Pakistan trying to broker Afghan deal

[pkd]

Pakistan's role in Afghanistan

Tickets to the endgame
Pakistan wants a say in ending the war, and it knows how to ask
Mar 18th 2010 | ISLAMABAD | From The Economist print edition

A HIGH-LEVEL delegation of Pakistanis is due to sweep into Washington for the restart on March 24th of a “strategic dialogue” with America. The Pakistanis have muscled their way to the table for what looks like a planning session for the endgame in Afghanistan. The recent arrest of the Taliban’s deputy leader, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, and a clutch of his high-ranking comrades, has won them a seat.

The Pakistani team, led by the foreign minister, will include both the army chief and the head of the army’s spy agency, the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). America has upgraded its own representation at the talks, last held in mid-2008, from deputy-secretary to secretary-of-state level. The dialogue is supposed to cover the gamut of bilateral issues, including help for Pakistan’s fragile economy, and even, on its ambitious wish-list, civil nuclear technology.

But the future of Afghanistan is the most pressing topic, and in Pakistan that issue is always controlled by the powerful army and the ISI. Pakistan believes that the Americans are coming to understand its fear of encirclement: a rising India to the east, uncertain relations with Iran to the west and growing Indian influence in Afghanistan to the north-west.

Whereas some see in Pakistan’s arrest of Mr Baradar hints of a strategic shift against its old jihadist proxies, it seems depressingly more likely to be an attempt by the ISI to grab control of the Taliban’s negotiating position. Mr Baradar had been making overtures directly to Hamid Karzai’s government in Kabul—bypassing Pakistan.

According to a senior Pakistani official, the detention of Mr Baradar is a double victory for Pakistan. It has captured a Talib who had become troublesome. And it hoped to win plaudits for cracking down on the insurgency’s leaders, meeting longstanding demands from the NATO-led coalition and Afghan government.

Instead, it finds itself criticised anew, despite dropping the denials it has maintained since 2001 that Afghan Taliban leaders were on its soil, and despite having acted against one of them. By some accounts Mr Karzai is angry that his favourite Talib was locked up. Other regional powers, such as India, Iran and Russia, are said to be alarmed that Pakistan is putting itself in the driving seat in the Afghan negotiations. According to Ahmed Rashid, a veteran observer of Afghanistan, Pakistan’s reinvigorated interference in its neighbour’s affairs risks setting off a regional competition for influence that could push Afghanistan back into the sort of civil war it endured in the 1990s, between proxies backed by outside powers.

Pakistan’s position has evolved. Rather than seeing the ethnic-Pushtun Taliban as its best hope of a friendly government in Kabul, its policymakers would now prefer the Taliban to be part of a broader-based Afghan government. Perhaps it has realised at last that extremists wielding unbridled power from Kabul tend to export disaster across the porous border they share. So Pakistan also needs links with non-Taliban elements in Afghanistan.

America is taking a harder line than most of its partners, Britain included, in seeking to weaken the insurgency, perhaps even inducing some rebel commanders to defect, before considering talks with the Taliban leadership. But as America plans to start drawing down its forces next year, the jostling for a political settlement is well under way. Pakistan’s basic demand is that any future regime in Kabul must be Pakistan-friendly, by which it means not too close to India. The Pakistanis believe they are close to convincing America that they hold the key to stabilising Afghanistan.

Pakistan's role in Afghanistan: Tickets to the endgame | The Economist

 

[Khan007]

Now this is what I call a great diplomacy by the Pakistani Military leadership. General Kayani and Co are the real heroes. The Indian leadership which was so proud of its lobbying is now nowhere to be seen after the London Conference disaster. They are now trying to get out of Afghanistan as now Pakistan has successfully convinced both the US and Karzai to have a bigger role in stabilizing Afghanistan. I wrote a thesis on this issue and my lecturer, who previously thought that India will have a bigger role, is now convinced that Pakistan is the real gainer.
Bravo General Kayani and Co !

 

[GOD OF WAR]

GREAT POST!!

Hopefuly thats what will happen. Pakistan's Diplomatic front has been a total disaster (due to ulterior motives and the absolute inability of the present government). All ur FM has been able to offer is a nice personal wordrobe display and a "beat up-******" facial and body expression.

Finally they are taking out RAW presence in Baluchistanand FATA. Yes, our Foreign Office has managed to clench a seat at the high table but how effectiely they put up thier case is yet to be seen. fear thay will only beg for table scraps and $$$ and avoid the real issues at hand.

Agreed that he US Govt, has started seng things differently but what do u have to say about the Mossad run CIA and SAD? Will they stop promoting the zionist agenda of destabilizing PAkistan? THINK NOT...THAT'S THE REAL END GAME!

Consequenty I view the BO govt too spineless to envoke the NeoCons, therfore WAR is the only option left; 'The mother of all wars"

rgds, god of war...........

 

[ameer219]

Pakistan believes that the Americans are coming to understand its fear of encirclement: a rising India to the east, uncertain relations with Iran to the west and growing Indian influence in Afghanistan to the north-west.

If America understands, then thank god they do!

 

[Ahmad]

the detention of Mr Baradar is a double victory for Pakistan.[/B] It has captured a Talib who had become troublesome. And it hoped to win plaudits for cracking down on the insurgency’s leaders, meeting longstanding demands from the NATO-led coalition and Afghan government.

I think Pakistan can easitly fool the members of this forum, but certainly not americans. they can have a single victory, but not a double one, it simply doesnt add up.

 

[Spring Onion]

I think Pakistan can easitly fool the members of this forum, but certainly not americans. they can have a single victory, but not a double one, it simply doesnt add up.

Neither Americans are becoming fools. Its a mutual interests' game and history has it that the two sides can be better off with cooperating than betraying each other.

Whenever there had been any double game both sides suffered hence at the end of the day the two have to come to equal footing and cooperate in the best interests of their own.

Same is happening now. No one is befooling the other, other than their own people.

 

[Ahmad]

Neither Americans are becoming fools. Its a mutual interests' game and history has it that the two sides can be better off with cooperating than betraying each other.

Whenever there had been any double game both sides suffered hence at the end of the day the two have to come to equal footing and cooperate in the best interests of their own.

Same is happening now. No one is befooling the other, other than their own people.

True, that was my point.

 

[GUNNER]

Pakistan Trying To Broker Afghan Deal

AFP

Pakistan is planning to help broker peace efforts in Afghanistan by acting as a bridge between the Kabul government and powerful Haqqani network, security officials said Wednesday.

Relations between Kabul and Islamabad have been marked by distrust, but there have been growing signs of rapprochement and Afghan President Hamid Karzai in March welcomed an offer from Pakistan to help with peace efforts.

"Pakistan is assisting the Karzai government and acting as a bridge between his administration and the Haqqani network," one security official told AFP on condition of anonymity because he was not authorised to speak to media.

Haqqani network leaders are based in North Waziristan. Created by Afghan warlord Jalaluddin Haqqani and run by his son Sirajuddin the group is one of the toughest US foes in Afghanistan, particularly in the east of the country.

But one senior military official told AFP that while there was perhaps some strategic planning about reaching out to the Haqqanis on behalf of Kabul, no precise contacts had yet been made.
"May be there is some thinking, some planning on a strategic level to broker such a deal, but on ground there is no development yet," the official said.

Pakistan has come under US pressure to press a military campaign in North Waziristan, but commanders have been reluctant to deploy overstretched troops against groups such as the Haqqani which refrain from attacks within Pakistan.

"Karzai has come to understand Pakistan's role in building contacts with different groups for future negotiations," said the Pakistani official.

"Apparently he wants to develop contacts with all groups to kick off an effective Afghan-led process of reconciliation before foreign troops begin to withdraw from Afghanistan in July 2011," the security official said.

Pakistan's most prestigious newspaper, Dawn, also reported on its front page that Pakistan was acting as a bridge between the Haqqani network and Kabul.

The Pakistani government neither confirmed nor denied the press report.

 

[GUNNER]

Pakistan trying to broker Afghan deal

By Baqir Sajjad Syed

Wednesday, 16 Jun, 2010

ISLAMABAD, June 15: Pakistan has dived headlong into the Afghanistan reconciliation process by taking on the task of acting as a bridge between the Haqqani network and the government in Kabul, Dawn has learnt.

“Preliminary contacts have been established with Siraj Haqqani and other leaders of his group through intermediaries in a bid to engineer a rapprochement with the Karzai administration,” a senior security official told Dawn.

The intermediaries, the source claims, have presented a roadmap for a political settlement between Kabul and the Haqqanis.

If the plan is accepted by the two sides, it could bring peace to the war-torn country, claim government officials. The Al Qaeda-linked Haqqani group is considered the most potent warring faction in Afghanistan and is viewed as a serious threat by the Karzai regime and also by the American troops there. “Although the future of the initiative is unclear at the moment, the initial signs are encouraging because the leadership of the militant group appears to be willing (to talk),” the security official told Dawn. However, Pakistani officials are reluctant to discuss the matter in detail and hence few details are available about the talks.

The initiative on the part of the Pakistan government has followed overtures from the Afghanistan government. Analysts agree that there has been a change in the attitude of Afghan President Hamid Karzai towards Pakistan in recent weeks.

