NOVANEWS

ISLAMABAD — Pakistani officials on Monday condemned the U.S. for carrying out its first drone strike in the country since parliament demanded they end two weeks ago, but qualified that it should be seen in light of the presence of Islamist militants on Pakistani soil.

The mixed signals indicate the delicate tightrope the government is trying to walk with the American attacks. They are very unpopular in Pakistan, so opposing them makes sense for political reasons. But the government does not seem to want the strikes to torpedo attempts to patch up ties with the U.S., which could free up over $1 billion in American military aid.

Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement saying the strikes which killed three suspected militants in the North Waziristan tribal area Sunday “are in total contravention of international law and established norms of interstate relations.”

“The government of Pakistan has consistently maintained that drone attacks are violative of its territorial integrity and sovereignty,” it said.

Pakistan’s parliament demanded an end to the strikes in mid-April when it approved new guidelines for the country’s relationship with the U.S.

Washington had hoped that parliament’s decision would pave the way for Pakistan to reopen supply lines for NATO troops in Afghanistan that were closed in November in retaliation for American airstrikes that accidentally killed 24 Pakistani troops.

The drone attacks have been a stumbling block. But Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani struck a moderate tone Monday when he seemed to link the strikes to the continued ability of Islamist militants fighting the government and international forces in Afghanistan to operate on Pakistan’s territory.

He pointed out that the resolution passed by parliament also stipulated that foreign fighters must be expelled from the country and Pakistani soil should not be used to attack other countries.

“So, when we plan a strategy (with the U.S.), all these aspects would be discussed,” said Gilani.

The U.S. has repeatedly demanded that Pakistan target Taliban and al-Qaida militants who use its territory to launch cross-border attacks.

The Pakistani military has refused, claiming its forces are stretched too thin by operations against homegrown militants battling the government. However, many analysts believe Pakistan is reluctant to target militants with whom it has historical ties because they could be useful allies in Afghanistan after foreign forces withdraw.

The drone issue is complicated by the fact that some elements of the Pakistani government, including the military, have helped the U.S. carry out strikes in the past. That cooperation has come under strain as the relationship between the two countries has deteriorated, but many analysts believe some in the government still support the program at some level.

Even those Pakistani officials believed to support the attacks often protest them in public because they are so unpopular in the country. Many Pakistanis believe they most kill civilians, an allegation disputed by the U.S. and independent research.

A Pakistani intelligence official said the most recent strike seemed to be a message from the U.S.

“It’s a message that things are going to continue as usual irrespective of what we say,” said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue.

It’s not the first time the U.S. has ignored Pakistan’s parliament, which has called for the drone strikes to end since 2008.

President Barack Obama significantly ramped up strikes in Pakistan when he took office in 2009, and while the U.S. has said little publicly about the attacks, American officials have argued in private that they are critical to targeting Taliban and al-Qaida fighters who threaten the West.

Drones are not the only issue complicating Pakistan’s decision to reopen the NATO supply lines.

The country’s parliament has also demanded that the U.S. provide an “unconditional apology” for the deaths of the Pakistani troops in November. The U.S. has expressed regret, but has declined to apologize – a decision that appears to be driven by domestic political considerations. The U.S. has said its troops fired in self-defense – a claim disputed by Pakistan – and the White House could be concerned about Republican criticism if it apologizes.

Posted By: Siba Bizri

Arabic Shoah Editor in Chief

كابول – كاميليا انتخابي فرد
في الأسبوع الماضي، شنّ متمردون سلسلة من الهجمات العنيفة في كابول وفي أربع محافظات أخرى في أفغانستان، مُبدين بذلك قدرة كبيرة على تحدّي جهاز الاستخبارات الحكومي في مدن كبيرة مثل كابول وجلال آباد.

وبعد حوالى أسبوع على تسليم العمليات الليلية إلى قوات الأمن الأفغانية، تحدّت حركة «طالبان» والمتمرّدون قدرات أجهزة الاستخبارات الأفغانية والقوات الخاصة من خلال إرسال 36 انتحارياً إلى أنحاء مختلفة من البلد، علماً أنّ معظمهم شنّ هجوماً على العاصمة. وفي 15 نيسان (أبريل)، دخل نحو 20 انتــحارياً في غضون دقائق إلى كابول مدجّجين برشاشات ثقيلة وقاوموا قوات الأمن الأفغانية على مدى 20 ساعة. ولم يكن الهدف من الهجمات التي نفّذت من أعلى المباني الشاهقة ضد سفارات أجنبية ومقر «إيساف» التسبب بسقوط ضحايا مدنيين، بل زرع خوف دائم في نفوس الشعب الأفغاني القلق أصلاً على المستقبل بعد انسحاب القوات الأميركية والحلفاء عام 2014.

لم تذكر حركة «طالبان» التي أعلنت مسؤوليتها عن سلسلة الهجمات التي وقعت في كابول وإقليم نانجهار وباكتيا وجلال آباد، أسباباً واضحة دفعتها إلى شنّ هذه الهجمات، كما أعلنت شبكة «حقاني» مسؤوليتها، معتبرة أنّ الهجمات نُفّذت للثأر من الجندي الأميركي الذي قتل 16 فرداً من عائلة واحدة في قندهار منذ شهر. غير أنه لا يمكن إثبات صحة هذا الادعاء، لا سيّما أنّ المناطق التي استهدفتها الهجمات الأخيرة لم تكن قريبة من المقرات الأميركية، مثل السفارة الأميركية أو قاعدة «باغرام» الأميركية في كابول.

اليوم، يجري الحديث في كابول عمّا يسمى بشبكة حقاني. لكن يبدو أنّ هذه الشبكة تشكّل غطاء جيّداً للعمليات التي تنفذّها حركة «طالبان». كما حمّل البعض العضو الأسبق في جماعات «المجاهدين» قلب الدين حكمتيار مسؤولية الأعمال الإرهابية المريبة التي وقعت خلال الأشهر القليلة الماضية.

ويُعرف حكمتيار الذي تولى على مدى سنة رئاسة الوزراء في حكومة «المجاهدين»، بالدور الدامي الذي أدّاه عند تدمير كابول خلال الحرب الأهلية الأليمة التي اندلعت في التسعينات. ويرى عدد كبير من الأشخاص في النخبة الأفغانية، أنّ حكمتيار هو العقل المدبّر للهجمات التي شُنّت في أفغانستان بما في ذلك الهجوم الذي وقع في الأسبوع الماضي في كابول.

حالياً، يربط تحالف متين بين قلب الدين حكمتيار وحركة «طالبان». ويضمّ حزبه «الحزب الإسلامي» أعضاء مدربين وأوفياء، علماً أنّ البعض منهم يعمل في إدارة كارزاي ويتبوأ مناصب عليا في الحكومة الأفغانية. تمّ تحميل «الحزب الإسلامي» مسؤولية القتل والدمار الكبير الذي لحق بكابول في نهاية التسعينات من القرن الماضي، ما دفع عدداً كبيراً من الأفغان العاديين إلى الترحيب ببروز حركة «طالبان».

ويرى السياسيون الأفغان، أنّ حكمتيار هو أحد أهم الزعماء المتمردين الناشطين في أفغانستان إلى جانب الملا محمد عمر وشبكة حقاني.

من المهمّ بالنسبة إلى الرئيس كارزاي أن تصل محادثات السلام مع حركة «طالبان» إلى مرحلة معيّنة قبل نهاية عام 2014 ورحيل القوات الأجنبية. هل بوسعه بلوغ هذا الهدف في غضون هذا الوقت القصير في حين يقتل المتمردون أكثر الأشخاص نفوذاً وأكثر السياسيين كفاءة في أفغانستان لا سيّما خلال العام الماضي؟

أشار ديبلوماسي أفغاني معني بالمجلس الأعلى للسلام، إلى أنّ «حكمتيار طموح ويعتبر نفسه مرشحاً قوياً في الانتخابات الرئاسية القادمة». كما لفت المصدر نفسه إلى أنّ حكمتيار يعتبر أنه قادر على العمل مع حركة «طالبان» وعلى إقناعها بوقف القتال في حال أصبح رئيساً. وبما أنه ينتمي إلى قبيلة البشتون الإثنية ومقرّب من بعض المجموعات التابعة لحركة «طالبان»، يعتبر حكمتيار المرشح الأنسب للرئاسة خلال الفترة التي تلي الاحتلال.

كان برهان الدين ربّاني خصم حكمتيار. ويرى قادة كبار في جماعات المجاهدين أنّ عدداً كبيراً من أعداء حكمتيار قتلوا خلال السنة الماضية. ومع رحيل الرجال الذين يحظون بمكانة عالية والجديرين بالثقة مثل ربّاني، سيكون حكمتيار قادراً على فرض نفسه كمرشح جدير بالثقة بسبب غياب المرشحين الأكفاء الآخرين.

والواقع أنّ محادثات السلام لم تحقّق بعد نجاحاً مهمّاً، لأنه من غير الواضح كيف أنّ عدداً كبيراً من المجموعات والخصوم لا يزالون يتقاتلون بعضهم مع بعض.

تمّ إعلان خبر تجديد محادثات السلام مع «الحزب الإسلامي» حين أعلن الرئيس كارزاي أنّ الانتخابات الرئاسية في أفغانستان ستجري بعد سنة، أي في عام 2013 في محاولة منه ربما للحصول على مساعدة أكبر وعلى التزامات أمنية من المجتمع الدولي قبل رحيل القوات الأجنبية.

وقبل أسبوع من الهجمات الأخيرة في كابول، أعلن المجلس الأعلى للسلام أنه سيستأنف قريباً محادثات السلام مع حكمتيار. تمّ إنهاء محادثات السلام سريعاً مع ممثلي حكمتيار منذ أشهر عدّة، بعد أن طرح حكمتيار 17 شرطاً، فضلاً عن مطالبته برحيل القوات الأجنبية وإرساء حكومة انتقالية بعد إجراء الانتخابات الرئاسية. واعتبر ربّاني والرئيس كارزاي هذه المطالب غير مقبولة، فتمّ حينها إنهاء المحادثات.

ومنذ الأسبوع الماضي، انتقد حميد كارزاي حلف شمال الأطلسي وأجهزة الاستخبارات الأفغانية لأنها أخفقت في تفادي الهجمات الأخيرة. غير أنه أشاد بقوات الأمن والشرطة الأفغانية لإبدائها قدرة كبيرة في محاربة الإرهاب.

غير أنّ ضعف الاستخبارات الذي انتقده الرئيس ليس جديداً على أفغانستان،

فمنذ سنتين تقريباً انعقد مجلس السلام في كابول، الذي جمع حوالى 1600 زعيم وطني لمناقشة الخروق الأمنية التي قد تعرضهم لخطر هجوم من حركة «طالبان»، وقد أجبر كارزاي رئيس الاستخبارات عمر الله صالح ووزير الداخلية أتمار على الاستقالة. وعارض سياسيون خارجيون ومحليون القرار الذي اتخذه كارزاي.

وبعد أيام على إقالته من منصبه، أخبرني صالح أنّ الرئيس كارزاي كان يتعرّض لضغوطات كبيرة من باكستان لا سيّما من أجهزة الاستخبارات للتخلّص من صالح في حال أراد كارزاي أن يتحسّن الأمن الأفغاني وأن يحصل على تعاون باكستان. وأذعن كارزاي، فرحّل صالح عن منصبه، إلا أنّ جهاز الاستخبارات لم يف بوعده ولم يتمّ تحسين الأمن في أفغانستان. وفي أيلول (سبتمبر) 2011، تعرّضت كابول لهجمات نفذّتها حركة «طالبان» ضد السفارة الأميركية وتمّ منذ ستة أشهر اغتيال الرئيس الأفغاني الأسبق ربّاني الذي كان مفاوضاً كبيراً مع حركة «طالبان» في المجلس الأعلى للسلام، في منزله.

وشكّلت الهجمات الأخيرة أكبر سلسلة من الهجمات تشهـــدها كابــــول بعد حـــــــكم حركة «طالبان». لماذا لم يجبر الرئيــــس كارزاي رئيس الأمن في البلد على الاستقالة في حين يتمّ تحميل فشل أجهزة الاستخبارات المسؤولية؟

كان أداء الشرطة وقوات الأمن الأفغانية جيّداً . أدّت العملية الليلية الأفغانية إلى بلوغ المرحلة النهائية من القتال ضد الإرهابيين في كابول، وتعدّ مصدر فخر لأفغانستان. تمّ التشكيك بقدرة أفغانستان واستعدادها لإدارة العمليات الليلية التي سُلّمت إلى جهاز الأمن الأفغاني قبل أسبوع على وقوع الهجمات. إلا أنها نجحت في مواجهة الانتحاريين الذين نفذّوا هجماتهم في الأسبوع الماضي. يشعر البلد بفخر وبرضى كبيرين، علماً أنّ هذا الشعور كان غائباً منذ مقتل رئيس الائتلاف الشمالي أحمد شاه مسعود. لقد أخفقت أجهزة استخبارات الحكومية وكارزاي أيضاً، إلا أنّ الشعب الأفغاني وقوات الأمن الأفغانية نجحت في الدفاع عن نفسها

الحياة

NOVANEWS

By Ismail Salami

Hell is empty and all the devils are here. — William Shakespeare, The Tempest.

A country robbed of peace and bereft of aspirations, Afghanistan seems to be plunging more and more into a pitiful morass of grievances brought about by the military madness the US troops exhibit in the beleaguered land with brazen-faced contumely.

One such instance of military insanity is reflected in the two-year-old photographs recently published by the Los Angeles Times which show US soldiers posing with the mangled bodies of Afghan militants.

These repugnant photos dealt a rapid blow to US-Afghan relations at a time when Washington seeks a strategic deal with Afghan President Hamed Karzai to maintain a presence in the country after the 2014 pullout of most foreign troops.

Karzai slammed the photographs as “inhuman” on Thursday, calling for a rapid transition from NATO to Afghan security in order to stall further similar incidents. A statement issued by Karzai’s office says, “The Afghan president emphasized that the only way to prevent such bitter experiences in the future is a quick and complete security transition from foreign forces.”

The 18 photos were provided by a soldier who served in Afghanistan with the 82nd Airborne’s 4th Brigade Combat Team from Ft. Bragg, N.C. who believed that the photos “point to a breakdown in leadership and discipline.”

Apart from the rage these revolting photos sparked all across Afghanistan and the aversion they created in international community, these photos represent the absurdity and the devastating nature of a war initially waged in the name of de-talibanizing the country at the hands of those who have lost the very quintessence of humanity.

In 2010, a group of US soldiers made up a kill team and decided to go on a shooting spree in their neighborhood. Stationed in Kandahar, they went for a human hunt all for the sake of gratifying a mad passion neighing in their breasts. With no fear for any pangs of conscience that might later prick them to death, two men of Bravo Company, Cpl. Jeremy Morlock and Pfc. Andrew Holmes embarked on their devilish journey until they reached La Mohammad Kalay, an isolated farming village. They caught sight of a young Afghan whose age could not possibly exceed 15. His name was Gul Mudin. The young boy was killed in cold blood and his blood-stained body was used by the same soldiers to pose for photos. In an unnamable act, Pfc. Andrew Holmes then cut off the Afghan’s pinky for a keepsake. Later, it transpired that the US soldiers in his Platoon “[threw] candy out of a Stryker vehicle as they drove through a village [and shot] children who came running to pick up the sweets.” Later, Spiegel Online published some of these photos.

Desecrating the dead in Afghanistan by US soldiers is nothing new. In another inhuman act, a 40-second clip shows four men in combat gear urinating on three dead bodies.

They are also heard to say jokingly, ‘Have a great day, buddy’, ‘Golden like a shower’ and ‘Yeahhhh!’

It is very shocking to note that there is no limit to their insult. In February, US soldiers at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan burned some copies of the Holy Quran.

Hatred for the US government is on the rise in Afghanistan. Any iota of optimism that Washington launched an expedition into the country in order to wipe out the Taliban and give the Afghans a breath of freedom is obsolete now. The Afghan people’s cognizance of US agenda in the country may be next to nothing but they now know the sadistic-fetishistic acts the US troops perform on dead bodies in the country are an egregious affront to the Afghans in the first place and a desecration of all qualities revered by every sensible person in the second.

Colonialism has run its course. Yet, the US troops in Afghanistan have travelled back in time when Americans colonized people through the malicious practices of serfdom, indentured servitude and debt bondage and treated them as chattels. Figuratively speaking, they built their houses on the bones of their slaves.

But Afghanistan is not a US colony!

NOVANEWS

by Kathy Kelly and Hakim

Last weekend, in Kabul, Afghan Peace Volunteer friends huddled in the back room of their simple home. With a digital camera, glimpses and sounds of their experiences were captured, as warfare erupted three blocks away.

Two Afghan youth taking refuge together with the Afghan Peace Volunteers

The fighting has subdued, but the video gives us a glimpse into chronic anxieties among civilians throughout Afghanistan. Later, we learned more: Ghulam awakens suddenly, well after midnight, and begins to pace through a room of sleeping people, screaming.  Ali suddenly tears up, after an evening meal, and leaves the room to sit outside. Staring at the sky and the moon, he finds solace.  Yet another puzzles over what brings people to the point of loaning themselves to possibly kill or be killed, over issues so easily manipulated by politicians.

I asked our friend, Hakim, who mentors the Afghan Peace Volunteers, if ordinary Afghans are aware that the U.S. has an estimated 400 or more Forward Operating Bases across Afghanistan and that it is planning to construct what will become the world’s largest U.S. Embassy, in Kabul.  Hakim thinks young people across Kabul are well aware of this. “Do they know,” I asked, “that the U.S. Air Force has hired 60,000 – 70,000 analysts to study information collected through drone surveillance?  The film footage amounts to the equivalent of 58,000 full length feature films. The Rand Corporation says that 100,000 analysts are needed to understand “patterns of life” in Afghanistan.”

Hakim’s response was quick and cutting: “Ghulam would ask the analysts a question they can’t answer with their drone surveillance, a question that has much to do with their business, ‘terror’: “You mean, you don’t understand why I screamed?”

Two days ago, “Democracy Now” interviewed Hakim about on-going U.S. military occupation in Afghanistan.  “If we don’t address the agreements that the U.S. and Australian governments and other governments are making for a long-term war strategy in Afghanistan,” Hakim observed, “we are heading for an increase in violence in this part of the world, in South Asia, perhaps perpetual war, more serious than the Kabul attacks.”

Analysts could better understand patterns of life in Afghanistan by mixing with Afghans in their homes and along their streets, unarmed.

The analysts would spend less tax-payer money but possibly obtain a genuine perspective on everyday life in Afghanistan. If they interacted with Afghan people instead of surveying them from the air, they’d be better equipped to study ‘terrorism,’their supposed intent.

What if U.S. analysts could feel the frustration Afghans feel as convoys of trucks bearing fuel and food for U.S. soldiers drive past squalid refugee camps where children have starved and frozen to death (250 die of starvation every day; 40 froze to death since January, 2012 ).

Hakim again: “They would understand quickly, even through cursory study by one ‘non-analyst,’ that Afghans are just as infuriated by U.S. soldiers urinating on corpses as U.S citizens are by their own police pepper-spraying college students.

They would understand that just as U.S. citizens can’t even imagine living under the barrel of the Mexican army, Afghan citizens, including of course those labelled ‘insurgents’, dislike foreign guns. No number of Special Ops forces staying on perpetually beyond 2014 can make Afghans like foreign guns. This is what the U.S. Afghan Strategic Partnership War Agreement will do with at least 4 billion U.S. tax payer dollars a year spent just on Afghan security forces.”

16 year old Ali understands that the agreement being readied for the NATO summit won’t accomplish foreign troop withdrawal. This creates what for some is deadly distrust. Ali knows that a long-term foreign military means that the firing and killing will continue.  “It’s tit-for-tat,” says Hakim, “U.S. soldier-for-Talib, dollars-for-rupees, and all those insensible human decisions that would occasionally make Ali cry.  But, the military and militant apparatus does not have human ears. It has bombs. So, when the recent Kabul attacks were going on, as seen in the very human moments in the video clip, the Afghan youth crouching in the refuge of a room were assured and delighted to hear from Voices activists, from across the miles, calling to ask how they were.

‘Ah! Someone cares. Someone listens,’

The monthly Global Days of Listening conversations which the youth have had with ordinary U.S., European, Middle Eastern and Australian citizens have helped change their lives person-to-person, overcoming the cold impersonal ‘shoosh’ of overhead rockets and under-running bloodshed.

Every day, Ghulam studies, cooks, washes the dishes and lives, very normally. But some nights, in the stupor of nightmares, Ghulam shouts subconsciously, out of ear-range to the million-dollar intelligence spies, ‘What kind of world is this that still insists on signing war agreements?

NOVANEWS

by Asif Haroon Raja

Among the seven agreements made by Gen Musharraf with Washington in September 2001, free passage of NATO containers from Karachi Port to Afghanistan via Torkham and Chaman and also air supplies were included. But for the supply routes, the ISAF couldn’t have sustained war on terror in Afghanistan and also conducted covert war against Pakistan for such a long period. In spite of free flow of massive supplies plying daily, the ISAF started sinking into the quagmire of Afghanistan because of stiff resistance put up by Mullah Omar led Taliban and al-Qaeda from 2008 onwards enabling them to make southern and eastern Afghanistan into their strongholds and pushing ISAF on the back foot.

Troop surges made by USA failed to contain resurgence of the Taliban. From 2010 onward, battle casualties and cases of mental disorders and indiscipline of ISAF rose sharply. Critical security situation in Afghanistan coupled with mounting domestic pressure to bring home US troops, growing unpopularity of the war, downslide in economy and 2012 as election year impelled Obama to announce drawdown plan, starting July 2011 and finishing by end December 2014. He directed Pentagon to expedite training of Afghan Army and Police so that security duties could be handed over to them. He also directed his political section to establish contacts with Taliban and work out a negotiated political settlement. Efforts were made to befriend Taliban leaders and convince them to get detached from al-Qaeda which had been the principle source of their woes.

Hamid Karzai, his half-brother Wali Karzai and Burhanuddin Rabbani were also encouraged to play their part to woo as many Taliban leaders. They might have succeeded in convincing Taliban Shura to accept Karzai’s offer of preferring peace over violence and sharing power with Northern Alliance. However, America’s three conditions of renouncing violence, severing ties with al-Qaeda and accepting US drafted western model democracy impeded reconciliation efforts. Opening of backdoor secret channels to induce and bribe moderate as well as hard line Taliban leaders with a view to isolating Mullah Omar were other factors which made the Taliban wary. In other words, the spoilers hypocritically worked on the strategy of dividing the Taliban to weaken them and then negotiating from position of strength. The military hawks didn’t sheathe the military prong since they felt that without using this instrument they may not be able to achieve their objective.

Meetings of Taliban with US officials were held twice in Munich and once in Doha between November 2010 and May 2011. UNSC separated the ‘1267’ joint list of names of members of al-Qaeda and Taliban as a move to win over Taliban. Process of reconciliation suffered a setback after military targets in Wardak and Kabul were struck and Burhanuddin murdered by Taliban in September 2011. Flummoxed by the ever growing power of Taliban and not knowing how to contain it, spin doctors of ISAF started fabricating excuses to hide poor performance of US military. The US gave vent to its enragement by throwing the blame at the doorsteps of Pakistan and making it the scapegoat. From 22 September onward, the US officials kept firing salvos at Pakistan relentlessly and also stepped up their efforts to woo the Taliban. The breakthrough achieved in Doha retarded as a consequence to series of events taking place in Afghanistan in first quarter of 2012. Acceleration of night raids together with incident of burning of copies of Quran in Baghram base and killing spree of Sergeant Bales heightened anti-Americanism and impelled the Taliban to discontinue negotiations. Multiple attacks in Kabul on April 15 were retaliatory acts.

Strains in Pak-US relations had started appearing from 2010 onwards because of hawkish behavior of the US officials, their never ending do more mantra, leveling of baseless allegations against Pakistan and propaganda campaign by US-Western media. Relations became frostier after Raymond Davis episode, Abbottabad assault and Mike Mullen’s invectives after Kabul attacks by Taliban, but broke down after unprovoked attack by NATO helicopters at Salala on 26 November. America’s ever growing involvement in internal affairs, presence of Blackwater, Dyncorps and CIA network, drone war and its heavy leaning towards India in disregard of Pakistan’s security concerns and appeasement policy of our rulers had make the people highly resentful. Accumulated pent up ill-will made the rupture imminent and call for severing relations with USA and terminating US sponsored war on terror became louder.

Mounting public anger and Army’s pressure compelled the government to hesitatingly take tough measures so as to curb America’s unbridled intrusions. It also set up a Parliamentary Committee on National Security to revise terms of engagement with the US, NATO and ISAF. Of all the measures taken by Pakistan, closure of NATO supplies hurt ISAF the most since it affects its operational efficiency and also CIA led covert war against Pakistan. Instead of mollifying Pakistan by offering an apology and promising compensation to the families of victims, the US behaved snobbishly. It refused to offer apology over Salala massacre and held Pakistan equally responsible. The US was confident that because of precarious socio-politico-economic situation, Pakistan would soon cave in and go back to business as usual. It was sure that the appointed Committee would make recommendations favoring USA. This crude response further vitiated the atmosphere and hardened the stance of Pakistan.

Unlike the poor track record of outcome of parliamentary committees, the Parliamentary Committee under Senator Rabbani worked hard and made further revisions in recommendations because of opposition’s objections. It put up its report to the Parliament containing several well-measured recommendations for debate and decision. Washington eagerly waited for the resumption of supply routes but gave no assurance that drone strikes would stop, or promised that no further unilateral attacks would be undertaken. On the contrary Obama and visiting US official Thomas Nides gave veiled warnings that Pakistan must remain mindful of US security needs. The government which was all set to give a green signal to appease the US had to apply brakes in the wake of intense public protests. The religious forces insist that opening of supplies should be made conditional to cessation of drone attacks and release of Aafia Siddiqui. Taliban from both sides of the border have also asked Islamabad not to feed the killers in Afghanistan. Difa-e-Pakistan Council and Fazlur Rahman warned that supply roads will be physically blocked if the government permits NATO containers to ply.

Finding himself cornered, the PM took the matter to the DCC with a hope of obtaining a favorable decision, but the DCC wisely decided to defer resumption of NATO supplies because of the outrage of the people. The principled democratic course adopted by the government to deal with issues of national importance is encouraging. Skeptics however say that the decision to restore supply lines for NATO has already been taken and will be announced before Chicago meeting next month which will be attended by Zardari. The President and PM must not forget the fact that great majority oppose reopening of transit facility for the ISAF whose intelligence agencies are involved in clandestine operations against Pakistan. Blow back may be severe. Policy makers must also recognize the hard reality that Pak-US interests are at variance and not in congruence and must therefore stop chasing rainbows that the US would treat Pakistan and its sovereignty with respect. We must not forget that the US nurtures sinister designs against our nuclear program. What is needed is to help the ISAF in extricating 130,000 troops, 70,000 vehicles and 120,000 containers via Pakistan’s land routes rather than reinforcing the ISAF and saboteurs and thus adding to the woes of people of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

NOVANEWS

Is Afghanistan a House of Cards, Just Waiting to Fall?

…by Khalil Nouri STAFF WRITER / EDITOR

High vantage points – a standard Taliban tactic

The wave of coordinated attacks unleashed by the Taliban militants in Afghanistan on Sunday targeting Parliament and eastern cities gives a grim realization that Western backed Afghan President Mr. Karzai’s staked peace deal efforts with the Taliban aren’t working.

But the real question is whether the fragile empire that Mr. Hamid Karzai has built will stay seamed together when international troops begin to leave Afghanistan in 2014 – or will it be swept aside by dangerous political fractures opened up by his efforts to negotiate peace with the Taliban?

Evidently, Mr. Karzai’s pursuit of peace was, from the outside, driven by political pragmatism, not high principle.

From 2006, the Taliban began a relentless assassination campaign targeting traditional tribal leaders in the Kandahar region (Mr. Karzai’s traditional power-base).

The campaign, which is estimated to have claimed over 150 lives, ensured that Mr. Karzai’s efforts to reach out to Alokozai Pashtun leaders would collapse; that his prestige among his own Popalzai clan was diminished; and evidently caused his controversial half-brother, Ahamad Wali Karzai, to be killed last summer.

Although vote rigged, the 2009 elections made evident that Hamid Karzai had little support among southern Afghanistan’s ethnic Pasthuns. His victory against key rival Abdullah Abdullah was secured because of support from ethnic minorities; those grouped around the warlords akin to Haji Muhammad Mhaqiq, and those loyal to Abdul Rashid Dostum.

Is the finger in the wind an effective policy?

In a desperate effort to rebuild his political foundations, Mr. Karzai turned to the networks of Mr. Rabbani’s Jamaiat-e-Islami – the centerpiece of the Islamist movement; which, from the 1970’s dethroned Afghanistan’s traditional elite; and now, the son of slain Rabbani, Salahuddin Rabbani is in the driver seat to weld the fruitless peace process.

Mr. Karzai also sought help from Gubuddin Hekmayar’s Hezb-e-Islami, a party which though still ostensibly insurgent, has proxies in the political system.

Inside the Kabul palace—as it became clear western forces would draw down in 2014 — figures considered close to Pakistan acquired critical importance; among them, his chief of staff Abdul Karim Khurram.

From 2010, Mr. Karzai initiated an ever-more desperate search for peace with the Taliban and alienating large swathes of the opposition. Even though Pakistan proved unwilling, or unable, to rein in Taliban operating from its soil, Mr. Karzai continued to reach out; hoping a deal could be struck.

In 2010, the very same warlord Mr. Muhaqiq reneged on his earlier support, warning: “the new political path that Karzai has chosen will not only destroy him, it will destroy the country”, and “It’s a kind of suicide.” Those are words Mr. Karzai ought to be carefully considering now.

The recent attacks were a great embarrassment for the Afghan government, despite the allegation that they were directed by the Pakistani intelligence apparatus; which like Mr. Karzai’s usual blame game on others, particularly NATO, was not accepted by the majority in the wake of the incident.

Multiple car bomber attacks – another standard tactic

Having recently praised the direction of Special Forces night raids away from US control, the infiltration of fighters equipped with rocket-propelled grenades, suicide vests and machine guns inside Kabul’s secured green zone must obviously count as a major security lapse.

In fact, it will be a moment of re-evaluation for representatives of Afghanistan’s ethnic minorities who have been in talks to build a united front ahead of the 2014 elections—hoping to create a broad coalition that could include leaders from the south, like United States-based scholar Ali Ahmad Jalali and even a royalist Hamayoon Shah Asifi.

In the last ten years, many more people in Afghanistan have developed deep interests in the need for keeping the peace. There are businessman and contractors with stakes in the system; young people who have invested in their education; even orphanages who already face charity contribution hurdles; and the list goes on for many whose businesses will be disrupted by ongoing war.

The question, though, is how to create and maintain a security apparatus for a fragile country; and not allowing it to slip back into repeated mayhem?

The clash of civilizations

It is clear that the same Taliban that Mr. Karzai hoped to make peace with has no intention of accepting any kind of deal that Afghanistan’s political system, as a whole, could live with.

In addition, a path to peace cannot be achieved when a government has not gained the allegiance of its people; nor can peace be attained with a group that has brutalized women and minorities in the past.

The world knows that the Taliban have no intention of relinquishing its Islamo-fascist mentality.

Does Mr. Karzai have a plan “B” despite all that has recently happened? If not, he has become certain of one thing for sure: Pakistan alone has held the key to peace in Afghanistan?

He should consider salvaging the first Afghan President Mohammad Daud Khan’s policy to unite the Pashtuns by vigorously opposing Pakistan’s de-Pashtunization of Pasthuns That should be the key to long lasting peace for Afghanistan.

Khalil Nouri is the cofounder of New World Strategies Coalition, a native think tank for nonmilitary solution studies for Afghanistan, and member of Afghanistan Study Group.