iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Afghanistan War: Taliban, Pakistan And Iran Could Hamper NATO Exit

By DEB RIECHMANN 05/22/12 03:47 PM ET AP

KABUL, Afghanistan -- The NATO summit's plan to "responsibly wind down" the Afghan war is not entirely in the hands of President Barack Obama and his fellow world leaders.

The carefully orchestrated exit strategy could come unhinged if the resilient Taliban stage a major comeback or Afghanistan's neighbors interfere with the process to bolster their position in a weak country soon to be without thousands of international combat troops.

In short, the Taliban, Pakistan and Iran still get a vote.

The Taliban, who continue to carry out attacks across the country and have shown little interest in negotiating peace with the Afghan government, described the NATO summit as a "show" with "no result."

"Nobody can trust their statements and lies," Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said in an e-mail to the media on Tuesday, a day after the two-day summit closed in Chicago. "They are claiming that everything is fine in Afghanistan, which is far from the reality."

At the summit, the U.S.-led NATO coalition finalized its plan for Afghan forces to take the lead in providing security in the middle of next year. Foreign troops will move into backup support and training roles, then completely end their combat mission at the close of 2014. The goal is to pull back gradually to avoid a repeat of the civil war that followed the Soviet exit two decades ago – chaos that paved the way for the rise of al-Qaida and the Taliban.

Ivo Daalder, the U.S. permanent representative to NATO, said Tuesday on a conference call with reporters that the U.S. has been paying close attention to the role of Iran and particularly Pakistan in the transition strategy for Afghanistan.

"We are in a very active and in-depth set of dialogues with Pakistan to find ways in which we can cooperate to deal with the problems that exist in order to make sure that our strategy in Afghanistan will succeed," Daalder said. "That's why we have and will continue to find ways to cooperate on dealing with the terrorists."

Pakistan has said repeatedly that it wants a stable Afghanistan, and the U.S. has given that country billions of dollars in aid over the past decade to enlist its support in fighting Islamist militants. But U.S. officials also have accused Pakistan of being a fickle ally and even supporting Taliban insurgents fighting the American troops in Afghanistan. Pakistan has denied this allegation.

Last year, then-Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen said the Haqqani network, which is affiliated with the Taliban and al-Qaida, "acts as a veritable arm" of Pakistan's intelligence agency. Mullen accused the network last year of staging an attack against the U.S. Embassy and NATO headquarters in Kabul and being behind a truck bombing that wounded 77 American soldiers. He claimed Pakistan's spy agency helped the group.

Still, both Afghanistan and the U.S. need Pakistan's help to negotiate a peace agreement with the Taliban.

"It is in Pakistan's interest to work with us and the world community to ensure that they themselves are not consumed by extremism that is in their midst," Obama said in Chicago.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai met with Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari on the sidelines of the summit. The main subject was Pakistan's role in the peace process. Karzai's office said in a statement that Zardari invited the head of the Afghan peace process to Pakistan to discuss the issue.

Pakistan is not a NATO member but was invited to the summit because of its influence in Afghanistan and its role until last year as the major supply route to landlocked NATO forces there. Pakistan closed those routes after a U.S. attack on the Pakistani side of the border killed 24 Pakistani soldiers in November. The routes remain closed because of a dispute over how much the U.S. will pay Pakistan to allow each truck to drive across its territory.

Iran also has the ability to complicate NATO's plans. Iran does not like the U.S. military footprint on its eastern border and will be closely watching negotiations on a U.S.-Afghan security agreement that will define the size and parameters of an American military presence in Afghanistan in the years to come.

Although the Iranians are cozier with Afghanistan's ethnic Hazara than with the majority Pashtuns who fill the ranks of the Taliban, NATO has accused Iran of providing the Taliban with weapons used against coalition forces.

Last year, NATO forces seized 48 Iranian-made rockets that officials said were intended to aid the Taliban. NATO officials said the shipment was evidence of a serious escalation in Iran's state support of the Taliban – an allegation Tehran denied. Western officials accuse Iran of conducting a proxy war against the U.S., which is in a standoff with Tehran over its nuclear program.

For now, Afghans are taking a wait-and-see approach to the summit's upbeat assessment of their future.

"We have witnessed a lot of international conferences on Afghanistan – conference after conference after conference," said Mohammad Qassim Zazai, a businessman from Paktia province who is living in Kabul. "The people say `Let's see what's going to happen on the ground.'"

Abdul Khaliq Bala Karzai, a parliament member, said he was pleased that world leaders expressed their commitment to Afghanistan even as they are pulling out their troops.

"I was watching on TV and they said they are going to protect Afghanistan and the Afghan people. Security is like water – very vital," said the lawmaker from Kandahar province, the birthplace of the insurgency.

The world leaders now need to pressure Iran and Pakistan to cooperate, not interfere, in Afghanistan, he said.

"For the time being, the Taliban are not able to fight on the ground against the Afghan and foreign troops. They are able only to launch guerrilla attacks, plant mines and carry out suicide attacks," he said. "When the foreign troops leave, the Taliban will get stronger, especially if these two countries support them – give them weapons and sanctuary, which is going on now."

Mawlana Farid, a political analyst in Kabul, said he also was heartened to hear the international community's strong support going forward.

"The world leaders in Chicago announced their unity in protecting Afghanistan, but we still have concerns about our neighbors – Pakistan and Iran," he said.

Even in front of 60 world leaders, Pakistan was not willing to open up its borders to allow NATO convoys to move through its territory, he lamented.

"These convoys are the ones being used to help fight the terrorism. Pakistan is not ready to cooperate," Farid said. "Pakistan needs to give their word to the international community that they will not support insurgents or terrorism. If not, the situation could get worse."

___

Associated Press Writer Amir Shah contributed to this report.

Earlier on HuffPost:

FOLLOW WORLD

KABUL, Afghanistan -- The NATO summit's plan to "responsibly wind down" the Afghan war is not entirely in the hands of President Barack Obama and his fellow world leaders. The carefully orchestrated ...
KABUL, Afghanistan -- The NATO summit's plan to "responsibly wind down" the Afghan war is not entirely in the hands of President Barack Obama and his fellow world leaders. The carefully orchestrated ...
Filed by Ryan Craggs  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 191
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (5 total)
07:27 AM on 05/24/2012
If Iran and Pakistan want Afganistan, let them have it. They will be sorry!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
07:33 PM on 05/23/2012
THE ROVING EYE
War and cheeseburgers
By Pepe Escobar

A specter haunts Europe. No, it's not communism; it's US rating agencies. Greece is bankrupt; the eurozone is about to crack; JP Morgan makes billion-dollar "mistakes"; there's no (jobs) future for the new generations. And yet the weaponized arm of the Western 0.1% elites occupies Chicago - turned into an Orwellian police city-state - to discuss "smart defense".

In Afghanistan, the "smart" North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) is in fact bound for a humiliating escape.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Ed Forney
11:50 AM on 05/23/2012
Looks like Pakistan is trying to get even more billions from the US
10:49 AM on 05/23/2012
This place was a mess before we got there and will be once we leave. It has been at war with its self for centuries. The best we can hope for is that it will not pose an immediate threat to us. It has always been a "no win" situation. Two of the worlds greatest countries couldnt change a thing in this country. Best to just monitor it and try to keep them from getting too out of control. As for the Afghan people, I feel sorry for them, especially the younger women. They were given a brief dose of freedom and now that will be taken away once we leave, but this place will only change when they get rid of that ridiculous religion and start thinking like human beings not cavemen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Val Mercy
In war, truth is the first casualty.
09:58 AM on 05/23/2012
Why would Iran support the Taliban? They are bitter enemies. Random.

Pakistan, that's a different story.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
terroristmd
10:55 AM on 05/23/2012
Iran and Taliban has the same enemy...the U.S. Also go back and look at the deals they are cutting with each other involving supplies and POWS.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
CapSen
Empathy. The faculty to feel what the other feels.
08:13 PM on 05/23/2012
Iran and the US have the same enemy: the Taliban. It might be useful to look at the truth and take a different angle.

If the US wasn't caught up in this insane animosity with Iran, things would look totally different.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
OldCowboy
Against stupidity the Gods contend in vain.
09:56 AM on 05/23/2012
Here's the skinny on Afghanistan. It doesn't matter how slow or how fast we get out, the Taliban are going to take over. Period.
09:29 AM on 05/23/2012
Pfukemall
09:16 AM on 05/23/2012
There is most certainly a faction (or two) that does not want NATO to ever pull out of the region. NATO forces' presence in the region is like a perpetual Olympics Games or a Super Bowl or Carnival constantly going on. Their entire economy depends on our being there, and it would completely collapse if we pulled out.
And that's another good reason to napalm all the poppy fields, get out and leave them to deal with each other in whatever ways they wish.
Then we can deal with the survivors later if we want to.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Alexey Braguine
Author of Kingmaker, a novel
09:07 AM on 05/23/2012
Thebest result we can hope for will be warlords galore, lots of refugee camps, and a Tajik - Pashtun war
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
muck-raker
give me liberty or give me death
09:07 AM on 05/23/2012
interesting short read: Take off your hat. Taps is playing. Almost four decades late, the Vietnam War and its post-war spawn, the Vietnam Syndrome, are finally heading for their American grave. It may qualify as the longest attempted burial in history. Last words—both eulogies and curses— have been offered too many times to mention, and yet no American administration found the silver bullet that would put that war away for keeps.

Richard Nixon tried to get rid of it while it was still going on by "Vietnamizing" it. Seven years after it ended, Ronald Reagan tried to praise it into the dustbin of history, hailing it as "a noble cause." Instead, it morphed from a defeat in the imperium into a "syndrome," an unhealthy aversion to war-making believed to afflict the American people to their core.

A decade later, after the US military smashed Saddam Hussein's army in Kuwait in the First Gulf War, George H.W. Bush exulted that the country had finally "kicked the Vietnam Syndrome once and for all." As it turned out, despite the organization of massive "victory parades" at home to prove that this hadn't been Vietnam redux, that war kicked back. Another decade passed and there were H.W.'s son W. and his advisors planning the invasion of Iraq through a haze of Vietnam-constrained obsessions.
more: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/04/afghanistan-vietnam-war-quagmire
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lhoffman5
72 yr old,Eisenhower Rep. Retired history Teacher
09:04 AM on 05/23/2012
Taliban, Pakistan, and Iran get a vote in the Allied withdrawal! Lets look at this another way. No matter how well we train the Afghanistan police and army, when we all leave, the Taliban and other dissidents will pick up the pace and ferocity of their attacks, this will, and seems to be happening, in Iraq, and Pakistan is due: there will be civil wars, and some serious strife will occur in that part of the world. IF not for the nuclear weapons, I'd say let them have their wars, perhaps when the Grandmothers, Mothers, Wives, get tired of burying their mates, children and friends,they will unite an take their rights and stop the killing. Basically, until the people involved in disputes get sick and tired of the death and destruction, there will be no end to it. Just ask the families of the Hatfield's and the McCoy's they know how and what it takes to end a feud. End of story
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Stanley Bonk
"mad, bad, and dangerous to know"
08:26 PM on 05/23/2012
My friend, you're quite right in everything you say, but I fear our sojourn in Afghanistan may go on for a long time, even if our formal military ever gets around to leaving. When they do, the CIA will remain as well as an unknkown number of paid mercenaries provided by Xie, formerly known as Blackwater. I'm a relative newbie here, and i have yet to figure out how to post a link. If I could, I would refer you to an article from an Indian site announcing the beginning of the construction of a natural gas pipeline from Uszbekistan, I believe, through Afghaistan, Tadjikistan, and on into India.

I suspect it's the old pipeline propsal originally put forth by Unocal, a subsidiary of the Carlisle group, among whose notables are George HW Bush and his old friend John Major. There's reason to believe that the whole sorry business, from 9/11 to the War in Afghanistan and much else has it's roots in that pipeline proposal. As originally conceived, it was supposed to bring natural gas from central Asia to the ports on the Gulf or Hormuz, bypassing possible interference by the Russians, who want to maintain a stranglehold on the natural gas shipped to much of Europe. The whole business is complicated, and I can't go on in greater detail here.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
lhoffman5
72 yr old,Eisenhower Rep. Retired history Teacher
08:57 PM on 05/23/2012
sadly, you too are correct
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
derealest
08:59 AM on 05/23/2012
Patience everybody.......Our president says we can negotiate with them.....If we just let out more prisnors with the message of negotiation we will have them right where we want them.....Ahhhh the return of the good ole days when Taliban beat women and allow terrorists to assemble and travel with legal passports and visas......I can't wait. Don't forget the mushroom cloud coming to a town near you soon. .................Yep we're on the right track.
photo
checkmoot
We have met the enemy and he is us.
11:25 AM on 05/24/2012
If you hadn't mentioned the mushroom cloud I wouldn't have known who you were. Posting under an alias are you ? Welcome to the forum Mr. Cheney
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kev58
08:40 AM on 05/23/2012
Just get out and let them go on killing each other. Stop wasting American lives over these animals. They will never stop.
09:30 AM on 05/23/2012
AMEN
photo
sr25fullauto
Go get your own opinion if u don't like mine!
06:12 AM on 05/23/2012
The Taliban has proven throughout history that it can survive the test of time. They are not going away, they are keeping up with just enough attacks to keep US mired in this costly conflict. It is no expense to them to stay in the shadows where it is a great expense to US to stay in their country. It did not take long after Russia pulled out for them to re-establish themselves just as it will not take long after we pull out. It is to their benefit as well as Iran and Pakistan's benefit to keep us there killing off our troops and bankrupting our country. This reduces the resources that we have to keep them in check.
05:34 AM on 05/23/2012
Take a careful look at the soldiers of Afghanistan; for them, this is a job with a pay-packet. They do not want to maim or kill their own, nor do they want to support the Mayor of Kabul. They are Male Muslims, and as such identical to a Taliban.