Secretary of State John Kerry made a conscious effort to convince India that the process of ?reconciliation? the Obama Administration initiated with the Taliban did not constitute surrender to Taliban ambitions by a US tired of its expensive ?War on Terror? after the attacks on New York and Washington on 9/11. New Delhi listened, but made it clear that it was concerned by shifts in American policies, which no longer required the Taliban to renounce violence, accept the Afghan Constitution and end links with terror groups like the al-Qaeda and its affiliates, before ?reconciliation? in Afghanistan could proceed. President Karzai had earlier demanded the US suspend the ?reconciliation? process, after the Taliban opened its office in Qatar.
President Obama evidently intends to go down in history as the first African-American President, who ended expensive military expeditions in Iraq and Afghanistan and set the US economy on a new path of growth and prosperity. With discoveries of vast resources of shale oil and gas, the US will soon become the largest producer of oil in the world and a major exporter of gas. With the housing and car industries in the US reviving, Obama intends to restore the US as a leading industrial power, bequeathing a legacy of peace and prosperity. At the same time, he realises that he cannot afford to totally withdraw from Afghanistan, as the Taliban still retains close links with international terrorist groups from Pakistan and elsewhere, which can stage more 9/11-style terrorist attacks on the US.
Dr Manmohan Singh is naturally concerned that if ?reconciliation? with the Taliban involves moves that lead to the Taliban taking control of part or the whole of Afghanistan, with backing from the ISI, Afghan territory will once again become? a haven for anti-India terrorism. The Taliban have, after all, close links with and provided haven to terrorists from the Lashkar-e-Taiba and the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen and even informed former ISI Chief General Ziauddin that they were prepared to provide thousands of ?volunteers? for ?jihad? in Kashmir. They have, moreover, attacked Indian diplomatic missions in Kabul and Kandahar and targeted and kidnapped Indian workers and engineers in Afghanistan. Nawaz Sharif has his own priorities and worries. He realises that while his primary objective of focusing on economic recovery will be adversely affected by policies that promote radicalism and terrorism, he may not be able to prevent his military establishment from arming and training the Taliban.
There has been a substantive change in the US approach to relations with Pakistan after Hillary Clinton relinquished office as Secretary of State and was replaced by Kerry. Clinton did not mince words in condemning Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, or hesitate to offer a $10-million reward for assistance in bringing Hafiz Mohammed Saeed to justice. She firmly believed in a policy of ?carrot and stick? in dealing with Pakistan. Kerry, on the other hand, acts as a virtual apologist for terrorism sponsored by Pakistan. Instead of focusing on Pakistani policies that have led to huge American casualties in Afghanistan, Kerry praises the ?sacrifices? made by Pakistan during the ?War on Terror? and even seeks to ignore the role of the Pakistan army in providing haven to Osama bin Laden, his family and entourage for over six years in the Abbotabad cantonment.
It remains to be seen how American policies play out in Afghanistan, where they have virtually ended all combat operations. Will the US stay the course in arming and training the Afghan National Security Forces to enable them to withstand ISI-backed Taliban attacks? Will Nawaz Sharif be able to bring semblance of moderation and sanity in the ISI?s fondness for ?jihadi? terrorism? We will perhaps get a better understanding of all this when Singh meets Sharif and Obama in September.
rose bowl auld lang syne dick clark Happy new year fiscal cliff Pitbull Hannah Storm
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.