What's new

US Ambassador Pakistan Visit | Orya Maqbool Jan | Harf e Raaz

ghazi52

PDF THINK TANK: ANALYST
Joined
Mar 21, 2007
Messages
102,921
Reaction score
106
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
US Ambassador Pakistan Visit | Orya Maqbool Jan | Harf e Raaz


 
.
Not sure what is happening behind-the-scenes! We have our share of spin-masters in the media.

American mission was to neutralize Al-Qaeda Network in the region, and this objective is accomplished. Therefore, US pulled much of its forces from Afghanistan in 2014.

The ongoing struggle is in regards to achieving a political endgame in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is experiencing a major rift between progressive elements (US-backed Afghan government) and disgruntled elements (Afghan Taliban) who believe that they were wronged in 2001 and their mandate be restored; both elements draw support from people on the ground but at a heavy cost. My take is that US is not willing to babysit Afghanistan for indefinite period in regards to fixing its internal problems. Therefore, US is having talks with Afghan Taliban in search of a solution which is acceptable to all stakeholders in the region.

FYI: https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-taliban-us-officials-secret-doha-meetings/4655392.html

If this is the way forward, then so be it.

Lasting peace in the region > inflated egos.

US can retain its presence in Afghanistan in diplomatic ways - no need for military bases there.
 
.
Not sure what is happening behind-the-scenes! We have our share of spin-masters in the media.

American mission was to neutralize Al-Qaeda Network in the region, and this objective is accomplished. Therefore, US pulled much of its forces from Afghanistan in 2014.

The ongoing struggle is in regards to achieving a political endgame in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is experiencing a major rift between progressive elements (US-backed Afghan government) and disgruntled elements (Afghan Taliban) who believe that they were wronged in 2001 and their mandate be restored; both elements draw support from people on the ground but at a heavy cost. My take is that US is not willing to babysit Afghanistan for indefinite period in regards to fixing its internal problems. Therefore, US is having talks with Afghan Taliban in search of a solution which is acceptable to all stakeholders in the region.

FYI: https://www.voanews.com/a/russia-taliban-us-officials-secret-doha-meetings/4655392.html

If this is the way forward, then so be it.

Lasting peace in the region > inflated egos.

US can retain its presence in Afghanistan in diplomatic ways - no need for military bases there.
Keep lying pathologically and religiously... but you won't get buyers for your here.
 
.
Keep lying pathologically and religiously... but you won't get buyers for your here.
You speak for all now? Every war have its share of conspiracies which eventually die down along with the conflict.

I am consistent in my views in regards to American mission in Afghanistan; you can go through my posting history and see for yourself.

I have pointed out on a consistent basis that Bush administration was mainly interested in neutralizing Al-Qaeda Network in the region (Afghanistan and Pakistan), and its successor in Obama administration stuck with this policy. This observation is consistent with the fact that US withdrew much of its forces from Afghanistan after Osama Bin Laden was found and executed in 2011, and Al-Qaeda Network - on the whole - was rendered irrelevant with cooperation from Pakistan forces by 2014.

FYI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_of_U.S._troops_from_Afghanistan

Afghan Taliban was a secondary target throughout the course of occupation of Afghanistan (Afghan Taliban have certainly lost thousands of its combatants in its clashes with NATO over the course of years), but for some odd reason, US did not declare Afghan Taliban a terrorist organization. This was a subtle indication that US always left the door open for Afghan Taliban to embrace US-led democratic reforms - few had realized this until rumors of talks began to surface.

FYI:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/taliban-terrorists-white-house/story?id=28588120
https://www.voanews.com/a/afghan-taliban-us-list-foreign-terror-groups/3732453.html

I have also pointed out on a consistent basis that US saw in Afghanistan an ideal test-bed for new types of weapon systems and battlefield doctrines. However, there is a limit to how much US can prolong its stay in Afghanistan because American citizens are burdened with taxes and asking questions. 20 years is sufficient time to appease domestic Military Industrial Complex under the shadow of an overseas conflict.

Nevertheless, US have sufficient experience in warfare to plan an endgame for any conflict in advance, and its endgame for Afghanistan is near. Whatever it is, it will become apparent to all eventually.

Two potential outcomes:-

1. US allow Afghan Taliban to retake Kabul after a deal in which American interests for the region are preserved to large extent.

