Music Video - The Wallflowers - One Headlight

The Daily Show with Trevor Noah - So Much Winning | The Daily Show - Aug 30, 2018

Video Report - South Africa detects new coronavirus C.1.2 variant

Video Report - Taliban escorted Americans to Kabul airport in secret

#JoeBiden - Biden addresses US troop withdrawal as Taliban celebrates

Music Video - Ahmad Zahir - Khuda Bowad Yaret - احمد_ظاهر - خدا بود یارت

د آشنا تلویزیون د سه شنبې خپرونه د ۲۰۲۱ د اګست ۳۱ - وږي ۹

Video Report - په زوره د لادرکه کړل شوو کسانو د خوشې کولو لپاره په اسلام اباد کې مظاهره وشوه.

A reformed Taliban?

Pervez Hoodbhoy

AFTER capturing Kabul the Taliban want to be seen as rulers rather than just as a religious militia. Eager to secure legitimacy — internationally and among Afghans — closed door negotiations are afoot for a government inclusive of non-Taliban Afghans. Will these actually work out? And what lies ahead for young, urbanised, internet savvy Afghans seeking to live in the 21st century rather than the 7th? This choice had been denied just a while ago.

Under Mullah Omar, the earlier phase (1996-2001) of Taliban rule had single-mindedly concentrated upon rigorous enforcement of the Quranic injunction amr bil ma’roof wa nahi ‘anil munkar (promote that which is good and approved, and forbid that which is evil and disapproved). Imbibed from madressahs scattered across Pakistan, this was understood in the sense of a demand for strict religious policing.

Liberal Islamic scholars, however, say the injunction merely enjoins believers to seek piety through self-control. The Taliban under Mullah Omar disagreed emphatically with this interpretation. They carried out stoning of adulterers to death, amputation of limbs for theft, public floggings, closure of girls’ schools, extreme limits on the mobility of women, and destruction of the 2,000-year-old Bamiyan Buddhas. Similar actions do not exist in the living memory of older Afghans.

The new face suggests that amr bil ma’roof will henceforth be more liberally interpreted. Whether rank-and-file fighters will see eye to eye on this cannot presently be foreseen. But some leaders of this religious militia — one that thrived for decades on foreign aid and extortion — have become aware that economic reasons demand change.

Pakistan should welcome the Taliban’s new face but must resolutely insist upon their civilised behaviour.

This is understandable. Those accustomed to the comfort of Doha’s luxury hotels, and of their bungalows in Quetta and Peshawar, are unfit for returning to the mountain villages from where they fought against an invader. Instead they now want the good life the invader has invented. In time they, or maybe the generation that succeeds them, will send their children to regular schools instead of Pakistani or Afghan madressahs.For this to happen, the spigot of international aid must be turned on again. Still more urgent: under Afghan soil lies a trillion dollars ready to be scooped up. But to extract these minerals, technology and organisation have to come from outside. Many countries are eager, China and Russia particularly. This implies complicated geopolitics and much wheeling and dealing.

In this new game Pakistan hopes to play a big part. While the Chinese are said to be capable of eating everything that moves, they cannot stomach an unreformed Taliban; this would create hellish indigestion within Xinjiang. Former Taliban allies, Saudi Arabia and UAE, are wary of Taliban radicalism spilling over and wrecking attempts to liberalise their countries. Much needs to be thrashed out.

That Pakistan may be accepted as a mediator is possible because the “Naya Taliban” — an evocative term first used by Dawn’s columnist Niaz Murtaza — feel ideologically comfortable with the leader of Naya Pakistan. The commonality lies in shared opposition to western dress, education, and language. Both place high value on symbols such as shalwar-kameez and turban, and both equate morality with regularity of prayers and fasting. Indeed, unable to contain his joy at the Taliban takeover of Kabul, PM Khan declared that Afghanistan had “broken the shackles of slavery”. In creating a new dispensation, the Naya Taliban will naturally turn towards those who made their ascent possible. But here caution will kick in. Even if pragmatism presently forces them to deal with those they know to be hypocritical, the Taliban are not hypocrites themselves. They also know full well who packed off their comrades to Guantanamo Bay – from where some are yet to return.

To quote from the back cover of General Musharraf’s autobiography, written in 2006 while still in office: “We have captured 672 and handed 369 to the United States. We have earned bounties totaling millions of dollars”. Memories cannot disappear easily although the freshly victorious may not dwell upon such betrayals for now.

On the other hand, the Taliban have fully trustable allies inside Islamabad. When some days ago the white Taliban flag flew — albeit briefly — from Jamia Hafsa, this sent across an important message from Maulana Abdul Aziz and his likes to their victorious Afghan colleagues: we were with you when you were being bombed in Tora Bora. And we are with you now that you have won. Like it or not, AfPak has become reality. Despised in Pakistan because of its American origin, this term rings true. Geographical proximity is now augmented by the ideological proximity of rulers in both countries. Taliban style thinking is bound to spread through the length and breadth of Pakistan.

Now that the Indians have been chased out of Afghanistan, Pakistan’s dream of strategic depth stands fulfilled. So have we reached nirvana? Well, almost, but not quite.

Fears that the Naya Taliban are no different from the Purana Taliban has made millions of Afghans desperate to flee. But there is opposition to accepting these refugees into Pakistan even from those who might have on their lips Iqbal’s couplet: butan-e-rang o khoon ko tor kar millat mai gum ho ja; na toorani rahay baqi na irani na afghani. (Smash the idols of blood and colour, become Muslim; be not Turani nor Irani nor Afghani, be just Muslim.)

Subcontinental pan-Islamism — that which created Pakistan — ends at the Durand Line for most Pakistanis. But the Naya Taliban could think differently; Afghan nationalism has come into its own. The cultural and ethnic continuity from ages past cannot be eliminated by fencing. Indeed, after booting out the mightiest power of all times why should the Taliban consider as sacred the arbitrary straight lines drawn by a long dead, stuffy old Englishman?

Pakistan must open its doors for fleeing Afghans; to not do so is immoral. Using its considerable influence it must also impress upon Taliban victors that the world will not accept their old-style barbarity. This is not the age when women should be confined to their homes and shoved into burqas, or where religious and ethnic minorities are persecuted and killed. For this message to get across, we might first have to get our own house in order.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1643074/a-reformed-taliban

The burden of Imran Khan’s incompetence should not be placed on the people of Pakistan – Chairman PPP Bilawal Bhutto Zardari

Pakistan Peoples Party Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has demanded immediate and transparent elections in the country and said that after seeing Imran Khan’s performance and the previous government’s performance, the people of Pakistan now want young, forward-looking leadership. “This is the leadership you will very soon see,” he said, “You will soon witness people joining PPP in large numbers.”

Addressing a press conference at the Mazari House in Kashmore, the PPP Chairman said that the phenomenal receptions he had received across the country made it evident that the people of Pakistan see PPP as the true representatives of their will and that come next election, they will vote in the PPP. He said it has become clear that the people of Pakistan now want a people-friendly party like PPP, which will give them relief. “The people of Pakistan have seen through charlatans who talk of tabdeeli. They recognise that only the PPP has implemented policies that have reduced unemployment and inflation.”

Speaking on the Pakistan Media Development Authority (PMDA) issue, Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said that the Pakistan Peoples Party rejects the government’s attempts to muzzle the media. He elaborated that the PTI Government only intended to curb any and all criticism of the governments ineptitude. The PMDA is PTI’s desperate and dangerous attempt to have a pliant media, and to stifle any attempt at alternative sources of journalism on blogs and social media. By stifling alternative sources to conventional journalism, the government further seeks to silence not only critics its has managed to strong arm out of newspapers and television channels, but also silence an entire generation of upcoming journalists that seek to speak truth to power. “The Pakistan Peoples Party condemns this black law and any and all attempts to muzzle the media.” Promising journalists and media personnel that the issue will be taken up in the parliament and the Senate, Chairman PPP said, “If need be, we will even go to the judiciary. This is a black law, and we will never accept it.”

In response to a question from a journalist during the press conference, Chairman PPP said that he always tried to spend time with the people of the nation instead of living in a closed room. In this regard, he often visits different areas in the province to personally inspect and assess the situation of different regions. “Pakistan Peoples Party is a political party, and its politics does not take a break,” he said, emphasising on the fact that the party is constantly preparing for elections. Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari further demanded a fair and transparent election to be held in the country as soon as possible. “This is a rigged government, which has been imposed on us,” he stated.

Chairman PPP said that the people have had to bear the burden of the present government in the form of exorbitant inflation, and skyrocketing unemployment. “We believe that the burden of Imran Khan’s incompetence should not be placed on the people of Pakistan,” he said. When asked about the activities of PDM, Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said that the PDM movement was supposed to start a long time ago. He also stated that he prays the PTI government is damaged in some way through these political activities.

He added that there seemed to be confusion within the PDM about their strategies, given PMLN and JUIF had earlier waylaid the protest movement, including the Long March, by insisting on resignations. “When we defeated Imran Khan in his own assembly, our friends postponed the long march saying that it was useless without resignations,” he explained. “If they are announcing a long march now, then hopefully, they will resign. Announcing the long march and then withdrawing from it will only harm the opposition.” Chairman PPP also emphasised that their thinking and position must be clear whether the opposition parties are working together or individually.

Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari pointed out that as long as the PDM followed the PPP’s suggestions, the opposition would win, and the government would lose. “We were winning… from FATA to Pishin, from Pishin to Karachi, and from Karachi to Daska. The opposition was united, and it had the support of the people, and it managed to defeat the government in the National Assembly. We morally defeated the government the very day we won in the National Assembly,” added Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. But when the PMLN and JUIF sowed confusion amongst the opposition, and everyone had their own statement, the people of Pakistan rejected this confusion. He said that if the opposition is serious about taking on the government, the first step must be against Buzdar and then Imran Khan, that is the blueprint by which these selected rulers can be removed. Responding to a question about his contacts with angry PTI members, the Chairman PPP said that the party had not taken any decision in this regard, but the party will make its decision soon.

In response to another question, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said that the present government was not serious in solving the people’s problems; it is only earnest in carrying out political revenge and using NAB against its political opponents by making false cases against honorable people.

Meanwhile, Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari offered condolences to former provincial minister Sardar Saleem Jan Mazari on the demise of his mother. Earlier, Chairman PPP offered condolences to party member Sindh Assembly Mir Abid Sundarani on the passing of his brother Majid Khan Sundarani. In addition, Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari offered condolences to Sardar Mehboob Bijarani in Kandhkot on the demise of his mother.

During this visit from Naudero to the Kashmore Kandhkot district, Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari was given a hearty welcome. Citizens everywhere chanted slogans of the PPP as the Chairman’s car drove by, and the Jiyalas were seen dancing to the tune of ‘dilla teer bijan’.

https://www.ppp.org.pk/pr/25409/

Music Video - #BillyJoel #WeDidntStartTheFire #Rock Billy Joel - We Didn't Start the Fire

Video Report - 08/30/21: Press Briefing by Press Secretary Jen Psaki

Video Report - President Biden Meets with Governors and Mayors from States and Cities Impacted by Hurricane Ida

Video Report - Secretary Of State Antony Blinken Speaks After US Leaves Afghanistan After 20 Years

Video Report - US completes #Afghanistan withdrawal as final flight leaves #Kabul

Video Report - Dr. Fauci pleads for increased vaccination rates: They are safe and highly effective

Video Report - Biden attends dignified transfer of the service members killed in Kabul

Video Report - Remarks by President Biden at FEMA for a Briefing on Hurricane Ida

Opinion: Trump & Co. engineered the pullout from Afghanistan. Now they criticize it.

 Opinion by Max Boot

The Biden administration, as I’ve argued, deserves plenty of blame for its precipitous and ill-planned exit from Afghanistan. Naturally, a sense of decency and consistency has not prevented former President Donald Trump and his minions from adding their voices to the chorus of criticism, even though they themselves designed this exit strategy and lauded it until the last moment. We are now being treated to the contemptible spectacle of people who sent the airplane into a nosedive complaining about the resulting crash.

As recently as April 18, Trump said: “Getting out of Afghanistan is a wonderful and positive thing to do. I planned to withdraw on May 1st, and we should keep as close to that schedule as possible.” On June 26, he bragged: “I started the process. All the troops are coming back home. They couldn’t stop the process. Twenty-one years is enough, don’t we think?”

Now he is calling the situation “not acceptable” and saying that the troop withdrawal should have been “conditions based” — which wasn’t part of the deal he struck with the Taliban. He is demanding that Biden “resign in disgrace for what he has allowed to happen to Afghanistan,” i.e., for carrying out Trump’s policy. Bizarrely, Trump is even castigating Biden for failing to “blow up all the forts,” as if U.S. forces were fighting in the Middle Ages.

Trump’s partner in hypocrisy, as in misgovernment, is former secretary of state Mike Pompeo. Not only did he oversee the negotiations with the Taliban, Pompeo convinced Pakistan to release from prison Abdul Ghani Baradar, Afghanistan’s new president, to serve as an interlocutor. Pompeo met with Baradar last year and bragged about it on his Twitter feed, thereby legitimating the Taliban and disheartening the Afghan military.

As recently as July, Pompeo was eager to “applaud” the withdrawal, saying he wanted “the Afghans to take up the fight for themselves.” On Sunday, by contrast, he was fulminating that “weak American leadership always harms American security.” He went on to ludicrously accuse the Biden administration of being “focused on critical race theory while the embassy is at risk.”

Hold my nonalcoholic beer, says former vice president Mike Pence. On Tuesday in the Wall Street Journal, he offered a master class in blame-shifting and buck-passing. “The Biden administration’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan is a foreign-policy humiliation,” he thundered, “unlike anything our country has endured since the Iran hostage crisis.”

In Pence’s alternative universe, the reason the Taliban won was because Biden extended the Trump deadline for withdrawal by a few months: “Once Mr. Biden broke the deal, the Taliban launched a major offensive against the Afghan government and seized Kabul. They knew there was no credible threat of force under this president.” You would never know from reading this mendacious twaddle that the Taliban never agreed to a lasting cease-fire and never stopped attacking even when Trump and Pence were in office. (More than 3,000 Afghan civilians were killed in 2020.)

Let’s get real. When it comes to Afghanistan, Trump and Biden are, as Trump’s former national security adviser John Bolton said on Wednesday, “like Tweedledee and Tweedledum.” “While Biden bears responsibly for bungling the implementation,” Bolton said, “I have no confidence Trump would have executed it any more competently.” Indeed, given how many other policies Trump bungled, from the pandemic to migrant children, there is every reason to expect that he would have found some way to outdo Biden in mismanaging Afghanistan. At least Biden is now trying to airlift U.S. allies out of Afghanistan. Better late than never. It’s hard to imagine Trump doing even that much given the anti-immigrant animus of his base.

Charlie Kirk, head of the pro-Trump group Turning Point USA, set the tenor by accusing Biden of wanting Afghanistan to fall because he “wants a couple hundred thousand more Ilhan Omars to come into America to change the body politic permanently.” In a similarly odious vein, Fox “News” host Tucker Carlson warned of millions of Afghan refugees coming to the United States: “So first we invade, and then we are invaded.”Of course, given the opportunistic inconsistency of the Trumpkins, it would not surprise me to see these very same people who now warn of resettling Afghan refugees turn around tomorrow to criticize Biden for abandoning U.S. allies. In fact, Trump already did just that before reverting to his trademark nativism. (“This plane should have been full of Americans,” he complained on Wednesday of an Air Force aircraft carrying Afghan refugees. “America First!”) Logic be damned. The only thing that matters is “owning the libs.”

What’s maddening is that the disingenuous Trump media strategy could work. The bungled exit from Afghanistan does serve to discredit Biden and seemingly confirms Trump’s criticisms — hitherto limited to the right-wing bubble — that the president is weak and ineffectual. Biden’s approval rating is dropping — along with support for the withdrawal. The irony that Biden could be punished for implementing Trump’s strategy will be utterly lost on Trump supporters.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/19/trump-afghanistan-withdrawal-criticism/

Opinion: Who’s to blame for the deaths of 13 service members in Kabul? We all are.