Karzai’s hostile statements against Islamabad seem to have stopped; in fact he acknowledged Pakistan’s role in the reconciliation process in his visit to Islamabad in March.

In addition, resignations by Afghanistan intelligence chief Amrullah Saleh and interior minister Hanif Atmar are also likely to help improve relations between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Even though Saleh ostensibly quit because of a security failure, a rocket attack during a jirga held in Kabul in the first week of June, observers point out that his departure from the government fulfils a longstanding demand of Pakistan.

In fact, Saleh has been quite vocal in his criticism of Karzai since his resignation; he has alleged that the president is now looking towards Pakistan, instead of the United States, to bring peace to Afghanistan.

Dawn has learnt that Islamabad’s efforts to mediate between the Haqqani group and Kabul were the result of intense pressure from the United States to launch an offensive in North Waziristan.

However, the military is not interested in opening another front in Fata as it is already dealing with active operations in places such as Orakzai and wants to hold off going into North Waziristan.

At the same time, it is no secret that the military’s reluctance stems from a number of other reasons. For instance, army officials have on more than one occasion explained that the Haqqani group has not been involved in attacks inside Pakistan and hence it is not a direct threat to the state as are other militant groups.

But, more importantly, some analysts feel that elements within the military establishment, which still maintain contacts with the Haqqani duo, feel that the father-son team can yield results for Islamabad in future; if the group becomes a part of the future regime in Afghanistan, it can and will provide Pakistan a say in the country’s affairs.

It is against this backdrop that Pakistani civilian and military officials are pushing for a deal between Karzai and the Haqqani network. The biggest challenge in working out a settlement, however, defence analysts believe, is the US reception of such an arrangement.

But officials tell Dawn that the US attitude towards the Haqqani network will become less intransigent with time. Pakistan is aware that the Americans are keen to begin withdrawal by July 2011 – the deadline set by President Barack Obama -- and in order for this to happen, Kabul will have to start a dialogue with some Taliban groups.

American officials have, on more than one occasion, conceded that at some stage the Taliban can be engaged provided certain conditions are met, such as cutting off ties with Al Qaeda and other foreign terrorist groups.

That this possibility does not exclude the Haqqani group is clear from the statements of officials within the US administration and military. For instance, US Central Command Director of Intelligence Major General Michael Flynn had been quoted by The Atlantic magazine as saying that Jalaluddin Haqqani was “absolutely salvageable”.

Karzai has in the past tried at least twice – in 2007 and 2009 – to woo the Haqqani group but to no avail. It even refused to attend the recent Kabul peace jirga. But since then Pakistani officials claim that the Haqqanis have been persuaded to talk to Karzai. The Haqqani network, which is operationally headed by Jalaluddin Haqqani’s son Sirajuddin, is believed to have sanctuaries in Pakistan’s North Waziristan region close to the Pak-Afghan border and is viewed as one of the most potent warring groups active in Afghanistan.

Though this group operates largely in the south-eastern provinces of Khost, Paktia and Paktika, allied forces have accused it of carrying out attacks in Kabul and Kandahar as well, including the one on the Indian mission in Kabul.

However, while military and foreign office officials are willing to talk about this initiative in off-the-record conversations, the official line from the Foreign Office remains ambiguous: “Pakistan will continue supporting Afghanistan-led efforts towards reintegration and reconciliation.”

 

[SMI]

nice sharing...........
we have very sensitive role in Afghanistan.

 

[fatman17]

COMMENT: The ‘Great Game’ resumes —Zafar Hilaly

The trouble with the role we have chosen to play in Afghanistan is its inherently contradictory nature. An interested party cannot play the role of an honest broker. The conflict of interest is too glaring

Hamid Karzai has finally decided to break with the Northern Alliance partners and return to his Pashtun roots for deliverance from the Taliban and the Americans. This, one feels, is the reason behind his brusque sacking of his national intelligence chief and his interior minister, both belonging to the Northern Alliance.

Pakistan’s response was immediate, namely, to begin brokering deals between those elements of the Taliban who are friendly to us and the government in Kabul. Our sole condition for engaging in this thankless task — of which we claim we are past masters, although our record suggests otherwise — is the elimination of Indian influence. Any enemy of India, however antediluvian, cruel or vicious, is our friend and vice versa. That is the way it has been and that is how it will stay until India and Pakistan manage to inject a degree of sanity into the hatred their respective establishments harbour for each other.

At the moment our Taliban ally is the father and son team of the Haqqanis. In an earlier period it was Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. Whether we will succeed will depend, not so much on retaining Karzai’s support as much as obtaining that of the Americans who, in the final analysis, call the shots in Kabul. Hence, it is inconceivable that our effort should have been undertaken without some encouragement from the US, if not an actual ‘go’ signal from Washington. It is also inconceivable that the Haqqanis and Pakistan did not independently get clearances from Mullah Omar. Without Omar on board, no deal that may emerge is sustainable.

So, once again, the Great Game has begun, or rather, the decades old ‘time out’ has ended. Needless to say, the Northern Alliance, India and Iran will not remain idle, and neither will Russia.

The defunct KGB, avowedly Putin’s first love, had long wanted to recover lost Soviet territories in spirit, if not in fact. And with the Americans preoccupied up to their gills in Afghanistan and Iraq, Russia has indeed made a remarkable comeback, so much so that Russian influence in the Central Asian Republics has never been more pronounced than today. Russia is often the arbiter in their incessant squabbling and even on domestic issues Russian support can often decide the outcome. Hence, with its clout in Central Asia restored, Russia can afford to return to participate in the Great Game.

Nor will India, like British India, let all the blood and treasure it has expended in Afghanistan go waste. A predicament in which Delhi would not have found itself had it resisted its instinct to step in and take advantage of any situation that can add to Pakistan’s discomfiture. As India manoeuvres to maintain its stake in Afghanistan’s future, its relations with Pakistan will commensurately worsen.

It is strange how puny players can alter the course of events by inveigling mighty ones to step in where angels fear to tread. In any case, India hardly needs any prodding. New Delhi is perpetually consumed by one idea and it is, invariably, the wrong one when it comes to Pakistan. That is not to say that our fixation with India is any less unhealthy.

Iran, of course, has kept all its options open. With the Taliban whom it is accused of occasionally arming; with al Qaeda whom it is accused of giving refuge to and as often denies; with Pakistan; with India; with Russia and, of course, with the Northern Alliance of which, at all times, it has remained the patron. Iran has one goal: discomfiture of the US, which the US reciprocates in spades.

As for the Americans, to them the intricacies of the Great Game are novel. Very shortly they will not understand what is going on in Afghanistan. To them it will be the “unspellables killing the unpronounceables”. Their goals are power, predominance, crush rivals, and subdue nature. They are eager, restless, and positive because they are superficial. They have their heart set on the means and seldom think of the end. Secretly they prefer a clear defeat to a messy stalemate because they know that they will not know how to deal with the latter. Iraq is a shining example.

The trouble with the role we have chosen to play in Afghanistan is its inherently contradictory nature. An interested party cannot play the role of an honest broker. The conflict of interest is too glaring. Moreover, the deeper we find ourselves enmeshed in the Afghan snake pit, the more likely we are to come off the worse for all our good intentions. That happened after the Soviet withdrawal. So much so that eventually the Taliban, whom we helped fund, train and lead, ended up telling us to stop interfering. Colonel Imam, for all the help that he rendered the Taliban, is now languishing in some grotto while his erstwhile pupils determine his fate.

What then is the alternative for Pakistan? Actually, a fairly simple one and, in the words of Benazir Bhutto: “To let the dust settle in Afghanistan where it will.” In other words, to let the Americans stew in their own mess till eventually they are driven out by American public opinion aided by murderous Taliban attacks. And, meanwhile, to cleanse our lands of the presence of those who use our territory to wage war on the US, India or anyone else. And, if this means that we will have to take on Haqqani and his ilk then to do so, because such is the contagion that they have spread stretching from the furthermost edge of FATA to Karachi, which eventually, as surely as night follows day, we will have to confront or else succumb. Currying support from murderous villains who pose as our well-wishers is delusory. It is a sign of weakness and not strength and casts doubt on our commitment to democracy and progressive Islam.

Pakistan must look to itself and not others for its security and well-being. The responsibility begins and ends with us. Befriending the likes of the Taliban and indulging their abhorrent mindset suggests that we have a low opinion of ourselves. Importuning the Americans does the same. And that is an impression that no self-respecting nation can afford.

The writer is a former ambassador. He can be reached at charles123it@hotmail.com

 

[indushek]

Excellent article, unbiased and straight to the point with no beating around the bush. If only the two countries could...... well it is impossible. Some miracle is required sure.

 

[hillman32]

He is former foreign office man and he writes well and balanced.

Only thing is he is against Army in the heart of his heart.

 

[fatman17]

He is former foreign office man and he writes well and balanced.

Only thing is he is against Army in the heart of his heart.[/
QUOTE]


how you have come to that conclusion i dont know, but yes he is against the army's 'old' taliban / strategic depth policy.

he has writted some excellent op-eds on the mil-ops and on the CoAS!

 

[M8R]

If Zafar Hilaly was anti Army then Army would not invite him to different Army exercises as a guest.