gs Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 US-Taliban peace talks: Pakistan's political fortunes set to revive, India concerned NEW DELHI: A prospective Afghan political deal crafted by Kerry and Kayani threatens to sink Karzai. As the Taliban set up an office in Doha to start peace talks with the US dressed up in their old flag and named the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan, in one fell swoop, the gesture has marginalized Hamid Karzai, presaged a future Taliban role in the Afghan government and revived Pakistan's political fortunes with the US. The new situation has profoundly negative implications for India's security, particularly if the Haqqani network is added to the talks as Pakistan desires. India has promised to take up the issue with US secretary of state John Kerry during the strategic dialogue to be held here next week. In Baghdad, foreign minister Salman Khurshid said, "We have from time to time reminded all stakeholders about the red lines that was drawn by the world community and certainly by the participants should not be touched, should not be erased and should not be violated." The "red lines" included a renunciation of Taliban's links with al Qaida and an acceptance of the Afghan constitution. However, its been a couple of years that the US has abandoned all preconditions for talks with the Taliban. India is one of the largest donors to Afghanistan's stabilization, but India has a minimal role in the political chess-game currently under way, which will minimize India's security concerns in the larger transition. Officials in Kabul said, despite repeated assurances to Karzai by the US, the Taliban went ahead to set themselves up almost as a government in exile. Their initial statement said, as an afterthought, that they could even talk to "Afghans", but not the government. With the Taliban also opening talks with Iran as well as with the former Northern Alliance, the US, helped by Pakistan, could be preparing the way to bring the Taliban back into government in Kabul, a decade after they were removed from power by the US invasion. For the present, the Taliban in Doha, with the blessings of the US and Qatar, is more than an Afghan insurgent group. Just by the very fact that they are not in Afghanistan, its very easy for them to scale up their international profile to position themselves as a challenger or alternative Afghan government. Its clear the Taliban are sitting at the table because Pakistan has played a key role in getting them there. While Mullah Omar is believed to have agreed to the talks, the fact is that all the Taliban leaders in Doha have a strong Pakistan connection, with their families all living in Pakistan. According to Pakistani media reports, the deal came about largely because of a personal relationship between Kerry and Kayani. Quoting unnamed Pakistan military officials, a report in Pakistan's Express Tribune said, "The hardliners among the Taliban ranks did not want to give any space to US forces. They had realised that by stalemating international forces they had actually won militarily. It was Pakistan's turn to use its influence even though everyone in Washington had deep doubts about the Taliban showing flexibility. Our pitch to the Taliban was that by becoming part of the dialogue process they could gain international sanction, end conflict peacefully and achieve their goals of foreign forces exiting their country much more swiftly than through perpetual conflict." Karzai angrily suspended security talks with the US, as Washington scrambled to save the Doha talks by getting the Taliban to take down the offending banner. No peace talks started between the US and Taliban on Thursday, and a visit by the Afghan High Peace Council to Qatar on Friday too was cancelled. In Kabul, Karzai called in envoys from Russia and China and India to brief them on his position, even as Kerry tried to pacify him about the talks. While the US takes some time to pacify Karzai, sources said the first deals the US would be looking for includes the release of a US soldier, Bowe Bergdahl, in Taliban custody. On Thursday, Taliban spokesmen said he could be released in return for five Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo Bay. The US has not yet agreed to that though there may be some offer of keeping the prisoners in Bagram rather than Cuba. Second, the US will seek safe passage from the Taliban for their equipment and weapons as they prepare to leave Afghanistan. The Taliban may have entered peace talks but only on Wednesday they carried out an attack for which they even claimed responsibility. It's clear the forthcoming negotiations will be arduous, where the Taliban have the advantage of waiting for their demands to be met, while the US is heading for the exits.
1983-2011 Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 What happened to "We don't negotiate with terrorists", looks like after 12 years US wants to talk:giggle:
Clarke Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 What happened to "We don't negotiate with terrorists"' date=' looks like after 12 years US wants to talk:giggle:[/quote'] For their country, they don't! If you're an Indian, I would think you'd appreciate that.
Clarke Posted June 20, 2013 Posted June 20, 2013 @ topic, about time we stopped being crybabies. If there's a threat (when was there none), deal with it yourself. Its not like Amreeka was gonna hang around in that hell hole till the end of time.
zumi Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 Second, the US will seek safe passage from the Taliban for their equipment and weapons as they prepare to leave Afghanistan. The Taliban may have entered peace talks but only on Wednesday they carried out an attack for which they even claimed responsibility. It's clear the forthcoming negotiations will be arduous, where the Taliban have the advantage of waiting for their demands to be met, while the US is heading for the exits. So this means US have lost another war in Asia after Vietnam humiliation. Rather embarrassing that after more 10 years, they have to negotiate with a rag tag bunch of soldiers for a "safe exit", utter ****-up from US military.
Muloghonto Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 So this means US have lost another war in Asia after Vietnam humiliation. Rather embarrassing that after more 10 years, they have to negotiate with a rag tag bunch of soldiers for a "safe exit", utter ****-up from US military. Were you seriously expecting something different ? The Soviets could not beat them and the soviets shared a border with Afghanistan (ie, orders of magnitude easier logistics). Even the Brits fought them 3 times and won only once (the last one, thankfully) and that is professional British riflemen against Afghan horse riding buffoons. You cannot defeat the Afghans. Not when they know their terrain so well and fight to maximize their terrain advantage while every other Tom, Dick and Harry who's shown up fights in Afghanistan as if its just another war. There is only one thing the Afghans/Talibans cannot counter and that is drone strikes. So i say to Uncle Sam- keep up the dronage!
bulbul Posted June 21, 2013 Posted June 21, 2013 For their country' date=' they don't! If you're an Indian, I would think you'd appreciate that.[/quote'] For him India comes second :giggle:
Asim Posted June 26, 2013 Posted June 26, 2013 U.S. hopes to get Taliban peace talks 'back on track' http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/24/us-afghanistan-taliban-idUSBRE95N11S20130624
ravishingravi Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 XeU_VSuC9rY&feature=youtu.be Hippie Taliban. WE can talk with them. Perhaps even sing.
hhunaeh Posted June 30, 2013 Posted June 30, 2013 William darlymple's colorful essay blaming India pakistan rivalry for the afghan conflict. a deadly triangle, afghanistan, pakistan and India Why US shouldn’t accept Dalrymple’s reading of Afghan ‘history’ US diplomat's Afghanistan peace theory baffles New Delhi There is a feeling of deja-vu in the South Block corridors as visiting US special representative on Af-Pak James Dobbins brought back a frequent narrative among American officials that the mess in Afghanistan is a consequence of Indo-Pakistan rivalry. “Any improvement in Indo-Pak ties will almost automatically improve the Afghanistan situation,” Dobbins told reporters here on Thursday. Dobbins’ remarks would have given led to flashbacks for Indian observers. This is a pet theory in influential circles in Washington and is peddled out at regular intervals -- if only India was willing to go an extra mile by agreeing to resolve the Kashmir imbroglio, Pakistan would not be interested in meddling in Afghanistan’s internal affairs.
Recommended Posts