Karzai wants US to protect Afghanistan from Pakistan

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,322
Likes
11,666
Country flag
* NYT reports Afghan president also wants US to take direct military action against Taliban havens on Pakistani soil

KABUL: Afghan President Hamid Karzai wants a mutual security pact that would compel the United States to protect Afghanistan against Pakistan, and, possibly, even take direct military action against Taliban havens on Pakistani soil, the New York Times quoted Afghan sources as saying.

According to the newspaper, it was not until after the meeting of top security officials had ended – as Karzai stood in a corridor with a handful of advisers – that his frustration with the United States boiled over. Washington's attempt to open peace talks with the Taliban in Qatar, he fumed, was "in reality an attempt to cut him out and make an American deal with the Taliban", according to one of the officials who saw the outburst.

The Taliban's sudden willingness to talk in June looked like a potential coup for American diplomacy. The result has been anything but — and not just because the Taliban have done more grandstanding than negotiating since opening their Qatar office. Karzai quickly called off Afghan participation in the talks. And now, two weeks later, persuading him to restore his delegation would most likely take more than the United States would be willing to deliver, according to Afghans familiar with his thinking.

He wants a firm commitment on the number of American troops that would stay in Afghanistan past next year, and a lead role in peace efforts, the Afghans said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss diplomatic matters.

All of that is rooted in one of Karzai's core beliefs, according to those who know him: that the central challenge facing his government is not the Taliban insurgency, but rather in bringing the United States around to his way of thinking.

"Assurances that America will take care of us will no longer do for the president," said the Afghan official who witnessed the president's outburst. To move forward, Karzai wants "certainties".

The developments around the Qatar peace opening seemed to be ripped directly from Karzai's personal nightmare script: that his government would be marginalised in Washington's endgame in Afghanistan.

He has long voiced suspicions about American-orchestrated Taliban talks, and recently he has told those around him that the Qatar process could result in a separate peace deal between the United States, the Taliban and the group's backers in Pakistan, and perhaps even his political opponents within Afghanistan as well.

The fact that the Taliban have pointedly refused to say they would talk with Karzai's government even as they state their willingness to talk to the Americans has only reinforced his concerns.

He made that clear on Saturday, when after meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain he told reporters that the two had discussed "the fact that foreigners should not use the Afghan peace process for their goals and objectives". He did not elaborate.

Karzai's increasingly harsh response to American initiatives in recent years has struck some officials as verging on paranoia. But Afghans close to him say it is consistent with his view of the United States as an unreliable ally.

Afghans have not forgotten how the United States during the 1990s effectively outsourced its Afghanistan policy to Pakistan, which then helped bring the Taliban to power. That perceived abandonment remains a staple of conversation among many here. Karzai has often told those close to him of going to Washington for help in the 1990s and "having doors slammed in his face — nobody cared," said another Afghan who has worked with him. "He's seen this movie before," the Afghan said.

Though the offensive Taliban symbols have since been taken down, a senior State Department official said on Wednesday that the Taliban were demanding that their Qatar office be identified as the political office of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and that the sign with the name be restored.

In any case, a member of the Afghan High Peace Council, Said Muhammad Amin Tariq, said that removal of the flag and sign were not enough. "Karzai wants more assurances."

In particular, he is said to be adamant about pushing the Obama administration to pin down the specific number of American troops it wants to keep in Afghanistan after the NATO combat mission ends next year, as a sign of commitment to his government.

Karzai and some in his inner circle also seem to believe that the United States needs Afghanistan just as badly, and that they can strong-arm the Obama administration, according to some Afghan officials.

American officials say that kind of thinking is misguided. Though many American commanders and diplomats are pressing for a quick decision on troop numbers, some White House officials say they are increasingly uncertain that a security deal can be secured. "People are asking whether that's something we can live with," said one administration official. "The Afghans probably wouldn't like to hear the answer to that question."

Much of what Karzai wants beyond the troop commitment seems even more unlikely — particularly his demands pertaining to the Taliban talks. daily times monitor

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2013\07\07\story_7-7-2013_pg1_6#.Udmz6dC-PKI.twitter
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,322
Likes
11,666
Country flag
India's refusal to step in, provide weapons has made Karzai really desperate. I feel sad for him. Regardless of all corruption allegations, his fierce anti Pak/Taliban regime is good for the world.
 

arnabmit

Homo Communis Indus
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2012
Messages
5,928
Likes
6,039
Country flag
Show me a single country which is not irritated with Pakis!

China is not saying anything publicly, but common people are pissed off at pak trained ughur jehadis

Even SA is sending Paki workers back!
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,844
Show me a single country which is not irritated with Pakis!

China is not saying anything publicly, but common people are pissed off at pak trained ughur jehadis

Even SA is sending Paki workers back!
Things are more complicated. Even Russia >>> Russian ammo takes Chinese road to Pakistan - The New Indian Express

We may not like Jihadis or Mujahideen (I feel not comfortable even when spelling these), but we have to be pragmatic. Can Karzi or his successors survive Talib.?
 

t_co

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 20, 2012
Messages
2,538
Likes
706
Do you want him to survive?
On one hand, Karzai is partial to economic investment and trade, which is great for us. On the other, he is fiercely anti-Pakistan, which is irritating in the context of Gwadar and Pakistani security.