2. US convince Afghan Taliban to embrace Afghan democratic process. Once again, American interests for the region are preserved to large extent.

US maintain a small force in Afghanistan since 2014 just to make sure that Afghan Taliban have no choice but to comply with American endgame for this conflict. You might have noticed that this American contingent have a defensive posture - it will respond to Afghan Taliban's attempts to take over a city (Kunduz in 2015; Farah in 2018; Ghazni in 2018), but is not taking the fight to Afghan Taliban out in the open. Consequently, negotiations are picking pace.

Of-course, people do not necessarily see this conflict in the same light as I do. However, I grew up watching this conflict over the course of years and have my perspective about it. You are free to disagree with me.
 
Last edited:
. . .
You speak for all now? Every war have its share of conspiracies which eventually die down along with the conflict.

I am consistent in my views in regards to American mission in Afghanistan; you can go through my posting history and see for yourself.

I have pointed out on a consistent basis that Bush administration was mainly interested in neutralizing Al-Qaeda Network in the region (Afghanistan and Pakistan), and its successor in Obama administration stuck with this policy. This observation is consistent with the fact that US withdrew much of its forces from Afghanistan after Osama Bin Laden was found and executed in 2011, and Al-Qaeda Network - on the whole - was rendered irrelevant with cooperation from Pakistan forces by 2014.

FYI: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_of_U.S._troops_from_Afghanistan

Afghan Taliban was a secondary target throughout the course of occupation of Afghanistan (Afghan Taliban have certainly lost thousands of its combatants in its clashes with NATO over the course of years), but for some odd reason, US did not declare Afghan Taliban a terrorist organization. This was a subtle indication that US always left the door open for Afghan Taliban to embrace US-led democratic reforms - few had realized this until rumors of talks began to surface.

FYI:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/taliban-terrorists-white-house/story?id=28588120
https://www.voanews.com/a/afghan-taliban-us-list-foreign-terror-groups/3732453.html

I have also pointed out on a consistent basis that US saw in Afghanistan an ideal test-bed for new types of weapon systems and battlefield doctrines. However, there is a limit to how much US can prolong its stay in Afghanistan because American citizens are burdened with taxes and asking questions. 20 years is sufficient time to appease domestic Military Industrial Complex under the shadow of an overseas conflict.

Nevertheless, US have sufficient experience in warfare to plan an endgame for any conflict in advance, and its endgame for Afghanistan is near. Whatever it is, it will become apparent to all eventually.

Two potential outcomes:-

1. US allow Afghan Taliban to retake Kabul after a deal in which American interests for the region are preserved to large extent.

2. US convince Afghan Taliban to embrace Afghan democratic process. Once again, American interests for the region are preserved to large extent.

US maintain a small force in Afghanistan since 2014 just to make sure that Afghan Taliban have no choice but to comply with American endgame for this conflict. You might have noticed that this American contingent have a defensive posture - it will respond to Afghan Taliban's attempts to take over a city (Kunduz in 2015; Farah in 2018; Ghazni in 2018), but is not taking the fight to Afghan Taliban out in the open. Consequently, negotiations are picking pace.

Of-course, people do not necessarily see this conflict in the same light as I do. However, I grew up watching this conflict over the course of years and have my perspective about it. You are free to disagree with me.
So one trillion USD went down the drain to keep Taliban away from just the big cities? That's quite expensive!
(They're only away from big cities bcz of air support and it is not a matter of pride but a matter of shame for the sole superpower of the world)

Yet thousands of dead soldiers and civilians apart from that amount of money couldn't stop the Taliban from controlling more than half of the country. That is quite a definition of success.

The ANA which has suffered 28000 dead since 2015 is being funded, armed, trained and advised by the US. Sure one can blame the ANA but after all it is the ally of US and are pursuing the same objective.

And now Taliban are being talked to---when Taliban wanted to talk back in 2001/2002, their offer was rejected. That tells quite clearly who is on back foot. The US doesn't really wanted to talk to the Taliban, it is doing so because there is no other choice!

They are only being talked to because they are in a strong position. They control half of the country---big cities or not, their enemies fear them. And now there is ISIS as well.

What a glorious victory for the US indeed.
 
.

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom