Omar1984
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2008
- Messages
- 12,296
- Reaction score
- 0
LONDON, Feb 2: Former UN High Representative for Bosnia Paddy Ashdown has advised his old friend Richard Holbrooke, former special envoy of President Clinton to Bosnia and now the special envoy of President Obama to Afghanistan and Pakistan to get Iran engaged in Afghanistan, as according to him, this could pave the way for Islamic countries, rather than the West, to help Pakistan to regain control of its lawless borders where Al Qaeda and the Taliban have their sanctuaries.
In an open letter to Mr Holbrooke published in the Times on Monday, Lord Ashdown further advised his friend to also involve China in his efforts to bring peace to Afghanistan as in his opinion China would play a part, for it has its own reasons for fearing Islamic jihadists.
Maybe this could even open the way for a broader US-China strategic relationship that would benefit us all as the world moves deeper and deeper into instability.
The letter just the man to bang the heads together in Kabul has also asked Mr Holbrooke not to rule out the possibility of talking to Taliban.
Mr Ashdown has also advised Mr Holbrooke to focus more on what he called the political battle which he thought the Nato and its allies were losing in Afghanistan.
Its not the military battle we are losing its the political one, Mr Ashdown warned and said that the international community has failed to get its act together on a clear plan that is pursued through unity and speaking with a single voice.
The British think Afghanistan is Helmand, the Canadians think its Kandahar, the Dutch think its Uruzgan, the Germans think its the Panjshir valley and the US thinks its chasing Osama bin Laden.
Everyone sees Afghanistan through their own national prism. Far too much aid comes with a metaphorical national barcode to ensure that national money is spent, often through national profit-making companies, on their own national projects, rather than through the Afghan government on our jointly agreed priorities (here its USAID that is most guilty).
This is a sure way to defeat. It also means that our young soldiers are winning battles, often at considerable cost, while their political masters are wasting their sacrifices by failing to get their act together to win the peace. Thats the real scandal of Afghanistan. Someone needs to bash heads together out there and if anyone can, you can.
You will have to decide, too, whether to talk to the Taliban. In the end it will probably be necessary, provided they will put aside the gun in favour of the ballot box. But they are in no mood for talking now, because they think they are winning. The first step is get them on the back foot, militarily which is where the surge is so important. They must be convinced we have the force, the will and the staying power to beat them, before they will come to the table.
http://www.dawn.com/2009/02/03/top16.htm
In an open letter to Mr Holbrooke published in the Times on Monday, Lord Ashdown further advised his friend to also involve China in his efforts to bring peace to Afghanistan as in his opinion China would play a part, for it has its own reasons for fearing Islamic jihadists.
Maybe this could even open the way for a broader US-China strategic relationship that would benefit us all as the world moves deeper and deeper into instability.
The letter just the man to bang the heads together in Kabul has also asked Mr Holbrooke not to rule out the possibility of talking to Taliban.
Mr Ashdown has also advised Mr Holbrooke to focus more on what he called the political battle which he thought the Nato and its allies were losing in Afghanistan.
Its not the military battle we are losing its the political one, Mr Ashdown warned and said that the international community has failed to get its act together on a clear plan that is pursued through unity and speaking with a single voice.
The British think Afghanistan is Helmand, the Canadians think its Kandahar, the Dutch think its Uruzgan, the Germans think its the Panjshir valley and the US thinks its chasing Osama bin Laden.
Everyone sees Afghanistan through their own national prism. Far too much aid comes with a metaphorical national barcode to ensure that national money is spent, often through national profit-making companies, on their own national projects, rather than through the Afghan government on our jointly agreed priorities (here its USAID that is most guilty).
This is a sure way to defeat. It also means that our young soldiers are winning battles, often at considerable cost, while their political masters are wasting their sacrifices by failing to get their act together to win the peace. Thats the real scandal of Afghanistan. Someone needs to bash heads together out there and if anyone can, you can.
You will have to decide, too, whether to talk to the Taliban. In the end it will probably be necessary, provided they will put aside the gun in favour of the ballot box. But they are in no mood for talking now, because they think they are winning. The first step is get them on the back foot, militarily which is where the surge is so important. They must be convinced we have the force, the will and the staying power to beat them, before they will come to the table.
http://www.dawn.com/2009/02/03/top16.htm
