What's new

Clashing visions weigh on US drive for Taliban talks

Devil Soul

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Jun 28, 2010
Messages
22,931
Reaction score
45
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
Clashing visions weigh on US drive for Taliban talks
REUTERS
Published at 2013-06-28 14:24:22
ISLAMABAD: As the United States makes a fresh attempt to start talks with the Afghan Taliban, competing visions in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan over what an eventual peace process might look like have emerged as one of the biggest hurdles.

Washington's hopes of negotiating with the insurgents to stabilise Afghanistan before most foreign troops leave by the end of 2014 had appeared to achieve a breakthrough last week when the Afghan Taliban opened an office in the Qatari capital Doha.

But the process was plunged into uncertainty when Afghan President Hamid Karzai refused to send negotiators to the Gulf state after the Taliban raised a flag at its new premises, infuriating the Afghan government and prompting frantic attempts by US officials to resuscitate the planned dialogue.

While global attention has focused on the debacle in Doha, tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan - whose cooperation will be vital to any deal - have made the prospects of meaningful progress towards a settlement even less sure.

Since the Doha office was opened, Pakistani officials have made a series of comments suggesting that Karzai, who is due to step down at elections in April, 2014, is already irrelevant to what should be wide-ranging talks on Afghanistan's future. “His expiry date has come,” said a Pakistani government official, who is close to Pakistan's discussions with the US and other allies on Afghanistan. “The principle is a fundamental overhaul.”

Pakistan is in a position to influence the talks because its security forces backed the Taliban's rise to power in Afghanistan in the mid-1990s and continue to serve as gatekeepers to insurgent commanders living on its territory.

While the government official's view does not reflect the public position of Pakistan, which has pledged to support the Afghan government's reconciliation drive on the basis of the existing Afghan constitution, it does provide a window into a strand of thinking within Islamabad's ruling establishment.

However, it is unusual for senior officials in the government to discuss Afghan policy in detail. The view that Karzai is a hindrance to talks was reflected in comments made to Reuters by three senior Pakistani officials occupying key positions in the foreign ministry and the army, which holds sway over relations with Afghanistan, in recent months. Karzai was installed as president after US-backed troops overthrew the Taliban government in 2001.

“Right now, Karzai is the biggest impediment to the peace process,” a top Pakistani Foreign Ministry official told Reuters in March. “In trying to look like a saviour, he is taking Afghanistan straight to hell.”

The thrust of Pakistan's criticism is that Karzai is too erratic to handle negotiations. Pakistani officials also argue that the most important protagonists for any peace process are the United States, the Taliban, and the Northern Alliance, a group of Afghan ex-warlords who fought the Taliban in the 1990s and now wield significant influence in Kabul.

“Hostile and evil”

Afghan officials and commentators suspect that Pakistan's frustration with Karzai stems from its desire to ensure that any future government in Kabul overturns the Afghan president's policy of cultivating warmer ties with India, Pakistan's nuclear rival. They also maintain that Pakistan has backed the Taliban through the 12 years of war against US-backed troops.

“We pleaded with Pakistan for peace, but Pakistan's policy and intentions towards Afghanistan have always been hostile and evil,” said Bashir Bezhan, a Kabul-based political analyst.

Washington praised Pakistan last week for helping to nudge insurgents towards the negotiating table in Doha, a contrast with acrimonious exchanges in previous years over allegations that Pakistan continued to covertly support the Taliban.

Against this backdrop of suspicions of Pakistan, an attack by the Taliban on the presidential palace in Kabul on Tuesday cast fresh doubt on whether Karzai would be prepared to participate in peace talks.

US President Barack Obama later called Karzai and the two agreed on the need for an Afghan-led peace process and to support the presence of the Taliban office in Doha, the White House said. But no date has been set for any negotiations.

Pakistan foreign ministry spokesman Aizaz Chaudhry said Islamabad remained committed to supporting reconciliation in Afghanistan. “The official position of the government is to support an all inclusive, inter-Afghan dialogue,” he said.

Bonn two

The Pakistani government official who is close to Islamabad's thinking on Afghanistan, said one possible way forward at Doha would be far-reaching akin to the conference held in the German city of Bonn in December, 2001, which laid the foundations of Karzai's administration.

The key players would be the United States, the Taliban and members of the Northern Alliance, who Pakistan has been carefully courting for more than a year - but not Karzai. "It would be in a real sense a Bonn Two," the government official said. "Pakistan will have a ringside view...In the ring you'll have Americans and Afghans."

Such a view cuts a complete contrast with the position of Karzai's government, which believes the insurgents must lay down their arms, accept the constitution and find a role within the new Afghanistan that grew from the ashes of the Taliban theocracy toppled by US-led forces in 2001.

