afghan Taliban and never stopped helping them
Your post shows that you have zero contacts in intelligence community.

Do you know why attacks in Paktika,Paktia,Khost on ISAF have decreased in 2013?

Because local Afghan Taliban have stopped cooperating with Haqqanis in this years spring offensive.
 

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom