What's new

Taliban can run for president: Afghanistan election chief

A.Rafay

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Apr 25, 2012
Messages
11,400
Reaction score
10
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
KABUL: The Taliban and other insurgent leaders could stand as candidates in Afghanistan’s next presidential election, to be held in April 2014, the country’s top poll official said Wednesday.
President Hamid Karzai, who is serving his second term as leader of the war-torn nation, is constitutionally barred from running in the election and no clear candidate to succeed him has yet emerged.
The vote, scheduled for April 5, 2014, is seen as crucial to Afghan stability after the withdrawal of NATO troops and Fazil Ahmad Manawi, the head of the Independent Election Commission (IEC) insisted his body would act impartially.
“We are even prepared to pave the ground for the armed opposition, be it the Taliban or Hezb-i-Islami, to participate in the election, either as voters or candidates,” Manawi told a news conference.
“There will be no discrimination,” the IEC chief added, defending the body in response to a question about its impartiality.
Hezb-i-Islami is the faction of former prime minister Gulbuddin Hekmatyar which wages an insurgency along with the Taliban against Karzai’s Western-backed government.
Under the IEC timetable, initial results of the election will be announced on April 24 and final results on May 14, with May 28 set aside for any potential run-off vote.
The 2009 poll, in which Karzai was reelected over former foreign minister Abdullah Abdullah, was marred by widespread allegations of fraud, and the credibility of the 2014 vote is seen as key to avoiding an escalation in violence after the NATO withdrawal.
The International Crisis Group think-tank warned this month that the Kabul government could fall apart after NATO troops pull out, particularly if the presidential elections are plagued by fraud.
The Taliban, whose hardline regime was overthrown in 2001 by a US-led invasion for harbouring Osama bin Laden, did not take part in the 2009 election, instead attacking polling stations.
Under the Afghan system, voters elect the president as an individual rather than as a representative of a party, and candidates must submit their nominations by October 6, 2013.
The IEC will then rule on their admissibility and publish a final list of candidates on November 16.

Taliban can run for president: Afghanistan election chief – The Express Tribune
 
.
Ha Ha! Now there's one of two things. Either the Taliban are not terrorists or Afghanistan has officially agreed to allow terrorists run for Country's top office. Wow! Afghans are great in their affairs and still they blame us for this mess they are in.
 
.
If they really enjoy mass support in Afghanistan, as members says in this forum,then this situation provides them with a great opportunity to drop their weapons and fight to assume greater power in a peaceful, responsible and in a democratic way.
 
.
Afgan gov. knows what is coming in after NATO run away, they just want to play safe here but unfortunately things will not be soo smooth for our Afgan brothers, I hope people there live a life of happiness and opportunity like other nations.
 
.
now that is called true defeat of USA in AFGANISTAN, its more shame.
 
. .
US never wanted to fight Talibans, it's actually the other way round.

You're acting like them, I mean the Yankees. It was always 'Taliban and Al Qaeda', lately, from like 2-3 years, they have started to accept their defeat and started talking about peace with Taliban and how Taliban were never a target and all the BS in the world. If Taliban were not the target, who did the US lost around 4000 troops fighting against? Ghosts?
 
.
You're acting like them, I mean the Yankees. It was always 'Taliban and Al Qaeda', lately, from like 2-3 years, they have started to accept their defeat and started talking about peace with Taliban and how Taliban were never a target and all the BS in the world. If Taliban were not the target, who did the US lost around 4000 troops fighting against? Ghosts?

US was against Al Qaeda, and not Taliban. It was Taliban who was dead stubborn against handing over Osama to the US, hence bought the war on them. And US is indeed fighting against Taliban now, but the situation was totally different in the initial phase.
 
.
You're acting like them, I mean the Yankees. It was always 'Taliban and Al Qaeda', lately, from like 2-3 years, they have started to accept their defeat and started talking about peace with Taliban and how Taliban were never a target and all the BS in the world. If Taliban were not the target, who did the US lost around 4000 troops fighting against? Ghosts?

I've seen lots of Taliban given up weapons in return for reconciliation. But remember that theres different members of the Taliban who disagree and are killing each other. So whos actually being defeated here?


Taliban insurgents want reconciliation with Afghan government
 
.
.
I've seen lots of Taliban given up weapons in return for reconciliation. But remember that theres different members of the Taliban who disagree and are killing each other. So whos actually being defeated here?


Taliban insurgents want reconciliation with Afghan government

After a decade of fighting a rug tug army of irregulars, ISAF forces do not even control 50% of Afghanistan, you are now talking about peace with the Taliban, am I missing something here. This is a sign of defeat, mate.
 
.
What happens when they LOOSE????
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
They will kill each and every parliamentarian and take Power Back!!
 
.
US was against Al Qaeda, and not Taliban. It was Taliban who was dead stubborn against handing over Osama to the US, hence bought the war on them. And US is indeed fighting against Taliban now, but the situation was totally different in the initial phase.

Taliban demanded evidence against OBL which US was unable to provide. Even then, go do some research, Mullah Umar agreed to hand over OBL to a Islamic country after Pakistan talked to him. But, bang, in a week, US was bombing Afghanistan. Invading a country to get one man. Wow! that's not understandable, at least to me. US always wanted to 'kill' the Taliban regime, that's it.
 
. .
After a decade of fighting a rug tug army of irregulars, ISAF forces do not even control 50% of Afghanistan, you are now talking about peace with the Taliban, am I missing something here. This is a sign of defeat, mate.

Supposedly the Taliban wants to negotiate with the occupiers am I missing something here? This is a sign of defeat, mate.

After a decade of fighting a rug tug army of irregulars, ISAF forces do not even control 50% of Afghanistan, you are now talking about peace with the Taliban, am I missing something here. This is a sign of defeat, mate.

And besides if they control 50% why they still have to do offensive every after winter from Pakistan?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom