Pakistan trying to broker Afghan deal

[RescueRanger]

Hekmat Karzai, the director of the Kabul-based Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies and a cousin of the Afghan president, said such talks would be that of a pragmatic leader who understands the realities of Afghanistan and the region.

"The fact [is] that regional players support is needed, particularly Pakistan," he said.

There we have it, now expect some strong words to come from Washington in the coming days.

 

[Spring Onion]

There we have it, now expect some strong words to come from Washington in the coming days.

The issue is that Washington wants a govt of only its choice excluding Iran, Pakistan which is not possible. And if Afghanistan takes a rational decision of joining hands with Iran, Pakistan, Russia than it doesnt suite US.

Now tell me what option is left with US?

 

[RescueRanger]

The issue is that Washington wants a govt of only its choice excluding Iran, Pakistan which is not possible. And if Afghanistan takes a rational decision of joining hands with Iran, Pakistan, Russia than it doesnt suite US.

Now tell me what option is left with US?

Exactly sister, well we all know what plans the US has for Afghanistan, it's just a shame that if they follow through with them they will leave the country in a bigger mess than what the region can digest.

Ye wo zameen hai go sher ko billie bana daita hai. Asal mei in ko ab samag ai hai, key asal jang to ab shuru hoi hai... Ye apne chamchey choor ke janey ke chakar main hain, magar is mey me in ko bohat dushwari pesh aye ge. (Mainly because of the Karzai Bros and the massive chip on thier shoulders).

Lets see what happens.

 

[ای ایران]

The issue is that Washington wants a govt of only its choice excluding Iran, Pakistan which is not possible. And if Afghanistan takes a rational decision of joining hands with Iran, Pakistan, Russia than it doesnt suite US.

Now tell me what option is left with US?

Not really. The Russians have no interest in involving themselves in Afghanistan's administrative set-up, neither does Iran. The only concern of both is that the Taleban and other fanatics do not return to power. Despite American misgivings about Iran, they have been unable to prevent Iran and Afghanistan doing business together. Iran’s relations with post-Taleban Afghanistan are not often reported, but that doesnt mean there arent any. On the contrary, Iran is one of Afghanistan's major donors and is quite active in several Afghan provinces. Therefore, there is no need for Afghanistan to pursue anything further with Iran since Iran already pursues what it wants to with the Afghans.

So in short, Iran does not care to dominate or unduly influence Afghanistan, neither does Russia. But both will oppose the Taleban and any undue influence over Afghan affairs from Pakistan, America or anyone else.

 

[Spring Onion]

Not really. The Russians have no interest in involving themselves in Afghanistan's administrative set-up, neither does Iran. The only concern of both is that the Taleban and other fanatics do not return to power. Despite American misgivings about Iran, they have been unable to prevent Iran and Afghanistan doing business together. Iran’s relations with post-Taleban Afghanistan are not often reported, but that doesnt mean there arent any. On the contrary, Iran is one of Afghanistan's major donors and is quite active in several Afghan provinces. Therefore, there is no need for Afghanistan to pursue anything further with Iran since Iran already pursues what it wants to with the Afghans.

So in short, Iran does not care to dominate or unduly influence Afghanistan, neither does Russia. But both will oppose the Taleban and any undue influence over Afghan affairs from Pakistan, America or anyone else.

If there is all Iranian backed government then its Iranian undue influence in Afghanistan which is not appreciated either by Pashtuns neither Pakistan. So again we are back to the same point.

take all the sides onboard. this is best for Afghanistan as well as its neighbours. If Russia does not wish to involve itself in Afghanistan than why would it worry about Pashtuns returning to power sharing ???

 

[Sudesh Lahri]

Lets see where India fits in the scheme of things here. It would not be a high pitch interference though but inevitably its very potent soft power.

Haqqani is hopeless and useless for any future scene in AFG unless its about yet another bomb blast on foreign embassies..

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Haqqani is hopeless and useless for any future scene in AFG unless its about yet another bomb blast on foreign embassies..

If he can be convinced to end his violent insurgent campaign and join the political process (with whatever compromises are worked out between the GoA, Taliban, US, Pakistan and others) then he is immensely useful in any future scene in Afghanistan.

 

[karan.1970]

^^ Even if he agrees to, it will be a very tough sell to the USA and UN for him to get a say in Afghanistan's future. And atleast at this time, if USA doesnt buy it, it has little hope of succeeding..

 

[Sudesh Lahri]

Agno is just taking the official pak stand here. But as I said haqqu (a terrorist) is a seasoned bas**** and killer of innocents, hopeless in any future scenario.

My advise to pakistan and agno would be that give a share in power to hakimulla mehsud if he gives up gun and enters politics.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

^^ Even if he agrees to, it will be a very tough sell to the USA and UN for him to get a say in Afghanistan's future. And atleast at this time, if USA doesnt buy it, it has little hope of succeeding..

The US has indicated its skepticism over whether Haqqani or the other insurgent leaders are willing to compromise, given their belief that they (Taliban) are not losing. I would interpret that to mean that does not mean the US would not be amenable to reconciliation involving Taliban, if people like Haqqani can be convinced.

The question around US 'acceptance' of reconciliation involving the Taliban leadership will be the conditions from the Taliban. Demands for 'complete NATO withdrawal' are obviously not going to go anywhere.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Agno is just taking the official pak stand here. But as I said haqqu (a terrorist) is a seasoned bas**** and killer of innocents, hopeless in any future scenario.

'Labeling' my positions and arguments is not constructive and adds little value to the discussion. If you disagree with my position/comments, by all means say so and why, and offer alternatives - at least then the readers have something interesting to muse over.

My advise to pakistan and agno would be that give a share in power to hakimulla mehsud if he gives up gun and enters politics.

Hakimullah Mehsud is welcome to enter politics provided he give up the gun and disband his militias, (follow the lead of the religious parties ala the MMA), but the dynamics of the Taliban movement in Pakistan are somewhat different from the Taliban movement in Afghanistan, in that Pakistan is not under foreign occupation and has a functioning government and democracy.

In fact, Pakistan tried this approach of 'sharing power with the Taliban' through the Nizam-e-Adl peace deal in Swat, which collapsed because the Pakistani Taliban illustrated pretty brutally that they were not interested in sharing power, but intent on controlling the entire country through force.

 

[Sudesh Lahri]

'Labeling' my positions and arguments is not constructive and adds little value to the discussion. If you disagree with my position/comments, by all means say so and why, and offer alternatives - at least then the readers have something interesting to muse over.

Alternative would be to kill all form of Taliban from the entire region. Pakistan should stop patronizing the so called "good" taliban. Destroy all opium farms and therby choking the terror funding. Invest in infra, health and education and gain public support.

Makin political deals with oppurtunist thugs is insane.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Alternative would be to kill all form of Taliban from the entire region. Pakistan should stop patronizing the so called "good" taliban. Destroy all opium farms and therby choking the terror funding. Invest in infra, health and education and gain public support.

Makin political deals with oppurtunist thugs is insane.

NATO has far more economic and military resources that Pakistan, why hasn't it 'killed all form of Taliban from the entire region'? And before you raise the canard of 'safe havens in Pakistan', US military and intelligence officials have admitted that the majority of the Taliban insurgency is Afghan based and local (there would be not other way for the insurgency to continue for this long, without a local base and support).

The poppy crops are primarily in Afghanistan, not Pakistan. In fact Pakistan was able to implement various programs and become an almost 100% poppy free country decades ago - with crop substitution programs being implemented very successfully. So, again, your questions need to be directed at NATO and the GoA, not Pakistan, over why the poppy crop and drug and weapons trade in Afghanistan is not being eliminated.

Finally, on 'Taliban funding', aside from drugs, taxes, extortion etc. (all issues that NATO and the GoA have to address on their side) the Taliban are thought to get substantial funding from the Middle East in the form of donations and charities. That again is not something Pakistan has control over, nor does it have the geo-political clout to force the Mid East nations to act to stop this source of funding. NATO member nations do however have that political and economic clout, so again a question that is better directed at NATO instead of Pakistan.

So to recap at the end, why has NATO and the GoA, after almost a decade of occupation in Afghanistan, not implemented any of these fine ideas you articulated? And if they haven't done so by now, why blame Pakistan and the GoA for exploring alternative policies to ending the conflict?

 

[Sudesh Lahri]

NATO has far more economic and military resources that Pakistan, why hasn't it 'killed all form of Taliban from the entire region'? And before you raise the canard of 'safe havens in Pakistan', US military and intelligence officials have admitted that the majority of the Taliban insurgency is Afghan based and local (there would be not other way for the insurgency to continue for this long, without a local base and support).

Safe havens. Definately safe havens. (Pretty smart that you tried to cover up that!! )

As for the highlighted part, why do we keep on listening from US every now and then that pakistan needs to do more in its side?? If its as much rodent free as you claim.

As far as resources are concerned, the NATO only employs its drones out of all its resources in pakistani territory. Give them a free hand in your territory and I am sure taliban would be a history.

PS: I hope you remember that some time back few of your intelligence officials forewarned the talibans that they would be raiding their hideouts and stuffs like that. So its political patronage (for sake of strategic depth and countering India) resulting in saf e havens.

 

[mjnaushad]

Safe havens. Definately safe havens. (Pretty smart that you tried to cover up that!! )

As for the highlighted part, why do we keep on listening from US every now and then that pakistan needs to do more in its side?? If its as much rodent free as you claim.

As far as resources are concerned, the NATO only employs its drones out of all its resources in pakistani territory. Give them a free hand and I am sure taliban would be a history.

Tell me how much of Afghanistan do US control.....