By: Kayhan Int’l
Does the US really intends to end its 18-year occupation of Afghanistan – as its representatives to the Doha talks claim after signing a ‘dubious’ peace deal with representatives of the Taliban?
Well, this is a million-dollar question doing the rounds in the regional political circles, given the dishonesty of Washington in honouring its own commitments and the deep distrust the die-hard militia harbours towards the US, whose attempts to dominate the whole of Afghanistan it has successfully thwarted since 2001, despite being subjected to some of the most brutal bombings of the recent decades.
The details of the accord signed Saturday last in the Qatari capital are sketchy, other than the purported withdrawal of 4,000 of the 13,000 US occupation forces within 135 days – enough time for Donald Trump in the election year to strengthen his bid to stay in the White House for a second term by fooling voters into thinking that he is serious in ending America’s ‘perpetual wars’.
The rest of the sentence that "all American troops would be out within 14 months”, automatically becomes meaningless when the re-elected Trump violates the deal (as is his wont with all international treaties) by deciding to stay put in Afghanistan to the agony of the perpetually oppressed Afghan Muslims.
Then there are the two ‘secret’ factors pertaining to the deal to be presented to the Congress for its satisfaction by gangster Mike Pompeo who poses as Secretary of State in order to commit crimes worldwide. The Taliban have no idea what this means, and for the next couple of decades they won’t be released to the public.
Make no mistakes, however, the Taliban are no simpletons. In signing the deal with the ever-untrustworthy Americans, they are looking after their own interests, rather the national interests of the whole of multi-ethnic, multi-language and multi-religious Afghanistan.
Observers took note of this point while watching the make-believe camaraderie in Qatar between the two Pashto speaking ethnic Pahktun signatories, though born in different tribes, serving different sides, and having starkly opposite ideologies.
On one side was Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar who languished for 8 years in a Pakistani prison on being captured in 2010 a joint ISI-CIA operation while negotiating peace with the then Afghan president, Hamid Karzai. As a militant Muslim with his peculiar vision of a future Islamic Afghanistan, he knows the havoc the Americans have caused to his country, its people, and its culture.
On the other side was Zalmay Khalilzad, who as a naturalized US citizen, married to a non-Muslim American woman and having two sons named Alexander and Maximilian, may not be an apostate, but as the saying goes is "more catholic than the pope”. Having long turned his back on his homeland, he has nothing to lose if Afghanistan were to be destroyed and has everything to gain in the US, whose leaders have always used him as a decoy to deceive Afghans and Muslims.
With such signatories it is anybody’s guess how long the Doha Deal would survive, given the glitches that are beginning to emerge, as was evident from President Ashraf Ghani’s declaration the day after the deal that he will not free the 5,000 Taliban prisoners in Afghan jails as stipulated in the US-Taliban accord, since neither his government was a party to the talks nor the Americans have any right to decide on matters pertaining solely to the authorities in Kabul.
Moreover, how can peace return to Afghanistan, unless the American occupiers earnestly leave the country for good – every single one of them in the next four-and-a-half months and not the mere 4,000?
Suppose, even if all the American and NATO troops were to leave, peace and stability depends on not just the exit of the occupiers, but on intra-Afghan talks in good faith for the unity and progress of the country.
Furthermore, the Afghan government is itself embroiled in a political crisis, following the controversy that erupted after Ashraf Ghani was declared as winner of the allegedly-rigged presidential elections last September, whose results were belatedly announced only a couple of weeks back after a 5-month suspicious delay.
Chief Executive Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, who feels that he was the actual winner has announced plans to form a government, and has the support of such leading warlords as Gulbuddin Hekmetyar, Abdur-Rashid Dostum and Rahmatullah Nabil, who have outright rejected the election results.
This brewing political crisis could encourage the spoilers of peace, such as the Daesh terrorists, whom the crafty Americans could use to justify their breach of any deal by refusing to leave Afghanistan.
