What's new

Pakistan trying to broker Afghan deal

the basic thing which the taliban want is there should be no foreign troops on there land. One way or another US has to talk to Haqqani. Owing to the weakness of ISAF troops and there helplessness i dont think Haqqani would pull through for a low bargain. If the issue settels without a conflict than its good otherwise if the US opts for yet another millitery operation and fails again things would turn out more ugly. The best thing they could do is to talk with Haqqani , If hes onboard then US might ultimately be able to reach the conclusion of the Afghan mess and go home in peace..!
 
Safe havens. Definately safe havens. (Pretty smart that you tried to cover up that!! :lol:)

As for the highlighted part, why do we keep on listening from US every now and then that pakistan needs to do more in its side?? If its as much rodent free as you claim.
I didn't say that the Pakistan side did not pose issues from the perspective of some Taliban attacking NATO from there, but the fact remains that the majority of the Afghan Taliban insurgency, as admitted by US military officials, is Afghan based, and that is the focus of my comments - why has NATO not been able to take care of at least the insurgency on their side?

As far as resources are concerned, the NATO only employs its drones out of all its resources in pakistani territory. Give them a free hand in your territory and I am sure taliban would be a history.
On the contrary, given that the 'free hand' that NATO has had in Afghanistan has not enabled them to eliminate the Taliban in Afghanistan, they would be incapable of accomplishing something different in FATA. And again, the majority of the Afghan insurgency is Afghan based, not Pakistan based.
PS: I hope you remember that some time back few of your intelligence officials forewarned the talibans that they would be raiding their hideouts and stuffs like that. So its political patronage (for sake of strategic depth and countering India) resulting in saf e havens.
As far as I recall, Petraeus was asked that question in an interview, and responded that there was perhaps one clear instance in which the US believed someone tipped off the insurgents being raided.

One instance years ago does not equate to any sort of institutional policy on the part of the ISI nor is it reflective of all Pakistani ISI and/or PA officials.
 
Safe havens. Definately safe havens. (Pretty smart that you tried to cover up that!! :lol:)

As for the highlighted part, why do we keep on listening from US every now and then that pakistan needs to do more in its side?? If its as much rodent free as you claim.

As far as resources are concerned, the NATO only employs its drones out of all its resources in pakistani territory. Give them a free hand in your territory and I am sure taliban would be a history.

PS: I hope you remember that some time back few of your intelligence officials forewarned the talibans that they would be raiding their hideouts and stuffs like that. So its political patronage (for sake of strategic depth and countering India) resulting in saf e havens.

you are being Naive to think that the major problem lies in Pakistan. There are places in Afghanistan where even Nato troops cant go and there the millitants reighn with compleet impunity.
Secondly ISAF cant even do things right in heilmand and marjah, and you are talking about North Waziristan .. No one has ever been successful there. You are dreadfully mistaken that by simply having a millitery ops there Nato will be successfull. Its a hornet's nest and if u touch that you better be ready to fight till the death and win. Failure there is no option...!

And oh yes, its simply not in the favour of strategik equation to go against the Talibans , if it did than ISAF would have won by now..!
 
Alright, so US went into Afghanistan to get the plotters and sponsors of 9/11.
Now they are trying to broker a deal and get out without accomplishing the goal.

Is it just me or the fact that Al-Qaeda didn't attack USA type conspiracy theory starts to make a lot more sense?



I mean months back 7 CIA officer were killed by a double agent. Looks like militants have breached CIA more than the latter.


Jeez man, I wonder what 2012 would be like for Pakistan and Afghanistan.
 
Alright, so US went into Afghanistan to get the plotters and sponsors of 9/11.
Now they are trying to broker a deal and get out without accomplishing the goal.

Is it just me or the fact that Al-Qaeda didn't attack USA type conspiracy theory starts to make a lot more sense?



I mean months back 7 CIA officer were killed by a double agent. Looks like militants have breached CIA more than the latter.


Jeez man, I wonder what 2012 would be like for Pakistan and Afghanistan.

If afghanistan burns, pakistan will brun too, lets pray that things dont get any worse.
 
Haqqani was described as 'goodness personified' by Charlie Wilson, I think USA will be able to rekindle their old relation with him and and his son (the leader now). Haqqani has visited White House too so I think that an emotional get together will take place.

From 'goodness personified' to deadly CIA attack suspect - Americas, World - The Independent

Haqqani and Haqqani Jr during the Soviet invasion.

pic15.jpg
 
Cries and mourning from across the border continues.

As General Ashfaq Pervez Kayani heads to Kabul on Monday to ratchet up pressure on President Hamid Karzai to share power with extremist Pashtun groups nurtured by the Pakistan Army, India will soon have to demonstrate its relevance to Afghanistan’s rapidly evolving political dynamic.
On his trip to Kabul, Kayani will be accompanied by the chief of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence, Gen Ahmad Shuja Pasha.
The two generals, who dominate the conception and conduct of Pakistan’s national security policy, have been making frequent visits to Kabul in the past couple of months.

Diplomatic observers here say there is no reason for Delhi to press the panic buttons at Kayani’s shuttle diplomacy. But they wonder if India has the political resolve to help its Afghan partners cope with Pakistan’s efforts to change the balance of power within and across Afghanistan.

Sensing the growing confusion in Washington about its political objectives and military methods in Afghanistan, and the popular exhaustion in the West with a war that many see as unwinnable, Kayani has moved quickly to seek the diplomatic upper hand for Pakistan.

Delhi is certainly aware that geography and demography make Pakistan a critical factor in any scheme to stabilise Afghanistan. With an open border that runs 2,500 km and millions of Pashtuns straddling across the Durand Line that notionally divides the territories of Pakistan and Afghanistan, there is no way Delhi can wish away Rawalpindi’s influence in Kabul.

Yet Delhi cannot ignore the long-term negative consequences of Rawalpindi re-establishing its dominance over Kabul through its extremist proxies. Nor can India turn a blind eye to the immediate pressures from Kayani on Karzai to replace key personnel in Kabul’s intelligence, internal security and defence sectors that Rawalpindi does not like.

What India’s Afghan friends and international interlocutors want to know is where Delhi stands in the strategic flux that is beginning to envelop Kabul. Doing nothing, however, may not be an option for Delhi.

While Washington appears to have been surprised by Kayani’s Kabul forays, the various political formations in Afghanistan have begun to debate the implications of a political deal between Kabul and the dissident Pashtun groups under the tutelage of the Pakistan army.

Afghanistan’s ethnic minorities — the Tajiks, Uzbeks, and Hazara — who can’t forget their brutalisation under the Taliban rule during the 1990s, are bound to resist any arrangement that restores Pashtun domination over Kabul.

Kayani’s offer to the United States and NATO at the beginning of this year to facilitate negotiations with the Afghan Taliban and other Pashtun groups as part of a political settlement in Afghanistan seemed no more than a general offer. But there is nothing abstract about the current shuttle diplomacy that Kayani and Pasha have launched in recent weeks between Rawalpindi, where the Pak Army headquarters are located, and Kabul, where Karzai has chosen to strike out on its own amidst growing tensions with US President Barack Obama.

Although Obama has ended the public attack on Karzai and promised to work with the elected leaders in Kabul, Karzai appears to be losing faith in the American ability to decisively defeat the Taliban insurgency that has gathered momentum across Afghanistan.

As Karzai looked to diversify his internal and external support base, Kayani and Pasha have stepped in. For one they offered to broker deals with key elements of the Pashtun opposition, especially the Haqqani network. Led by Sirajuddin Haqqani and his brothers, the network is based in Pakistan’s North Waziristan and has been a long standing partner of both the ISI and the al Qaeda.

Having resisted American pressures all these years to mount a military offensive in North Waziristan, Kayani is now pressing both Kabul and Washington to accept the Haqqani faction as part of the future power structure in Kabul. The Haqqani faction, it may be recalled, was used by the ISI for repeated attacks on Indian targets during the last few years.

Pakistan’s establishment-friendly media is hailing Kayani’s shuttle diplomacy as a “new beginning” for Afghanistan. For Delhi, it is the biggest political challenge in Afghanistan since the Taliban was ousted from Kabul at the end of 2001.

Kayani in Kabul, Delhi up against challenge

C. Raja Mohan
:rolleyes:
 
Kabul dismisses report Karzai met militant leader

KABUL — Afghanistan's government angrily dismissed as baseless on Monday a media report that President Hamid Karzai had met face-to-face with an Al-Qaeda-linked Taliban leader in Kabul.

Karzai's spokesman said the report on Al-Jazeera television on Sunday was part of a conspiracy to undermine a government-initiated peace plan aimed at ending almost nine years of war.

Al-Jazeera said Karzai had met with Sirajuddin Haqqani, who heads the Al-Qaeda-linked Haqqani network, at his palace in the Afghan capital as a prelude to peace talks. Haqqani is regarded as one of the most brutal militant leaders in the troubled region.

"The report is totally baseless. It is a lie and there is no truth in it," Karzai's spokesman Waheed Omar told reporters.

The report "was a source of some concern for us because we believe there is a connected chain of irresponsible rumours about the government of Afghanistan.

"We believe this is part of the same campaign to undermine the peace process and undermine the process that we are going to start very soon," he said, referring to plans by Karzai to hold talks with Taliban.

He said Karzai's government had "pre-conditions for any peace talks" with insurgents.

Militants wishing to join any peace plan must renounce violence, accept the Afghan constitution, and rescind ties with "international terrorist groups," Omar said.

"The government will never compromise those conditions," Omar added.

Al-Jazeera reported that a meeting between Karzai and the militant leader had recently taken place in Kabul mediated by Pakistan's army chief General Ashfaq Kayani and the head of its intelligence services, lieutenant general Ahmad Shuja Pasha.

"There has not been a visit by any senior member of the Taliban, be it Haqqani or be it anybody else," Omar said.

Pakistani military spokesman Major General Athar Abbas also dismissed the report, telling AFP in Islamabad: "These reports are baseless and unfounded."

He said "the chief of army staff was scheduled to go to Kabul to attend a meeting of the Tripartite Commission on Monday, but this meeting was postponed."

The Tripartite Commission is composed of senior military representatives from Afghanistan, Pakistan and the coalition forces in Afghanistan. It holds regular meetings alternately in Kabul and Islamabad.

Karzai would soon order the creation of a new body, called the High Council for Peace, to work on reconciling Taliban and other militants, Omar said.

Since being toppled from government in a US-led invasion in 2001, remnants of the Taliban have waged an increasingly violent insurgency.

Karzai has been trying to convince the rebels to give up fighting his administration in return for amnesty.

The United States and NATO, which prop up Karzai's administration, have 140,000 troops in the country to fight the insurgency, and have so far this year lost more than 300 soldiers as the war intensifies.

Haqqani is believed to be based in the Pakistani tribal region of North Waziristan, which has seen a surge in US drone attacks recently.

AFP: Kabul dismisses report Karzai met militant leader
 
Obama calls Pakistan’s Afghan settlement efforts ‘useful’

NEW YORK, June 28 (APP): US President Barack Obama has described as “useful step” the move by Pakistan to promote a political settlement in war-torn Afghanistan, but appeared to suggest caution at the early stage of the evolving negotiations process. “I think it’s too early to tell.I think we have to view these efforts with skepticism but also with openness,” the president said while responding to questions about the Afghan peace deal at a press conference marking the end of the G-20 summit in Toronto, Canada.

According to the New York Times, the US president avoided any direct comment on whether the Haqqani network, the Taliban group reportedly proposed by Pakistan as part of a power-sharing deal, could become part of Afghanistan’s future leadership.
But, he said, that “conversations between the Afghan government and the Pakistani government, building trust between those two governments, are a useful step”.Obama also said a political solution to the conflict was necessary and suggested elements of the Taliban insurgency could be part of negotiations.
He noted that as the Afghanistan war approached its 10th anniversary, it was the longest foreign war in American history, and that ‘ultimately as was true in Iraq, so will be true in Afghanistan, we will have to have a political solution.”As for Pakistan’s effort to broker talks, Obama added: “I think it’s too early to tell.
I think we have to view these efforts with skepticism but also with openness. The Taliban is a blend of hard-core ideologues, tribal leaders, kids that basically sign up because it’s the best job available to them. Not all of them are going to be thinking the same way about the Afghan government, about the future of Afghanistan.
And so were going to have to sort through how these talks take place.
“The comments Sunday were the administration’s first public response to a report of Pakistan’s deal-brokering efforts last week in The New York Times.

Associated Press Of Pakistan ( Pakistan's Premier NEWS Agency ) - Obama calls Pakistan’s Afghan settlement efforts ‘useful’
 
If there is all Iranian backed government then its Iranian undue influence in Afghanistan which is not appreciated either by Pashtuns neither Pakistan. So again we are back to the same point.

take all the sides onboard. this is best for Afghanistan as well as its neighbours. If Russia does not wish to involve itself in Afghanistan than why would it worry about Pashtuns returning to power sharing ???

Iran and Russia are opposed to the Taleban, not to Pashtuns. Please do not presume that either Russia or Iran shares the same myopic view of Afghanistan and its ethnic balance that many in Pakistan may do. And neither should you presume that Pashtuns as a whole are generally Taleban supporters. Iran and Russia have no hostility or opposition to Afghan-Pashtuns, hence the cordial and constructive relations Hamid Karzai has had with Iran for a number of years now and the refuge that Iran had once given to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.
 
Pakistan key to Afghan reconciliation: Petraeus
By Anwar Iqbal
Wednesday, 30 Jun, 2010

gen.jpg



WASHINGTON: Pakistan’s involvement in a reconciliation agreement in Afghanistan is essential and the United States needs to further this developing partnership between the two neighbouring countries, Gen David Petraeus told his confirmation hearing on Tuesday.

But the new US commander for Afghanistan also told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Afghan President Hamid Karzai had denied reports that he recently met a top leader of anti-Kabul network, Sirajuddin Haqqani.

“Pakistani involvement in some form of reconciliation agreement, I think that that is essential,” Gen Petraeus told the committee’s chairman Senator Carl Levin.

Senator Levin wanted the general to comment on recent media reports that Pakistani officials had approached the Karzai government with a proposal that includes delivering the Haqqani network, which US believes runs a major part of the insurgency in Afghanistan and is an ally of Al Qaeda, into a power-sharing arrangement.

“Clearly, we want to forge a partnership or further the partnership that has been developing between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Those countries are always going to be neighbours. And helping them develop a constructive relationship would be an important contribution,” the general said.

But he also warned not to expect these recent contacts between Pakistan and Afghanistan to lead to an immediate reconciliation between the Afghan government and the Taliban insurgents.

“Now, whether that is possible, such an agreement, I think is going to depend on a number of factors that will play out over the course of the summer, including creating a sense among the Taliban that they are going to get hammered in the field and perhaps should look at some options,” said the general.

On Sunday, both President Barack Obama and CIA Director Leon Panetta also expressed scepticism about the likelihood that Taliban leaders would accept a proposal for reconciliation.

But President Obama also noted that the attempt to draw Afghanistan and Pakistan into a closer partnership was a useful step.

When the senator asked Gen Petraeus if he knew about a reported meeting between President Karzai and Sirajuddin Haqqani, Gen Petraeus said Mr Karzai denied meeting any leader of the Haqqani Network.

“In talking to President Karzai in the vehicle on the way over here, he assured me that he has not met a Haqqani group leader, by the way in recent days or, I think, at any time,” the general said.

On Saturday, Al Jazeera reported that President Karzai recently met Mr Haqqani to discuss a power-sharing agreement. The meeting was reportedly orchestrated by Pakistani intelligence and army officials, who want the Haqqani Network to be included in a new set-up in Afghanistan.

Dawn, however, reported on June 15 that Pakistani officials were indeed trying to broker a deal between the Afghan government and the Haqqanis, although the sources who spoke to Dawn did not confirm a meeting between President Karzai and Mr Haqqani.

US intelligence officials who spoke to the media noted that President Karzai would have little incentive to admit that such a meeting took place, if in fact it did. But they also cast doubt on the Al Jazeera report.

These officials, however, do not dispute press reports and say that the Pakistanis are attempting to broker a deal between the Haqqanis and the Afghan government. Instead, they disputed the notion that Mr Karzai could have had a face-to-face meeting with Mr Haqqani. One senior intelligence official pointed to Mr Karzai’s heavy American security detail as an obstacle to such a meeting.

Gen Petraeus noted that in recent past lower and mid-level Taliban leaders had indeed sought to reintegrate with the Afghan government and there had been “more in recent days, small numbers here and there”.

The general said that the reintegration decree that President Karzai approved on Tuesday would help codify this process.
“But whether or not very senior leaders can meet the very clear conditions that the Afghan government has laid down for reconciliation, I think, is somewhat in question. So in that regard, I agree with Director Panetta,” he said.

When Senator John McCain, the ranking Republican on the committee, asked Mr Petraeus if he was concerned that the ISI continued to work with the Haqqani and other Taliban groups, the general said it was difficult to give a categorical answer to this question.

“What we have to always figure out with Pakistan is: are they working with the Taliban to support the Taliban or to recruit sources in the Taliban? And that’s the difficulty, frankly, in trying to assess what the ISI is doing in some of their activities in Fata, in contacts with the Haqqani network, or the Afghan Taliban,” he said.

“There are no questions about the longstanding lengths. Let’s remember that we funded the ISI to build these organisations when they were the Mujahideen and helping to expel the Soviets from Afghanistan,” he added.

“And so certainly, residual links would not be a surprise. The question is what the character of those links is and what the activities are behind them.”

DAWN.COM | Front Page | Pakistan key to Afghan reconciliation: Petraeus
 
The punctured the bubble on the big story about Islamabad and the so called Haaqani Network. The CIA chief said, he knew of Pakistan’s efforts.

“Obviously there are discussions going on between Afghan officials and Pakistani officials, and we certainly want to see ways in which Pakistan can be supportive of this broader process,” said the department’s spokesman Phillip J. Crowley. (WP report)

However the big story of the week is based out of Delhi. Apparently Bharat now wants to talk to Pakistan about Afghanistan. This is huge development because Bharat had refused to do this in the past. Recognizing that all roads to Kabul lead through Islamabad, Delhi is now trying to find a way back into Kabul.
WASHINGTON: CIA Director Leon Panetta said on Sunday he was aware of Pakistan’s efforts to help negotiate a deal between the Haqqani network and the Afghan government but did not see a real desire among the militants to seek reconciliation.
Earlier in the day, Al Jazeera television reported that Afghan President Hamid Karzai had held face-to-face talks with Sirajuddin Haqqani, leader of a major anti-government faction.

But official sources told Dawn in Islamabad on Sunday that there had been no meeting between President Karzai and Mr Haqqani. The sources, however, said that Army Chief Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani would visit Kabul on Monday.

Dawn reported on June 15 that Pakistan had dived headlong into the Afghanistan reconciliation process by taking on the task of acting as a bridge between the Haqqani network and the government in Kabul.

Dawn also reported that Islamabad had presented to Kabul a roadmap for a political settlement between the Karzai government and the Haqqanis.

At the weekend, the US State Department had said that Afghanistan and Pakistan were holding direct talks with the Taliban insurgents, adding that Washington wanted to see Pakistan play a supportive role in this broader process.
“Obviously there are discussions going on between Afghan officials and Pakistani officials, and we certainly want to see ways in which Pakistan can be supportive of this broader process,” said the department’s spokesman Phillip J. Crowley. Earlier this month, India also indicated that it was willing to discuss Afghanistan with Islamabad, an option New Delhi had previously rejected.

In an interview to ABC ‘This Week’ talks show on Sunday, the CIA chief said he was aware of reports that Pakistan was helping the Afghan government to negotiate a deal with the militants but had not seen any ‘real interest’ among the insurgents for reconciliation. The militants, he said, would not seek reconciliation until they realised they were going to lose the war.

“I read all the same stories, we get intelligence along those lines, but the bottom line is that we really have not seen any firm intelligence that there’s a real interest among the Taliban, the militant allies of Al Qaeda, Al Qaeda itself, the Haqqanis, TTP, other militant groups,” said the CIA chief when asked to comment on these reports.

“We have seen no evidence that they are truly interested in reconciliation, where they would surrender their arms, where they would denounce Al Qaeda, where they would really try to become part of that society. We’ve seen no evidence of that.”

Mr Panetta said the militants would only seek reconciliation when they feared losing the war. “Very frankly, my view is that with regard to reconciliation, unless they’re convinced that the United States is going to win and that they’re going to be defeated, I think it’s very difficult to proceed with a reconciliation that’s going to be meaningful,” he said.

But Al Jazeera insisted that the Karzai-Haqqani meeting did take place and that Pakistan’s army and ISI chiefs accompanied Mr Haqqani to the meeting with the Afghan president.

The television also reported that President Karzai’s office had denied that any such meeting and so had Major General Athar Abbas, the Pakistani army spokesman.

Earlier this week, The New York Times reported that Pakistani officials had told Afghan officials they could deliver the Haqqani network into a power- sharing arrangement with them. Afghan officials told NYT that the Pakistanis were pushing various other proxies with Gen Kayani personally offering to broker a deal with the Taliban leadership.

Al Jazeera, however, not only insisted that its report was correct but also observed that reports about Mr Karzai’s meeting with Mr Haqqani had fuelled increased speculation in Kabul that Pakistan was trying to strike a deal in Afghanistan that would safeguard its interests there.

The report also referred to the resignation of two hard-core opponents of the Taliban: Amrullah Saleh, the head of the Afghan intelligence, and Hanif Atmar, the interior minister, earlier this month.

Al Jazeera indicated that the resignations might be linked to Mr Karzai’s interest in seeking a deal with militants like Mr Haqqani.

Hekmat Karzai, director of the Kabul-based Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies, told Al Jazeera he believed that only a pragmatic leader who understood the realities of Afghanistan and the region would pursue such talks.

“The fact (is) that regional players support is needed, particularly Pakistan,” he said.“Without a doubt Amrullah Saleh was not happy with Pakistani politics, and Pakistan considered him an obstacle in the way of them gaining a foothold in Afghanistan,” Ahmed Saeedi, a political analyst in Kabul, told Al Jazeera.

“The Pakistanis have always said if you want peace you have to go through us.”
 
Another rupee news crap from moin ansari....:frown:

post the link please...
 
Pakistan will definitely have most important role in Afghanistan after US.
but it is also true that any country could take intrest in any other country if ther ar business oppurtunity in offering
ANd thats what India is doing
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom