Ceasefire Holding, But Thousands Stranded at Border
by
Jason Ditz,
Antiwar.com
June 20, 2016
The ceasefire between Afghanistan and Pakistan is holding at the Khyber Pass border,after deadly gunfights last week that killed at least four, and which continue to leave thousands of people stranded on either side of the disputed border.
The ceasefire between Afghanistan and Pakistan is holding at the Khyber Pass border,
Negotiations don’t seem to be making much progress either, with the two nations ending a full day of talks today without anything resembling an agreement resulting from them. Pakistani officials came out of the talks, however, reiterating their intention to build the border fence.
Afghanistan and the US occupation forces there have been pressuring Pakistan for years to “control” the border, and Pakistani officials believe that fence and gates will improve their control over traffic back and forth. Pakistani officials even tried to be amicable about it, building the fencing some 30 meters into Pakistani territory.
At least by Pakistani reckoning, and that’s the problem. The 1893 deal between Afghanistan and Britain, which defines the de facto border, is roundly rejected by Afghan officials, who insist that the “real” border is dramatically further south, at the Indus River, and that Afghanistan actually spans a large portion of Pakistan as well.
So when Pakistani government forces came to build the fencing, the Afghans started shooting, and the border patrols quickly got into open combat. With nothing resolved, it remains to be seen what happens when the construction crews return.
US Congressmen from Jewish backgrounds and Zionist-Hindutva-Israel-India Lobbies, with help from renegade traitor Husain Haqqani are trying to block/stop the transfer of much needed F-16s to Pakistan. F-16 has proven to be the best weapons systems in the difficult terrain of Pakistan-Afghan border and FATA. What options Pakistan has in current US backstabbing? Not many, US is globally famous for cutting off it’s nose to spite it’s face. However, soon the 3rd and 4 Generation JF-17 Thunder,Pakistan and China’s Joint Strike Fighter will equal and beat F-16s in ceiling,combat maneuverability, and range. Pakistan must re-think its policy of attacking its own tribals to guard US and Western Interests.
If US Betrays Pakistan’s Trust Again, Redress May Not Be Possible
America is preparing to leave Afghanistan at the mercy of a lame government and an army of questionable loyalty.
The search for “good” Taliban is on in Afghanistan; the U.S. has announced that no action is to be taken against those who are not a threat to the U.S., including Mullah Omar.
The United States has said that after Jan. 2, 2015, the U.S. Army will not take any action against Mullah Omar and other Taliban leaders in Afghanistan if they pose no direct threat to the United States. Addressing a press conference in Washington, Pentagon spokesman Rear Adm. John Kirby said that the U.S. will not operate against anyone simply on the basis of their being Taliban members. Nevertheless, he used the occasion to clarify that those who fight will not be spared by any means. Kirby emphasized that any Taliban who operate against the U.S. or against its Afghan partners will automatically fall within the scope of the U.S. military operation.
Addressing the final news conference for the year last Friday, President Barack Obama reassured the American public that he is committed to his promise to end the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan at the end of 2014. Obama said that in less than even two weeks, the U.S. mission that has continued in Afghanistan for more than 13 years will come to an end. However, Obama gave full permission to his troops to combat extremists in the event of their becoming direct threats to the U.S. or to Afghan forces.
After 9/11, America’s enemies in this region were al-Qaida and the Taliban. The U.S. and its allies needed Pakistan’s cooperation in confronting these enemies, cooperation which Pakistan provided. With this cooperation, and with the use of modern arms and trained armies, the U.S. and its allies totally crushed Afghanistan. Ammunition and iron rained down on the land of Afghanistan, and land forces also employed their talents and weaponry to the full extent. Thousands of al-Qaida members and Taliban were killed, and at the same time, hundreds of thousands of innocent citizens were also killed, including children, old people and women. In the words of America, it broke the back of al-Qaida.
The Taliban were removed from power but could not be eliminated. They still exist as a force in Afghanistan and some other countries, and the U.S. has even carried out direct, as well as indirect and secret, negotiations with them at times. Although the U.S. stayed in Afghanistan for 13 years with full pomp and power, it could not realize its desire to completely eliminate the Taliban; nor could it persuade the Taliban to cooperate with the Afghan government. Now that a big part of the U.S. Army will be leaving Afghanistan in about a week and a half, without coffins, the Americans are hoping that the Taliban who continued to confront them for 13 years will start behaving like good children and pledge allegiance to Ashraf Ghani and Abdullah Abdullah. This is not simply an illusion or a misconception on the part of the U.S., but inane thinking. The Taliban maintain a hold in many areas of Afghanistan and influence in several others; they are simply lying in wait for the U.S. and its allies to leave Afghanistan — when they can implement their plan to occupy Kabul.
Despite the presence of tens of thousands of military experts and their operations, the governments of the previous Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, and current President Ashraf Ghani have remained weak in most areas other than in cities such as Kabul. At the beginning of the coming year, following evacuation of NATO forces from Afghanistan, the government of Ashraf Ghani will have to face severe problems despite having full or partial authority in different regions. Perhaps the U.S. and the Afghan administrations are relying on the 150,000 members of the [Afghan] National Guard. But these are the very U.S.-trained soldiers who carried out dozens of attacks on their American teachers. It is possible that tomorrow these U.S.-trained soldiers will be seen standing in support of the Taliban in the same way that the army of President Hafizullah Amin joined the Taliban following the Russian evacuation.
The U.S. defeated Russia with help from Pakistan; it then took the route home, leaving Afghanistan in a state of anarchy and leaving Pakistan suffering to this day from the ill effects of its actions. Had the U.S. restored peace in Afghanistan by establishing a strong government there, the hundreds of thousands of Afghan refugees would not still be a weight on Pakistan after 35 years. As it did in the past, the U.S. is once again leaving Afghanistan without any planning. Pakistan today is in the grip of terrorism and lawlessness that is stronger than any it experienced in the past. Pakistani Taliban — products of the Afghan[istan] War — have turned the whole country into an ammunition pile.
On Dec. 16 these terrorists, carrying out the worst example of brutality and barbarity in human history, bathed hundreds of children in dust and blood at the Military Public School in Peshawar. According to the brutal terrorists, this was retaliation for operation Zarb-e-Azb, being conducted by the Pakistani army to eliminate the terrorists. Following this incident, the whole country united under the Nawaz Sharif government for the elimination of terrorists. The prime minister lifted restrictions on the death penalty to be effective immediately. So far there have been six executions, while gallows have been constructed in prisons for more.
After the Peshawar incident, the government immediately called a conference of parliamentary parties in an effort to form a working group that would reach a consensus regarding a strategy. Yesterday, this group agreed on eight recommendations including the establishment of military courts and repatriation of Afghan refugees. The prime minister was briefed about these recommendations and, in this context, has called a meeting of parliamentary parties to approve an action plan based on the working group’s recommendations. The meeting will be attended by political leaders, including Imran Khan.
Along with execution of terrorists, the Pakistani army is conducting rapid operations in which 200 terrorists were killed within a week and twice the number arrested. In the most recent action in Karachi, 13 terrorists belonging to al-Qaida and the banned Tehrik-e-Taliban were killed in confrontations; arms and suicide jackets were recovered from them. About 300 suspected terrorists were arrested in operations carried out in Mansehra and Islamabad.
Pakistan helped the U.S. with its heart and soul in the war against terrorism, as a result of which, the flames of warfare that were extinguished in Afghanistan have started flaring up in Pakistan. Until yesterday, the U.S. was placing pressure on Pakistan to take evenhanded action against those who posed a danger to Pakistan as well as those who did not pose a danger to Pakistan, without discrimination. Now the U.S. is in search of “good” Taliban in Afghanistan.
Whether the matter relates to Pakistan or to Afghanistan, “good” Taliban are those who give up arms. Taking the position that we will not confront those who are not confronting us is equivalent to deceiving oneself. This thinking is no different from saying that “you cannot use your weapons; but if your reservations lead you to wield arms, then we will also retaliate.” Prior to the U.S. invasion, the nature of the Taliban position in Afghanistan was no different from this; they had not hurt U.S. interests and even bin Laden had not stood up with his gun in Afghanistan. Still, the U.S. placed a price of $10 million on Mullah Omar’s head. In light of the U.S. statement today, how would the U.S. treat him if he makes an appearance at the beginning of next year, decorate him with garlands?
America is preparing to leave Afghanistan at the mercy of a lame government and an army (the [Afghan] National Guard) of questionable loyalty. Further, the fire of terrorism is blazing in Pakistan. Should the U.S. once again leave Pakistan without its friendship and support — as it has done in the past — then Pakistan will eventually emerge from the morass after it faces difficulty. However, its trust in the U.S. will be finished and it will not wish to cooperate with the U.S. ever again. It is possible that in only a few months following evacuation, the U.S. will be in need of Pakistan’s cooperation in Afghanistan.
Re: Who could have averted school massacre in Peshawar?
Admiral(Retd) Afzal Tahir: former Chief of Naval Staff
Nobody ordinary has the exact information so none can give it to you. However, as a first step let the powers that be and by that I mean the people in the know come out and tell the nation who is behind the tragedy, the executioners, the planners, the aiders and the abettors, exactly in the same words as the ISAF commander was told.
Such an operation cannot be done alone by a single group and it has to have supporters of many kind. Let us stop lying to our people and tell the truth about whoever is involved in this dastardly attack. I would point the finger at the Afghan government or some agency of it and of course India’s intelligence agency RAW.
Let us stop drumming about US interests and that of other Western countries, look at your neighbours and see how their interests are also served by such like incidents.
Let us behave like a nuclear nation and call a spade a spade. An attack on Afghan soil to target and kill the perpetrators is fully justified and must be undertaken and do not think about sovereignty. After all we have endured drones and attacks in the same cause being a sovereign country.
STAND UP TO THESE RASCALS AND KILL THOSE WHO KILL YOUR OWN WHEREVER YOU CAN FIND THEM, THIS OR THAT SIDE OF THE BORDER. THE WORLD OF TODAY UNDERSTANDS THE LANGUAGE OF FORCE ONLY.
THIS IS NOT AN EMOTIONAL OUTBURST BUT A WELL THOUGHT OUT COURSE OF ACTION.
Almost thirteen years ago, the US led coalition forces started raining tons of molten from the air on October 7, 2001 on sovereign and peaceful Afghanistan. Its sin was that the ruling regime had allegedly sheltered the mastermind of 9/11 Osama bin Laden and had the temerity to refuse to hand him over without providing proof of his complicity in the crime. No Afghan was involved in the attacks on World Trade Centre and Pentagon. Daisy cutters, cruise missiles, cluster bombs and other lethal ordnance were used abundantly to break the will of the Taliban fighters. Ground operation spearheaded by Indian-trained Northern Alliance was backed by carpet air/artillery bombing, tank fire and gunship helicopters.
While Tony Blair was the most vociferous supporter of war, Pakistan was coerced to ditch the Taliban and support the invasion. Month long air and ground bombing devastated the country. In order to save the country and its people from further ruination, ruling Taliban regime under Mullah Omar took a wise decision to carry out a tactical withdrawal and deal with the invaders at an opportune time. The calculated withdrawal was however trumpeted by the invaders as a complete victory.
In order to form a government of its choice in Kabul under string-puppet Hamid Karzai, the US doled out $1.2 billion to win over the loyalties of war criminals and warlords including ruthless Gen Rashid Dostum. The US kept pumping billions of dollars on propaganda war to demonize the Taliban, to sell its brand of democracy and constitution, win over the confidence of Afghans through development works, make the Karzai led regime functional and to train and equip non-Pashtun heavy ANSF, which could assist the ISAF in combating Taliban/al-Qaeda threat. Colossal amount was also spent to pay 80,000 security contractors and for the covert war against Pakistan.
In short, rather than taking Afghan Pashtuns on board as suggested by Pakistan, all possible means were employed to bring the resistance forces comprising Pashtuns down on their knees. This discriminatory act impelled overwhelming majority of Pashtuns residing on both sides of the Durand Line to gravitate towards the Taliban. Opening of another war front in Iraq in 2003 despite the international outcry was a big mistake. It gave a godsend opportunity to the Taliban to return to their strongholds in eastern and southern Afghanistan and start the guerrilla war.
When all efforts failed and the Taliban kept gaining strength despite all the odds against them, the US picked up Pakistan as a convenient scapegoat and held it squarely responsible for all its failings. Karzai lent strength to the indo-US propaganda war and blamed Pakistan that it was in league with the Taliban. Trusting India and distrusting Pakistan, which had helped the US winning the first Afghan war, was another blunder made by USA. George Bush kept wholly relying on US military prowess and didn’t pay any head to Pakistan’s advice of complimenting military prong with political prong.
Once the initiative was lost by the US led occupation force in Afghanistan in September 2009 as a consequence to military debacles in Helmand and Nuristan despite the two troop surges, hurriedly vacating forward posts in eastern and southern Afghanistan, bunkering the troops in fortified military bases and restricting the war effort to airpower only, the US never made any worthwhile efforts to recover the 65% territory it lost and to regain its upper edge. Thereon it was a downhill journey. Replacement of Gen Stanley McChrystal with Gen David Petraeus in 2010 and subsequent changes made no difference. Instead of salvaging the situation, top commanders got involved in sex scandals. Fatal casualty and injury rates kept multiplying and surge in militant attacks kept mounting all over the country.
The US/British trained non-Pashtun heavy ANSF could not match the grit of the Taliban hell-bent to push out the occupying forces, topple US installed unpopular, inefficient and corrupt regime of Hamid Karzai and to regain power. In the backdrop of fast deteriorating security situation and having understood that it was impossible to win the war, Obama took the hard decision in December 2010 to bid farewell to Afghanistan by December 2014 and forgo the high-flying dreams he and his predecessor had nurtured. He took this decision in spite of serious reservations of the US military, which egoistically insisted that it had the will and capacity to turn sure defeat into victory.
In order to show to the world that the US military had not lost heart, Gen Petraeus planned a major offensive in Kandahar in April 2011 but kept postponing it on the plea that until Pak Army cleared North Waziristan of the presence of Haqqani network (HN) and al-Qaeda, it will not be possible for him to undertake the risk. Pakistan refrained because of its multiple compulsions. To punish Pakistan for not ceding to its demand, operation ‘Get Osama’ was executed in May 2011, followed by activation of western border with the help of runaway Fazlullah.
Spectacular attacks by Taliban on most sensitive targets inside Kabul in September 2011 shook the security apparatus in Afghanistan and in sheer frustration Admiral Mike Mullen put the blame on Pakistan saying HN was the ‘veritable’ arm of ISI. In revenge, NATO launched a brutal attack on Salala Post in November 2011 forcing Pakistan to suspend military ties with Washington, close Shamsi airbase and block NATO supply routes. Worsening ties with Pakistan made the drawdown cumbersome.
The US woes kept increasing in the following years despite restoration of ties with Pakistan and opening of supply lines in July 2012. While secret parleys between the US and Taliban for a possible political settlement stalled because of bungling of the US over prisoner swap deal in 2012, the US military was confronted with other menaces of in-house green-over-blue attacks, surge in suicide cases and PTSD cases. Waning economy and home pressure to end the futile war were other worrisome reasons to ‘turn the page’ on America’s longest war initiated by George W. Bush led neo-cons. Karzai after serving US interests faithfully became irksome and started creating trouble for the US.
2014 has proved more calamitous for the US. The Taliban have gained ascendency over 80% of Afghan territory and are so far not in any mood to negotiate a political settlement with the US despite the successful prisoner swap over on June 1, 2014. Presidential election on which the US had pinned lot of hopes has also gone awry owing to Abdullah Abdullah’s allegation that Karzai was fraudulently trying to make Ashraf Ghani win the race. Offensive launched by the Taliban in Helmand on June 19 has posed a serious challenge to the ANA. It has so far not been able to evict 800 attackers holding on to Barekzai and Bostanzai in Sangin District. Further reinforcements in far-flung Helmand will render Kabul vulnerable to HN attacks.
Although the longest war in the US history is at last winding up, endgame of Afghan venture is meshed in uncertainties. Ambitious dreams of the imperialist powers lay in tatters since nothing has proceeded in accordance with the chalked out plan and laid down objectives. While the Soviet forces managed to skip out of Afghanistan under the umbrella of Geneva Accord, no arrangement has so far been made to ensure smooth and safe exit of ISAF troops. Of the 150,000 ISAF troops, less than 33000 soldiers are now desperately looking forward to fly back home in one piece. 12000 soldiers forming part of residual force which is required to stay back till 2016 would be the unhappiest.
Pakistan policy makers have no clue what shape Afghanistan will take in the aftermath of pullout of foreign troops in next six months. Many neighbors and distant neighbors of Afghanistan would like to fill the power vacuum in Afghanistan. In this, India, Iran, China, Russia and Pakistan are likely contenders for space. Barring Pakistan, all other competitors particularly India and Iran have an edge because of their closeness with current Northern Alliance heavy regime. The US, Israel and western powers would also back India and Iran and bolster ANSF to prevent the Taliban from recapturing power.
On the other hand, although Pakistan has a soft corner for Taliban because of multiple reasons, there is no strategic relationship between the two. In the ensuing power struggle, civil war becomes a probability. If so, outside powers will fuel bloody internecine war in which Afghanistan and Pakistan would again be the biggest losers. Much talked of strategic grouping of India, Afghanistan and Iran backed by Israel and USA and development of alternative economic corridor linking Chahbahar with Central Asia are the emerging possibilities having serious ramifications for Pakistan.
The writer is a retired Brig/war veteran, defence analyst/columnist/historian, Director MEASAC Research Centre, Director Board of Governors Thinkers Forum Pakistan, member Executive Council PESS. [email protected]
Former Pakistani ISI Director Gen. Lt. (Ret.) Hamid Gul, here with World Security Network President Dr. Hubertus Hoffmann: “Needed are direct talks between high echelons of Taliban leadership and the US State Department. It should take about a month to set the stage. Only the USA should be involved with Pakistan as a facilitator. A peaceful, stable and prosperous Afghanistan automatically provides strength and depth to Pakistan. However, larger than life presence of India in that country would neither be natural nor acceptable both to Pakistan and the future government of Afghanistan.”
No other Pakistani General is so often described as “controversial” as LtGen (Ret.) Hamid Gul, from 1987 to 1989 the Director-General of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the premier Pakistani secret service. During those last years of the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan he cooperated closely with the CIA and together they supported the Mujahideen including Osama bin Laden who has now been killed in the heartland of Pakistan where this most-wanted terrorist lived in comfort embedded in a secret infrastructure within Pakistan.
Some say Hamid Gul is dangerous. This included US Secretary of State Rice. Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has described former ISI Chief Lt. Gen. Hamid Gul as “more of a political ideologue of terror rather than a physical supporter” in an interview with Newsweek in December 2008. Replying to a question whether US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice had asked him to arrest Gen. Gul, he said, “Hamid Gul is an actor who is definitely not in our good books. Hamid Gul is somebody who was never appreciated by our government. She [Rice] did not go into specifics, if I may share that with you.” (see “Zardari calls Hamid Gul political ideologue of terror rather than a physical supporter” The Nation. December 15, 2008).
The Washington Post reported on July 28, 2010 about Wikileaks reports which portray Hamid Gul as the public face of an underground Pakistani network to push the US out of Afghanistan (see Washington Post: The Audacity of Hamid Gul). Gul explained to The Wall Street Journal. “I am not against America, but I am opposed to what the American forces are doing in Afghanistan.”
My impression is that he endorses a traditional way of thinking from the 1980’s when he supported the Taliban movement in the national interest of Pakistan to control the Western neighbor Afghanistan while similarly avoiding his homeland being sandwiched by arch-enemy India. His own perception comes close to that of a true nationalist. I disagree with many things he says, but perceive him as a man worth listening to as he is not alone with his thinking in Pakistan.
Hubertus Hoffmann: General, how strong are the Taliban now and how much support do they have in Afghanistan in light of the recently announced spring offensive?
Hamid Gul: Taliban have grown from strength to strength over the years from the failure of operation Anaconda in 2003 to the fiasco of operation Mushtarik at Marja in Helmand province. They have become more confident and their ranks have swelled to around 50,000 fighting men. Now that they are sensing victory their morale is extremely high. Increasingly the Afghan population is turning to them as an alternative to Karzai’s corrupt and incompetent administration.
Hubertus Hoffmann: ISAF is on the offence with stronger Afghan Security Forces and have conceded territory from the insurgents. Is ISAF winning?
Hamid Gul: This is an incorrect impression. The resistance does not offer pitched battles or positional defense. They prefer hit and run type of engagements.
Hubertus Hoffmann: When should negotiations with the Taliban start? Now or later?
Hamid Gul: Its already late. The matters will get worse if there is dithering by the US and NATO policy makers.
Hubertus Hoffmann: Where? How long?
Hamid Gul: Should be direct between high echelons of Taliban leadership and the US state department. Should take about a month to set the stage.
Hubertus Hoffmann: Who must be involved? UN? Saudi Arabia? USA?
Hamid Gul: Only USA.
Hubertus Hoffmann: Which role do you see for Pakistan?
Hamid Gul: Facilitator and no more.
Hubertus Hoffmann: Does Pakistan still need ‘strategic depth’ to defend against India?
Hamid Gul: This is only a myth. A peaceful, stable and prosperous Afghanistan automatically provides strength and depth to Pakistan. However, larger than life presence of India in that country would neither be natural nor acceptable both to Pakistan and the future government of Afghanistan.
Hubertus Hoffmann: Will the alliance of the Taliban and Pakistan be renewed?
Hamid Gul: The future government of Afghanistan need not necessarily be exclusively Taliban. Pakistan will have to deal with whoever is in command in Kabul.
Hubertus Hoffmann: What do the Taliban want? The same as in 2001 before 9/11 or a modern Afghanistan? Or a Turkish model?
Mohammad Gul: The Afghan nation will evolve their own model and should be allowed to do so. The Taliban have reformed substantially as compared to their earlier conduct in governance.
Hubertus Hoffmann: What about the women rights? Will they agree to treat all women like the Prophet did with his wives and daughters, very gentle and kind and not suppressive? Will women be able to work as governors, doctors, or officers?
Hamid Gul: The question of women rights can easily be resolved in the light of the Islamic Shariah. It will take a while before they can be in equal positions due to the orthodox nature of that society. Yet, I see no difficulty for them to become doctors, teachers and working women in other vocations.
Hubertus Hoffmann: And education, including girls?
Hamid Gul: No problem at all. The Shariah does not discriminate.
Hubertus Hoffmann: And free media? And one million internet-users?
Hamid Gul: Taliban themselves are using the internet.
Hubertus Hoffmann: Will the Taliban respect the Constitution of Afghanistan?
Hamid Gul: Nobody in Afghanistan barring the vested interest has any love for this constitution. They will rally around Shariah which derives its inspiration from Quran and Sunnah.
Hubertus Hoffmann: Isn’t the Taliban concept outdated like coming from the stone-age if you look what the Facebook children in Egypt or Tunisia are demanding?
Hamid Gul: Mujahideen of Afghanistan are fighting for faith and freedom from foreign aggression which is not the case in Egypt and Tunisia and both these causes are rooted in the principles of Islam. They are as fresh and relevant today as they were 1,400 years ago. Only the new interfaces of contemporary times have to be explored and utilised.
Hubertus Hoffmann: What kind of Sharia is it? Killing innocent citizens is illegal under Sharia law and jihad rules – why bomb attacks who kill civilians? Aren’t people who kill civilians in the name of Allah ‘unbelievers’ in the sense of the Koran, should be excluded from the Ummah and punished according to Sharia as they offend the Koran and the Prophet? Is this not blasphemy?
Hamid Gul: That is why it is so important to invoke Shariah to get rid of the menace of terror practitioners who misuse the name of Islam. The ills of a Muslim society can be rectified by more and not less Islam.
Hubertus Hoffmann: Will the Taliban agree to treat all enemies like the Prophet did when he conquered Mecca in 630 CE – killing nobody and respect the existing order?
Hamid Gul: That depends on the nature of agreement between the US and Afghan resistance.
Negotiations don’t seem to be making much progress either, with the two nations ending a full day of talks today without anything resembling an agreement resulting from them. Pakistani officials came out of the talks, however, reiterating their intention to build the border fence.