A managed transition to a less unipolar government would be ideal; Karzai and his India-supported retinue leaves, replaced by a consensus PM who is just as eager to trade with China, while accepting Afghanistan's subordinate position in the AfPak relationship.
 

hit&run

Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
10,580
Likes
32,753
We may not like Jihadis or Mujahideen (I feel not comfortable even when spelling these), but we have to be pragmatic. Can Karzi or his successors survive Talib.?
amoy
On one hand, Karzai is partial to economic investment and trade, which is great for us. On the other, he is fiercely anti-Pakistan, which is irritating in the context of Gwadar and Pakistani security.

A managed transition to a less unipolar government would be ideal; Karzai and his India-supported retinue leaves, replaced by a consensus PM who is just as eager to trade with China, while accepting Afghanistan's subordinate position in the AfPak relationship.
Pragmatism is in using your clout to fix Pakistan, not in letting them use your backing to inflict harm in neighborhood. Pakistan is monster today because of China. Americans failed to fix Pakistan and today they are paying for it, one can see Chinese doing the same.

Regardless of any government in Afghanistan even a pro Chinese, there will be no peace for Chinese to operate in violent Afghanistan ignited by Pakistan for their strategic depth and Durand line psychosis.
 

IBSA

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
1,040
Likes
1,042
Country flag
Poor Karzai.

Likely amrikans will not answer his claims for military help against Taliban, since amrikans are compromised with the withdraw of their troops until 2014 and not to engage themselves in a new round of conflicts. Amrikans aim is to seek an agreement among Karzai and Talibans. They believe that inserting Talibans in Afghan government they will force both to work together and so avoiding a new civil war.
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,844
Karzai regime / ANA has proven incompetent in subduing Talib. even with the Allies' strong backing.

More likely a "soft-partitioned" Afghanistan will emerge, mirroring Libya or Iraq, with a coalition "Central Government" of figureheads sitting in Kabul, then all factions (read warlords, ethnic groups, religious sects etc.) are more or less proxies of foreign powers.




No one is totally happy, but can make do with that situation.
 

Agnostic Muslim

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
517
Likes
142
Because they can run across the border and regroup. Don't blame the ANA.
Many of the Taliban attacks occur hundreds of miles inside Afghanistan - are you seriously arguing that the ANA/ISAF is incapable of intercepting the Taliban 'running away across the border into Pakistan'?
 

datguy79

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2012
Messages
702
Likes
944
Many of the Taliban attacks occur hundreds of miles inside Afghanistan - are you seriously arguing that the ANA/ISAF is incapable of intercepting the Taliban 'running away across the border into Pakistan'?
No, I was replying to the previous member who suggested that ANA/ISAF is incapable of going after the Taliban when in fact the jugular vein of the insurgency lies across the border.
 

MLRS

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2013
Messages
91
Likes
129
Pakistan is America's pet that can be used as a proxy force against countries in the region. This may explain why NATO overlooks their support for the insurgency.
 

amoy

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2010
Messages
5,982
Likes
1,844
No, I was replying to the previous member who suggested that ANA/ISAF is incapable of going after the Taliban when in fact the jugular vein of the insurgency lies across the border.
How shall outsiders assess the situation when reading of Afghan Taliban boldly attack on Kabul airport - News ??

That was happening where it's supposed to be the stronghold of ANA/ISAF.

"We can expect high profile attacks, we can expect insider threats and we can expect maybe some assassinations," said German Gen. Gunter Katz, spokesman for the U.S.-led International Security Assistance Force. "
 

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
India's refusal to step in, provide weapons has made Karzai really desperate. I feel sad for him. Regardless of all corruption allegations, his fierce anti Pak/Taliban regime is good for the world.
do you think india will not provide afghanistan with anything?
we have a lot of interests wrt afghan as it can be a potential counterweight to pakistan,which could be a reason for u turn of american diplomacy regarding taliban.
usa dont want their old friend pak to join with china

let the time decide
 

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
On one hand, Karzai is partial to economic investment and trade, which is great for us. On the other, he is fiercely anti-Pakistan, which is irritating in the context of Gwadar and Pakistani security.

A managed transition to a less unipolar government would be ideal; Karzai and his India-supported retinue leaves, replaced by a consensus PM who is just as eager to trade with China, while accepting Afghanistan's subordinate position in the AfPak relationship.
thats the problem with china.you want some one like karzai , a one good for your business on the other hand you want afghan to subdue to pakistans power as its again in your interests.
both pakistan and afghanistan are enemies from beginning and it wont change until pakistan stops its plots to destabilize afghanistan
 

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
Poor Karzai.

Likely amrikans will not answer his claims for military help against Taliban, since amrikans are compromised with the withdraw of their troops until 2014 and not to engage themselves in a new round of conflicts. Amrikans aim is to seek an agreement among Karzai and Talibans. They believe that inserting Talibans in Afghan government they will force both to work together and so avoiding a new civil war.
forcing them both to work is like mixing fire and water.both dont go well with each other one has to die
 

drkrn

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2010
Messages
2,455
Likes
902
Many of the Taliban attacks occur hundreds of miles inside Afghanistan - are you seriously arguing that the ANA/ISAF is incapable of intercepting the Taliban 'running away across the border into Pakistan'?
those were fidayeen type attacks rather than face to face.no one can predict such ones
 

IBSA

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2011
Messages
1,040
Likes
1,042
Country flag
forcing them both to work is like mixing fire and water.both dont go well with each other one has to die
of course

i dont also believe in an agreement among ANA and Taliban to share the power. Why Taliban should be content with a piece of power when it can by war retake the full power?? afghan army, even all western aid, is not a great thing, and Taliban can easily be reequipped by ISI through the porous Durand Line.

but amrikaans think the democracy that they installed by bombs is a perfect political system and capable to solve all afghan political problems.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top