In view of these factors, the Taliban-US deal which lacks the backing of a unified Afghan nation, although an admission of American failure, might lead to political disagreements and further complicate the existing situation.
Well, this is a million-dollar question doing the rounds in the regional political circles, given the dishonesty of Washington in honouring its own commitments and the deep distrust the die-hard militia harbours towards the US, whose attempts to dominate the whole of Afghanistan it has successfully thwarted since 2001, despite being subjected to some of the most brutal bombings of the recent decades.
The details of the accord signed Saturday last in the Qatari capital are sketchy, other than the purported withdrawal of 4,000 of the 13,000 US occupation forces within 135 days – enough time for Donald Trump in the election year to strengthen his bid to stay in the White House for a second term by fooling voters into thinking that he is serious in ending America’s ‘perpetual wars’.
The rest of the sentence that "all American troops would be out within 14 months”, automatically becomes meaningless when the re-elected Trump violates the deal (as is his wont with all international treaties) by deciding to stay put in Afghanistan to the agony of the perpetually oppressed Afghan Muslims.
Then there are the two ‘secret’ factors pertaining to the deal to be presented to the Congress for its satisfaction by gangster Mike Pompeo who poses as Secretary of State in order to commit crimes worldwide. The Taliban have no idea what this means, and for the next couple of decades they won’t be released to the public.
Make no mistakes, however, the Taliban are no simpletons. In signing the deal with the ever-untrustworthy Americans, they are looking after their own interests, rather the national interests of the whole of multi-ethnic, multi-language and multi-religious Afghanistan.
Observers took note of this point while watching the make-believe camaraderie in Qatar between the two Pashto speaking ethnic Pahktun signatories, though born in different tribes, serving different sides, and having starkly opposite ideologies.
On one side was Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar who languished for 8 years in a Pakistani prison on being captured in 2010 a joint ISI-CIA operation while negotiating peace with the then Afghan president, Hamid Karzai. As a militant Muslim with his peculiar vision of a future Islamic Afghanistan, he knows the havoc the Americans have caused to his country, its people, and its culture.
On the other side was Zalmay Khalilzad, who as a naturalized US citizen, married to a non-Muslim American woman and having two sons named Alexander and Maximilian, may not be an apostate, but as the saying goes is "more catholic than the pope”. Having long turned his back on his homeland, he has nothing to lose if Afghanistan were to be destroyed and has everything to gain in the US, whose leaders have always used him as a decoy to deceive Afghans and Muslims.
With such signatories it is anybody’s guess how long the Doha Deal would survive, given the glitches that are beginning to emerge, as was evident from President Ashraf Ghani’s declaration the day after the deal that he will not free the 5,000 Taliban prisoners in Afghan jails as stipulated in the US-Taliban accord, since neither his government was a party to the talks nor the Americans have any right to decide on matters pertaining solely to the authorities in Kabul.
Moreover, how can peace return to Afghanistan, unless the American occupiers earnestly leave the country for good – every single one of them in the next four-and-a-half months and not the mere 4,000?
Suppose, even if all the American and NATO troops were to leave, peace and stability depends on not just the exit of the occupiers, but on intra-Afghan talks in good faith for the unity and progress of the country.
Furthermore, the Afghan government is itself embroiled in a political crisis, following the controversy that erupted after Ashraf Ghani was declared as winner of the allegedly-rigged presidential elections last September, whose results were belatedly announced only a couple of weeks back after a 5-month suspicious delay.
Chief Executive Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, who feels that he was the actual winner has announced plans to form a government, and has the support of such leading warlords as Gulbuddin Hekmetyar, Abdur-Rashid Dostum and Rahmatullah Nabil, who have outright rejected the election results.
This brewing political crisis could encourage the spoilers of peace, such as the Daesh terrorists, whom the crafty Americans could use to justify their breach of any deal by refusing to leave Afghanistan.
In view of these factors, the Taliban-US deal which lacks the backing of a unified Afghan nation, although an admission of American failure, might lead to political disagreements and further complicate the existing situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment