The United States invaded
Afghanistan under United Nation’s mandate. At the time of invasion it seemed
that the US would accomplish its mission by rooting out the Taliban and then
establishing a fully functional democracy in Afghanistan. However, the current
situation of law and order is worse than ever before.
Insecurity, criminal market economy, unemployment, emergent insurgency, poverty and corruption in Afghanistan are all matters of great concern for everyone Taliban are now more powerful than ever in Provinces of Parwan and Baghlan and it seems that they have now more support bases in Tajak and Uzbak populated areas of Afghanistan. Provinces under Taliban control are more peaceful than others. The Afghan public and even the Afghan Government have reached a conclusion that peace can only prevail if Western troops withdraw from Afghanistan and Taliban are given their due share in running affairs of the State. There are four main actors namely the United States of America, the Afghan Government (dominated by the Northern Alliance), Tehrik-e-Taliban Afghanistan and Pakistan involved in Afghan predicament. All of these actors have no clear-cut policy with regard a peaceful settlement of the crisis. Though all of these actors want to settle the issue through peaceful means, everyone wants to perpetuate their own interests. Pakistan is pursuing a wait and see policy and considers itself indispensable to the prospects of any settlement in the future. Indeed, the recent visit of Salahuddin Rabbani to Pakistan validates Pakistan’s claim. The Afghan Government has also started efforts to reengage the Taliban in negotiations and the recent visit by delegates of the Afghan High Peace Council (HPC) to get Pakistan’s support seems to be an encouraging step taken by the Afghan Government. However, this renewed vigor of Afghanistan in the peace process is out of compulsion, and fear of losing huge foreign investment. It is pertinent to mention here that the leaders and supporters of the Northern Alliance, who have a sufficient representation in the Afghan Government, have made huge investment in Kabul and they simply do not want to lose it in another war with the Taliban. Therefore they will make determined efforts to reach out to all actors for the peaceful settlement of the Afghan imbroglio. Washington still has to chart out a clear plan of action regarding the Afghan crisis; it is confused and still weighing different options. It has to come up with a transitional strategy for Afghanistan that is acceptable to all. Pakistan and Afghanistan do not want an abrupt withdrawal of US troops as they believe it will exponentially multiply Afghanistan's problems. They believe that the abrupt withdrawal may further embolden the Taliban which can become a source of problem for all regional countries in the future. However, the Taliban has made the complete withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan a precondition to the initiation of any dialogue process. The US is under domestic pressure and as a policy of appeasement announced the withdrawal of US troops by 2014. Vice President Joe Biden has also affirmed this decision. However the recent statement of William Burns, the US Deputy Secretary of State is contradictory. According to him US is not leaving in 2014 and its commitment to stability in Afghanistan doesn't end in 201415. He posits that, “It seems to me that there is no chance of rapprochement in the near future because the U.S has taken a very rigid stance on Taliban and Al Qaeda from ab-initio. At least ten years are needed for US to dilute that stance. Therefore, until and unless the US first dilutes its stance it cannot sell the idea of a peaceful settlement of disputes with Taliban to its public or her allies. It thus seems that the US wants to cut a deal with the Afghan Government on the pattern of South Korea and Japan, which will allow the former to station 20,000 to 30,000 troops in Afghanistan. These troops can be involved in various counter terrorism operations and will also give stability to the Afghan Government. However, the Afghan government seems reluctant and drags its feet because complete withdrawal of foreign forces is one of the conditions set by Taliban for engagement in any peace dialogue with the United States or Afghan Government. Policy Options for Islamabad: Challenges and Opportunities: In the wake of US withdrawal, a major challenge for Pakistan comes from the militant groups associated with the Tehrik-eTaliban Pakistan (TTP) and the centrifugal tendencies in Baluchistan. Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan has no single leadership like Tehrik-e-Taliban Afghanistan (TTA), and has been divided into several splinter groups, which occasionally coordinate terror attacks in Pakistan. Most of these groups have rivalries amongst each other, for instance the Mahsud group (Hakimullah Mahsud and Wali-urRehman) has rivalry with Mullah Nazir Group. On the other hand, Hafiz GulBahadar has great reservations against Hakimullah Mahsud and Wali-ur-Rehman who operate in North Waziristan but he does not have such strength to compel them accept his authority. Similarly, three different groups in Khyber agency are fighting against each other. The situation in Orakzai and Parachinar Agencies are no different to the rest of areas where there is hold of TTP. Abdul Wali, the TTP head of Mohmand Agency, has developed serious differences with Tehrik- Taliban Afghanistan. Fazalullah and Faqir Muhammad have both independent groups having bases in Afghanistan. In fact, absence of clear leadership of TTP is a great challenge for authorities in Pakistan, who has to interact with every group separately which makes things more complicated and complex. There are strong indicators that the spillover effects of US withdrawal will negatively influence law and order situation in Pakistan and especially in FATA. Likewise, Pakistan possesses great threat from Fazalullah and Fakir Muhammad. Pakistan claims that they are supported by the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) - India’s premier intelligence agency, and the National Directorate of Security (NDS)- Afghan intelligence agency, despite presence of US and NATO forces. These commanders are openly using Afghanistan soil against the interests of Pakistan. However, it might get hard for these commanders to operate freely from Afghanistan once the US and NATO troops would leave Kabul. Though the US withdrawal from the region will confront Pakistan with a number of challenges, if handled properly they could be converted into opportunities. The US withdrawal might sooth Pakistan's problems vis-à-vis militancy and terrorism. The militants associated with the TTP can slowly and gradually be mainstreamed by the use of a clear-cut reintegration policy. Two factors can play a pivotal role in mainstreaming these non-state actors (NSAs). Firstly, the pretext on which the Taliban are attracting recruits to its folds will diminish i.e., they claim that foreign forces are occupying Afghanistan and they have every right to wage jihad against US and its allies. Secondly, in Pakistan there are religious political parties which could be availed by these militants to promote the latter’s agendas in a peaceful and democratic way. In this regard, the recent extension of political parties Act for FATA is a positive step taken by the government. Earlier, only Jamiat Ulema-e- Islam had an excess and monopoly over the politics in FATA. With the opening of offices of other political parties people of FATA will have more options available to them. This will also help in generating more political activities and de -radicalizing FATA. Islamabad also has to deal with the Baloch separatist movement simultaneously. Pakistan blames India for the insurgency in its province of Baluchistan and believes that India is using Afghan soil against Pakistan’s interests. Similarly, it claims that finances to these separatist movements are provided by India and militants are given refuge in Afghanistan. With the US and West packing up from Afghanistan, it will get next to impossible for India to operate from Afghanistan the way they are currently operating. India might close down most of its consulates in Afghanistan. With the closure of its bases in Afghanistan the insurgency in Baluchistan will die its natural death. The separatist elements will thus find it hard to get training and finances from India with the Afghan Government’s support. Mindful of the worst case scenario, Pakistan has already made the necessary readjustments to its foreign policy. Pakistan has tried to reach out to various regional powers, which were previously antagonists in the situation. It is in the process to build good relations with Russia and is making best to bridge the trust deficit between the two nations and to make up for the former misunderstandings. Pakistan is also reaching out to the Northern Alliance and has diluted her stance on giving proper share to the Pakhtun population, which had previously created doubts in the minds of common Afghanis. Earlier, Pakistan openly demanded share for Pakhtuns, which is not the case now. Today, Tajak and Uzbak elders are more frequently visiting Pakistani embassy in Kabul”. A genuine effort has been in the offing on Pakistan’s part to remove North’s apprehension that Pakistan wants to impose Pakhtuns on them.
Insecurity, criminal market economy, unemployment, emergent insurgency, poverty and corruption in Afghanistan are all matters of great concern for everyone Taliban are now more powerful than ever in Provinces of Parwan and Baghlan and it seems that they have now more support bases in Tajak and Uzbak populated areas of Afghanistan. Provinces under Taliban control are more peaceful than others. The Afghan public and even the Afghan Government have reached a conclusion that peace can only prevail if Western troops withdraw from Afghanistan and Taliban are given their due share in running affairs of the State. There are four main actors namely the United States of America, the Afghan Government (dominated by the Northern Alliance), Tehrik-e-Taliban Afghanistan and Pakistan involved in Afghan predicament. All of these actors have no clear-cut policy with regard a peaceful settlement of the crisis. Though all of these actors want to settle the issue through peaceful means, everyone wants to perpetuate their own interests. Pakistan is pursuing a wait and see policy and considers itself indispensable to the prospects of any settlement in the future. Indeed, the recent visit of Salahuddin Rabbani to Pakistan validates Pakistan’s claim. The Afghan Government has also started efforts to reengage the Taliban in negotiations and the recent visit by delegates of the Afghan High Peace Council (HPC) to get Pakistan’s support seems to be an encouraging step taken by the Afghan Government. However, this renewed vigor of Afghanistan in the peace process is out of compulsion, and fear of losing huge foreign investment. It is pertinent to mention here that the leaders and supporters of the Northern Alliance, who have a sufficient representation in the Afghan Government, have made huge investment in Kabul and they simply do not want to lose it in another war with the Taliban. Therefore they will make determined efforts to reach out to all actors for the peaceful settlement of the Afghan imbroglio. Washington still has to chart out a clear plan of action regarding the Afghan crisis; it is confused and still weighing different options. It has to come up with a transitional strategy for Afghanistan that is acceptable to all. Pakistan and Afghanistan do not want an abrupt withdrawal of US troops as they believe it will exponentially multiply Afghanistan's problems. They believe that the abrupt withdrawal may further embolden the Taliban which can become a source of problem for all regional countries in the future. However, the Taliban has made the complete withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan a precondition to the initiation of any dialogue process. The US is under domestic pressure and as a policy of appeasement announced the withdrawal of US troops by 2014. Vice President Joe Biden has also affirmed this decision. However the recent statement of William Burns, the US Deputy Secretary of State is contradictory. According to him US is not leaving in 2014 and its commitment to stability in Afghanistan doesn't end in 201415. He posits that, “It seems to me that there is no chance of rapprochement in the near future because the U.S has taken a very rigid stance on Taliban and Al Qaeda from ab-initio. At least ten years are needed for US to dilute that stance. Therefore, until and unless the US first dilutes its stance it cannot sell the idea of a peaceful settlement of disputes with Taliban to its public or her allies. It thus seems that the US wants to cut a deal with the Afghan Government on the pattern of South Korea and Japan, which will allow the former to station 20,000 to 30,000 troops in Afghanistan. These troops can be involved in various counter terrorism operations and will also give stability to the Afghan Government. However, the Afghan government seems reluctant and drags its feet because complete withdrawal of foreign forces is one of the conditions set by Taliban for engagement in any peace dialogue with the United States or Afghan Government. Policy Options for Islamabad: Challenges and Opportunities: In the wake of US withdrawal, a major challenge for Pakistan comes from the militant groups associated with the Tehrik-eTaliban Pakistan (TTP) and the centrifugal tendencies in Baluchistan. Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan has no single leadership like Tehrik-e-Taliban Afghanistan (TTA), and has been divided into several splinter groups, which occasionally coordinate terror attacks in Pakistan. Most of these groups have rivalries amongst each other, for instance the Mahsud group (Hakimullah Mahsud and Wali-urRehman) has rivalry with Mullah Nazir Group. On the other hand, Hafiz GulBahadar has great reservations against Hakimullah Mahsud and Wali-ur-Rehman who operate in North Waziristan but he does not have such strength to compel them accept his authority. Similarly, three different groups in Khyber agency are fighting against each other. The situation in Orakzai and Parachinar Agencies are no different to the rest of areas where there is hold of TTP. Abdul Wali, the TTP head of Mohmand Agency, has developed serious differences with Tehrik- Taliban Afghanistan. Fazalullah and Faqir Muhammad have both independent groups having bases in Afghanistan. In fact, absence of clear leadership of TTP is a great challenge for authorities in Pakistan, who has to interact with every group separately which makes things more complicated and complex. There are strong indicators that the spillover effects of US withdrawal will negatively influence law and order situation in Pakistan and especially in FATA. Likewise, Pakistan possesses great threat from Fazalullah and Fakir Muhammad. Pakistan claims that they are supported by the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) - India’s premier intelligence agency, and the National Directorate of Security (NDS)- Afghan intelligence agency, despite presence of US and NATO forces. These commanders are openly using Afghanistan soil against the interests of Pakistan. However, it might get hard for these commanders to operate freely from Afghanistan once the US and NATO troops would leave Kabul. Though the US withdrawal from the region will confront Pakistan with a number of challenges, if handled properly they could be converted into opportunities. The US withdrawal might sooth Pakistan's problems vis-à-vis militancy and terrorism. The militants associated with the TTP can slowly and gradually be mainstreamed by the use of a clear-cut reintegration policy. Two factors can play a pivotal role in mainstreaming these non-state actors (NSAs). Firstly, the pretext on which the Taliban are attracting recruits to its folds will diminish i.e., they claim that foreign forces are occupying Afghanistan and they have every right to wage jihad against US and its allies. Secondly, in Pakistan there are religious political parties which could be availed by these militants to promote the latter’s agendas in a peaceful and democratic way. In this regard, the recent extension of political parties Act for FATA is a positive step taken by the government. Earlier, only Jamiat Ulema-e- Islam had an excess and monopoly over the politics in FATA. With the opening of offices of other political parties people of FATA will have more options available to them. This will also help in generating more political activities and de -radicalizing FATA. Islamabad also has to deal with the Baloch separatist movement simultaneously. Pakistan blames India for the insurgency in its province of Baluchistan and believes that India is using Afghan soil against Pakistan’s interests. Similarly, it claims that finances to these separatist movements are provided by India and militants are given refuge in Afghanistan. With the US and West packing up from Afghanistan, it will get next to impossible for India to operate from Afghanistan the way they are currently operating. India might close down most of its consulates in Afghanistan. With the closure of its bases in Afghanistan the insurgency in Baluchistan will die its natural death. The separatist elements will thus find it hard to get training and finances from India with the Afghan Government’s support. Mindful of the worst case scenario, Pakistan has already made the necessary readjustments to its foreign policy. Pakistan has tried to reach out to various regional powers, which were previously antagonists in the situation. It is in the process to build good relations with Russia and is making best to bridge the trust deficit between the two nations and to make up for the former misunderstandings. Pakistan is also reaching out to the Northern Alliance and has diluted her stance on giving proper share to the Pakhtun population, which had previously created doubts in the minds of common Afghanis. Earlier, Pakistan openly demanded share for Pakhtuns, which is not the case now. Today, Tajak and Uzbak elders are more frequently visiting Pakistani embassy in Kabul”. A genuine effort has been in the offing on Pakistan’s part to remove North’s apprehension that Pakistan wants to impose Pakhtuns on them.
1 comment:
that was definite that they would withdrawal from there
Post a Comment