The "Bonn two" proposal may, however, just be wishful thinking within Pakistan's military, which might see such a conference as a chance to promote its preferred factions.

There would also seem to be little appetite among Karzai's Western allies to go back to the drawing board in Afghanistan at a time when NATO countries are seeking to scale back their engagement.

The Afghan government declined to comment on any "Bonn Two" kind of meeting. Washington has repeatedly said the Taliban must accept the Afghan constitution and US officials said they were unaware of any proposal for a new Bonn-style conference. For now, the United States is sticking to its plan to coax Karzai's government and the Taliban together in Qatar, even as the tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan remain unresolved.

"In the Pakistani military's eyes, Karzai is a lame duck, irrelevant," said Cyril Almeida, a columnist with Dawn newspaper. "The problem is that his is the only Afghan government there is."
 
.
Super interesting article - notice that article is about Pakistan and Afghanistan's antagonistic view of each other - and while you are supposed to focus on this , US and talib interaction goes without much attention -- it's not so much that it's cleaver it's just so arrogant, to imagine that they can insult their readers intelligence in this way
 
.
Super interesting article - notice that article is about Pakistan and Afghanistan's antagonistic view of each other - and while you are supposed to focus on this , US and talib interaction goes without much attention -- it's not so much that it's cleaver it's just so arrogant, to imagine that they can insult their readers intelligence in this way


Pakistanis should not treat "Karazai" as a lone wolf, and lone madman.

He says what he says based on the trends among Afghanistani elite.

These elite right now are dominated by Kabuli Pashtuns (or Northy Pashtuns) and Tajik/Uzbek groups.

These groups will remain in control even if Karazai steps down.

these groups are also smart enough to keep Southern Pashtuns away from power.


So our view should be a bit more nuanced than what the OP says (or at least what I understood).

peace
 
.
Pakistanis should not treat "Karazai" as a lone wolf, and lone madman. He says what he says based on the trends among Afghanistani elite. These elite right now are dominated by Kabuli Pashtuns (or Northy Pashtuns) and Tajik/Uzbek groups. These groups will remain in control even if Karazai steps down. these groups are also smart enough to keep Southern Pashtuns away from power.
So our view should be a bit more nuanced than what the OP says (or at least what I understood).peace

On the contrary, Pakistan should out the man - But why should Pakistan out the man, what has happened for Pakistani officials to make such pronouncements? What is it that karzai and his cabal want?
 
.
Pakistanis should not treat "Karazai" as a lone wolf, and lone madman.

He says what he says based on the trends among Afghanistani elite.

These elite right now are dominated by Kabuli Pashtuns (or Northy Pashtuns) and Tajik/Uzbek groups.

These groups will remain in control even if Karazai steps down.

these groups are also smart enough to keep Southern Pashtuns away from power.


So our view should be a bit more nuanced than what the OP says (or at least what I understood).

peace

What you're saying is true.
The Northerners are those put in these high positions in kabul right after the invasion.
Northern alliance men put down their weapons and showed up in parliament.

But it's more complex then that.
Afghan parliament has both drug lords and war lords in it too, who despise the taliban, because during taliban rule, the talibs bought the opium trade to a close (only good thing they did).

So it seems, fighting will rage on even after the foreign troops leave.
 
.
On the contrary, Pakistan should out the man - But why should Pakistan out the man, what has happened for Pakistani officials to make such pronouncements? What is it that karzai and his cabal want?

All right since no one wants to touch this - I will elaborate:

Some readers think the problem began with the Doha office, the problem arose much earlier while the arrangements were being worked out, Mr. karzai once again, angry and reactionary decide to cry on shoulders in Dehli, finding little succor but much sympathy - so what prompted it? Mullah Baradar had been talking to the American before and during and after his cutody in Pakistan, and while Mr. Karzai held hopes that he can make the deal, the Americans had different ideas -- The Americans need to put A'stan to bed, in a serious manner, they realize that Bonn was flawed and the opportunity could be created to rectify.

So what does karzai want? he wants his associates to have a future and he wants one for himself -- since he can't constitutionally run for another term, his options are to put in place someone who can be counted on (another less talented bro), or amend the constitution, Pakistan's substantially improved relations with the Northern alliance deprive him of political space, that is to say it makes the job of amending the constitution very difficult if not impossible. To make matters worse the strong dislike Mr. Karzai engendered in Mr. Kayani found expression is Pakistani foreign affairs ministry,. that is to say, they publicly said that they do not see mr. Karzai worth their time.

To be relevant and secure a future for his associates Mr. karzai needs the talib to be negotiating with him and to validate him, the talib have been negotiating with everyone else but not Karzai.
 
.

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom