Afghan Issue: Another Wrong Decision of the US ( Pressurizing Afghan government and cutting US support is the problem, not the solution ) By Hafeez Hassanabadi
Afghan Issue: Another Wrong Decision of the US
Pressurizing Afghan government and cutting US support is the problem, not the solution
By Hafeez Hassanabadi
The United States, with its forces, made the first wrong
step by not putting any condition – that there will no violence against Afghan
forces and civilians, and at the same time the US excluded the Afghan
government from the Taliban-US talks, which severely damaged the importance of
the Kabul government. That’s why any step taken by the United States in this
direction will have negative consequences. The United States has agreed not to
attack the Taliban by excluding the Afghan government. The agreement between
the Taliban and the Italian troops in Afghanistan, which came to light in 2008
is the worst form of agreement, the Italians paid the Taliban a certain amount
of money for not attacking them. In return, they [Taliban and Italian] did not
attack each other.
The secret [agreement] was revealed when the French troops,
seeing the atmosphere of peace there, went and took charge. The Italians kept
their secret deal to themselves and the French were unaware, hence they were
easy targets for the Taliban, and ten of their young men were killed in a
single attack. French officials expressed outrage at the incident, while
Italian officials gave justifications that they didn’t commit any “protection
payment” to anyone. But the French insisted, and Afghan intelligence confirmed
that the Taliban had paid them in Pakistan and Herat. Meanwhile, Taliban
commander Muhammad Ismail also confirmed that the Italians used to pay them for
their lives, which was closed after their departure and they resumed their
operations.
At that time, all the allies, including the United States,
expressed their indignation over it. Now the question arises that if the
agreement behind the allies was wrong, then how can this agreement be right
behind the back of Afghans? The US tells Taliban, “For now, let us go, don’t
kill us, in return not only we will not attack you but also give you many
political and military concessions.” However, why the decision not to attack
Afghans was wrapped up in dozens of conditions?
Due to this decision of the United States, ordinary Afghan
citizens and the Afghan government are currently suffering the worst, which has
directly affected the interests of the oppressed nations fighting for their
survival in the region, including the Baloch, Pashtun and Sindhis. In
comparison, Pakistan despite losing its credibility due to its duplicitous
policies is now in a position where it can easily deceive the United States
once again. This has strengthened the possibility that the United States and
its allies will not be able to bring peace to Afghanistan. However, by
increasing their dependence on Pakistan, they will surely defeat themselves.
Because the United States, despite its 20-years presence in
Afghanistan, has not been able to establish an independent, sovereign and
authoritative election commission whose decisions are acceptable to all, nor
has it been able to establish an institution that can ensure the implementation
of EC’s decisions. As a result of this carelessness and ad hoc based approach,
the results of the Afghan elections were not only disputed at the behest of
Pakistan and Iran but also by the ridiculous announcement of two presidents in
one country to form a government in Kabul made the whole country a joke around
the world.
Regrettably, the burden of US decisions solely had its
effect on the Kabul government, besieged by the Taliban, who did not attack the
Americans and spared them to some extent to provide Pakistan and its allies the
opportunity to intensify their attacks in the entire country. The killing of
afghan forces and common citizens and the damage of such attack and the
pressure of the US promise to release 5,000 Taliban prisoners also befall on
Kabul government. Even though, it [Kabul] had not been taken into confidence in
the past neither have they felt the need to take the trouble to work out a
formula for a complex process.
If Kabul releases all prisoners, including Uzbeks, Chechens,
Turkmens, Uyghurs, Pakistanis, Arabs and those involved in serious crimes,
which are on Taliban’s list, there will be public outrage and violations of the
country’s laws. If they do not release the prisoners, the opposition groups,
including allies, would get the chance to criticise Kabul and to create the
impression that the Kabul government does not want peace and obstructing the
release of Taliban prisoners. Similarly, the punishment of Abdullah Abdullah’s
self-proclamation as Afghanistan’s president was given to the Kabul government
by cutting the US aid which was recognized and congratulated by the whole
world, including the United States.
Now, if Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah again agree for a
coalition government on the basis of mistrust as a result of US pressure, they
may be forced to remain in power for the next five years as they did in the
last five years but, such a government can not be strong and effective, which
at present Afghanistan needs more than ever.
At a time when the Kabul government is under internal and
external pressure, US Ambassador Zalmai Khalilzad’s statement that India should
talk directly to the Taliban to fix its affairs in Afghanistan seems to be
another pressure tactic to force Kabul to turn a blind eye and do whatever it’s
told.
In reality, it is the most illogical and unserious statement
of its kind ever made by a representative of any country. Can Mr. Khalilzad
advise any country in the world, including the United States, that they should
directly talk with terrorist organisations i.e. in Nigeria they should fix
their matters with Boko Haram, in Somali they should engage in talks with
al-Shabab, in Iraq, Syria and Libya they should sit on one table with ISIS and
in India they should directly talk to Hizb-ul-Mujahideen, Jaish-e-Muhammad and
Lashkar-e-Taiba, etc in Kashmir?
Surely, he can’t say such a baseless thing anywhere, so why
is he advising India to bypass the Afghan government and settle matters
directly with the Taliban? This makes him look like a messenger of the Taliban
and ISIS, not a representative of the United States.
If the statement is intended to increase pressure on Kabul
and give the impression that the United States is paving the way in the region
to hand over power to Taliban and Kabul government should accept what is being
said and fulfil the order without any ifs and buts or the process of power
transfer to the Taliban has begun or the process of pleasing the Taliban, as of
September 2018 when the United States made things easier for them, still
continues. It could also mean that the United States has decided to hand over
power to the Taliban and want to provoke a reaction to test its decision? No
matter if any of the above is true or false, but every explanation hints
towards the desperate defeat of the United States and which seems that America
is searching for an escape route, which is disastrous for all, given the
current situation in Afghanistan and the world.
The matter of fact is that the United States should have
stood behind the Kabul government and strengthened it in every way instead of
increasing pressure on it. Instead of weakening the Afghan government, the
pressure should have been applied to Pakistan so that it mends its ways. Mr. Khalilzad,
instead of advising India to settle its matters with an extremist group in the
region, should have recommended [India] to help the freedom-loving Baloch and
Pashtuns who have been trying singlehandedly to regain their lost freedom since
day one. I believe that even today if they are given diplomatic, moral and all
kinds of help from the world, they would become natural allies of the United
States, India and Afghanistan in this global war on terror, which would ease
their difficulties.
Comments
Post a Comment