By Max Boot

The last thing President Biden ever wanted to do was to preside over another ramp ceremony for more flag-draped caskets returning home from Afghanistan. Indeed, the entire rationale of his troop withdrawal was to avoid further casualties. Yet there he was on Sunday at Dover Air Force Base honoring the 13 service members killed in the suicide bombing at the Kabul airport. Fate can be cruel that way.

No doubt the president was even more gutted than the rest of us, because he was the one who sent them into harm’s way. In one of her last Instagram posts, Marine Sgt. Nicole Gee had been pictured holding an Afghan baby in her arms. “I love my job,” she said. Now she is gone. Along with Marine Lance Cpl. Rylee McCollum, who was married in February and expecting his first child; Marine Lance Cpl. David Espinoza, who hailed from the tiny border town of Rio Bravo, Tex., and saw military service as his “calling”; Marine Lance Cpl. Dylan R. Merola, who wanted to serve his country just like his two great-grandfathers who fought in the Korean War … and so many others.

Their deaths were not in vain. They died so that more than 114,000 people could escape to freedom. Generations as yet unborn will remember these heroes for helping them to find a better life. And yet their sacrifice was also agonizing and unnecessary. Like so many service members throughout U.S. history, they died, in part, because of the blunders of their superiors.

If you ask me who is to blame, I would point not only to Biden but to former president Donald Trump — and to all of us, the people of America. By carrying out this pell-mell withdrawal from Afghanistan, our leaders, after all, were only giving us what we wanted.

In a sense, the fuse of the bomb that exploded on Thursday was lit 18 months ago. That was when Trump, with bipartisan support, concluded a terrible troop-withdrawal deal that freed 5,000 Taliban terrorists and sapped the morale of our Afghan allies. Trump made scant provision to save Afghans who had fought with our troops. Olivia Troye, an aide to former vice president Mike Pence, has recounted how White House senior policy adviser Stephen Miller hindered every effort to bring the holders of Special Immigrant Visas to the United States.

Biden should have done better, but he didn’t. In April, also with bipartisan support, he announced that all U.S. forces would rapidly withdraw, along with the 17,000 contractors who kept the Afghan air force flying and the Afghan army supplied. Denied the ability to support their forces, the Afghan military rapidly collapsed in the face of a Taliban offensive.

Yet even as Biden was bowing out, he was ignoring calls from veterans’ groups to evacuate translators and other Afghan allies. Lawmakers, many with military backgrounds, pleaded with the administration to begin a mass evacuation, but their entreaties were ignored.

Why? At least three factors were at play. First, Biden was afraid of a xenophobic backlash from bringing so many Afghans to the United States. Second, he was concerned about sending a signal of no confidence in the Afghan government. And, third, he wagered that there was plenty of time to get people out later. But the Afghan government unraveled faster than anyone imagined, and desperate mobs of refugees swarmed the airport.

It was only then — with the Taliban already in control of Kabul — that Biden did what he should have done many months earlier: order a massive airlift of Afghans and U.S. citizens out of the country. What once could have been done in an orderly fashion with relatively low risk now became a highly perilous undertaking. The kind of “defense in depth” that was standard at U.S. military bases in Afghanistan — with multiple layers of trusted security personnel — was not possible in this chaotic environment.

U.S. troops were forced to rely on their enemies for outer-perimeter security. We do not know exactly how an Islamic State suicide bomber got close enough to carry out his devastating attack, but suffice it to say the Taliban guards were either incompetent or overwhelmed or simply unwilling to risk their own lives to save “infidels” and “traitors” from the wrath of fellow Islamists.

There are recriminations aplenty, but the sad fact is that the only way to avoid this particular disaster would have been either to stay in Afghanistan indefinitely or to leave our allies behind. Both options would have come with their own costs and were overwhelmingly rejected by the American people: Seventy percent of Americans wanted to withdraw from Afghanistan, and 81 percent wanted to evacuate translators and other allies. Our leaders were simply giving the American people what they thought we wanted.

The truth is that most Americans paid little attention to Afghanistan until recently (the three major television networks devoted a total of five minutes of evening news coverage to the country last year), and they had conflicting desires. They wanted out, but they did not want to bear the consequences of withdrawal. Those clashing impulses produced incoherent policymaking — and resulted in Sunday’s heartbreaking homecoming.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/08/29/whos-blame-deaths-13-service-members-kabul-we-all-are/?utm_campaign=wp_main&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

د آشنا تلویزیون د یکشنبې خپرونه د ۲۰۲۱ د اګست ۲۹ - وږي ۷

Editorial: Kabul airport attack serves as a harbinger of what lies ahead if the ISIS-K threat is ignored

WHILE Kabul may have fallen to the Afghan Taliban with little violence, Thursday’s devastating suicide blast outside the Afghan capital’s airport serves as a harbinger of what lies ahead should the local chapter of the self-styled Islamic State group have the freedom to operate in a security vacuum.

The IS’s Khorasan affiliate has claimed credit for the atrocity, which targeted families waiting outside the airport to be processed in order to leave Afghanistan. At the time of writing the death toll was at least 100, including over a dozen American troops, Taliban fighters and non-combatants. There had been intelligence reports of an impending attack, while the mass exodus to flee Taliban-ruled Afghanistan amidst the hasty Western withdrawal meant that a disaster was only a matter of time. IS was waiting to exploit the situation, and it has done so in a most brutal way.

However, gruesome as the airport bombing was, it offers an opportunity for all Afghan forces to disregard their differences and join forces — aided by the international community — against the IS threat. The world has seen in Iraq and Syria the brutal violence the self-styled caliphate is capable of. The threat of IS in Afghanistan has also been highlighted in these columns previously. Therefore, ignoring the threat will help create a regional security nightmare.

While the Taliban control most of Afghanistan, those opposed to their rule, primarily in the Panjshir area, have vowed to stick to their guns. In the interest of security, the Taliban and Panjshiri forces must work together to eliminate the IS threat from Afghan soil.

In reaction to the bombing, US President Biden has said he will strike back at IS. But instead of indulging in any gung-ho operations, there should be a unified anti-IS effort in Afghanistan led by the Taliban and other Afghan groups, and aided by foreign forces including Nato as well as Russia and China. Afghans know their country best and it should be left to them to purge it of IS.

However, such an operation does come with risks. After all, the more hard-line members of the Taliban may break ranks with the group’s leadership and join forces with IS, as was the case during the Taliban-US negotiations. Be that as it may, leaving IS to its devices in Afghanistan will help create a new monster. Not only will a rejuvenated IS rampage across Afghanistan, it will pose a grave threat to all major regional states, including Pakistan. Again, mention must be made of Syria and Iraq, where foreign interference and collapse of governance gave the soldiers of the ‘caliphate’ an open playing field. The effects of this folly were felt in the West also, as acts of terrorism increased globally. Therefore, mistakes of the past must not be repeated in Afghanistan, and Afghan forces must lead an internationally supported effort to disable IS in the country.

https://www.dawn.com/news/1643073/kabul-massacre

Biden’s Rushed Afghan Exit Adds Strains to U.S.-Pakistan Ties

Joe Biden’s hopes of keeping the Afghan Taliban in check will rely heavily on Pakistan, a neighboring nation that has close ties to the militant group but which has often proven an unreliable partner to the U.S.

Islamabad has long tried to balance its relationship with the U.S. and its support for the Taliban, stoking frustration in Washington and a sense now that the militant group’s triumph has a lot to do with its base of support in Pakistan.

“Americans believe Pakistan’s support for the Taliban over 20 years was the main reason” for the U.S.’s failure, said Husain Haqqani, who served as Pakistan’s ambassador to the U.S. from 2008 to 2011. “U.S.- Pakistan relations are in for a rough ride.”

Pakistan remains an indispensable power in the region and even if the Taliban weren’t ruling next door, the U.S. would want to maintain a foothold in the country to keep China’s influence in check and ensure Islamabad’s nuclear arsenal is secure. That will be even more critical after American troops wrap up their Afghan withdrawal on Aug. 31.

Bin Laden Refuge

The U.S. and Pakistan were never closer than after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, when the U.S. turned to Afghanistan’s neighbor for bases and intelligence. But the relationship hit a nadir in 2011, when U.S. special forces killed al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in the city of Abbottabad, not far from a key Pakistani military base. Many U.S. officials assume bin Laden’s presence was at least known by some in the Pakistani government, military and intelligence services, a charge officials there rejected. But the bitterness and distrust caused by that event still linger on both sides.Now, more than half a year into his presidency, Biden still hasn’t called Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan. “I keep hearing that President Biden hasn’t called me. It’s his business,” Khan told journalists this month. “It’s not like I am waiting for any phone call.”

Deadly Kabul Attack Shakes Biden’s Afghan Exit Strategy

Pakistani officials have complained over the years that the Americans have simultaneously wanted them to use their influence on the Afghan Taliban to help reach a political settlement while also cracking down on the group. Pakistan also has a large Pashtun population, the dominant ethnic group of Taliban leaders, complicating the politics of meeting U.S. demands. Leaving out Pakistan’s historic support for the Taliban, particularly from the country’s security services, Khan said the militant group’s success in retaking Afghanistan was probably inevitable and urged the world to work with them as a new government gets formed. The 300,000-strong Afghan security forces, equipped with sophisticated American weapons, couldn’t withstand 70,000 Taliban fighters because “no one fights for a corrupt government,” he said. “Let’s help them if the Taliban want to establish peace.”

China Ties

Despite the tensions, both sides still need each other.

For starters, “our intelligence-gathering ability in Afghanistan isn’t what it used to be,” Pentagon spokesman John Kirby said Aug. 20 when asked about the U.S.’s ability to track terrorists in the country as troops withdraw. Pakistan can help fill that gap, better than other neighboring nations.

 Another key incentive is China. The U.S.’s biggest strategic rival maintains close ties with Islamabad and stands to gain from America’s withdrawal from the region.Pakistan is a crucial part and original participant in China’s Belt and Road infrastructure initiative. Beijing and Islamabad signed $11 billion in projects last year alone. Close relations with Pakistan also provide China with leverage in its strained relationship with India.Khurram Schezad, chief executive officer at Karachi-based advisory Alpha Beta Core Solutions Pvt, said Islamabad needs to keep its options open, even as its long-standing political and economic ties with Beijing continue to deepen.

“China is a large trading partner for Pakistan but so is the U.S.” Schezad said. “We should keep diversification rather than concentrating risk with one specific nation.”

China-Pakistan trade totaled about $15 billion last year, more than double the $6.5 billion between Pakistan and the U.S., according to International Monetary Fund import data compiled by Bloomberg.

Investors are still cautious about the developing situation. While the stock market has seen little impact from the Taliban takeover, Pakistan bonds were the worst performers among emerging-market peers when the militant group took Kabul, according to a Bloomberg index, a reflection of the possibility that the country will face a backlash for its role supporting the Taliban.

If that happens, it would add to the economic troubles facing Pakistan, which is dependent on a $6 billion International Monetary Fund program.

Homegrown Terrorists

Pakistan also faces its own terrorist threats for which security and intelligence cooperation with the U.S. could prove useful. The Pakistani Taliban have been blamed for 70,000 deaths of civilians in the country since the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

The group has carried out multiple terrorist attacks in the country in recent years, including a car bomb explosion at a luxury hotel hosting the Chinese ambassador in the Pakistani city of Quetta this year. In 2014, the organization assaulted a school, leaving 145 dead -- mainly children.

Now, Pakistan is worried about terrorist attacks from across its border after militants were released from Afghan jails.

“The Taliban’s Pakistan faction was using Afghan soil against Pakistan,” Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said in a news conference this week. “Our concerns are genuine, and our expectations are also natural. We don’t want to see Afghanistan become a safe haven for any terrorist outfit.”

Qureshi has urged a political accommodation with the Taliban during visits to Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Iran to discuss the evolving situation. He argues that peace in Afghanistan would bring stability to the region and promote trade.

Hard to Forget

Besides Pakistan’s history hosting bin Laden, Americans will find it hard to forget that Pakistan gave the Taliban in Afghanistan the opportunity to rebuild and regroup after the U.S. invasion.

“No U.S. administration in the last 20 years was able to end the Pakistani sanctuary the Taliban enjoyed,” said Lisa Curtis, former senior director for South and Central Asia on the National Security Council under President Donald Trump. “So long as the Taliban could fall back safely to Pakistan and the Pakistani military allowed them to freely cross back and forth across the border, the Taliban were never going to lose the stamina, will, and resources to fight.”

Trump cut back on military assistance to Pakistan in 2018, wary that U.S. taxpayer dollars were being used to fund America’s enemies.

Yet for all the problems, neither America nor Pakistan seems capable of extricating itself from their awkward relationship.

The U.S. “looks at the region and says we have a potentially festering terrorism sanctuary in Afghanistan we need to deal with,” said Richard Fontaine, chief executive officer of the Center for a New American Security who was an adviser to the late Republican Senator John McCain. “They’re going to need regional partners, and Pakistan is going to be one of those.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-29/biden-s-rushed-afghan-exit-adds-strains-to-u-s-pakistan-ties

Fire from Afghan border kills two soldiers - Pakistan Army

Militant fire from across the Afghan border kills two Pakistanian soldiers, the Pakistan Army reported on Thursday. The army said it retaliated and killed two or three attackers.

The incident in Pakistan's Bajaur district is the first of its kind reported since the Taliban took over Afghanistan.

On Saturday, the United States said it had killed two ISIS-K militants in eastern Nangarhar province which borders Pakistan. The Taliban condemned the strike.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/militant-fire-across-afghan-border-kills-two-pakistan-soldiers-says-army-2021-08-29/

#Pakistan #PPP - Imran Khan celebrating destruction of three years: Bilawal Bhutto

Chairman Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP), Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has termed the PTI government as incompetent and selected and said that Imran Khan is celebrating the destruction of three years.

Addressing the ‘Workers Convention’ at Wassan House in Kot Diji, Khairpur District, he said that IRSA was doing injustice to Sindh on the issue of water.

Chairman PPP while criticizing the incumbent PTI said that incompetent and illegitimate government was imposed on the people terming the current government as ‘selected’.

Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said that unemployment and inflation have reached historic levels. He said that people have been made jobless during PTI’s three years of destruction adding that Pakistan Steel Mills was closed and people were made unemployed.

He said that the future of the youth of Sindh was being played with. Instead of building houses, people are being made homeless.

https://dunyanews.tv/en/Pakistan/617250-Imran-Khan-celebrating-destruction-of-three-years:-Bilawal-Bhutto-

Video - #TheDailyShow - America’s Afghanistan Fiasco

Video Report - Acosta: Kabul was a moment for national unity. And yet ...

Video Report - Biden warns another attack on Kabul airport 'highly likely'

Video Report - President Biden is Briefed on the Ongoing Preparations for Hurricane Ida

Video Report - #ISILBlastAirport Latest - US says drone strike killed two high-profile ISKP targets | Al Jazeera Breakdown

Video - Pakistan Peoples Party Workers Convention at Pitafi House, Tando Allahyar

#Pakistan #PPP - Inflation, unemployment, poverty real face of change: Bilawal

 

Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari while lambasting Prime Minister Imran Khan over economic policies said that inflation, unemployment and poverty are the real face of change.

Addressing a workers’ convention in Tandu Allah Yar on Saturday, he said that the PPP is the only party that can do opposition and compete the selected in the federation.

Bilawal said that whenever an undemocratic and selected government rules the country, they deprive the masses of their basic rights, he said.

He said that the selected government is now is attacking from all sides and depriving the masses of their human, democratic and economic rights, the way the rights were violated by the previous regimes.

The PPP chairman while urging the party workers to be ready counter the incompetent government said that PPP’s die-hard workers from Tando Allah Yar knew how to protect and snatch their rights.

On Friday, addressing a press conference, he said that the people of Pakistan are not satisfied with the three-year-long performance of puppet Prime Minister Imran Khan, adding that the PTI had promised to provide houses and jobs to the people, but instead, jobs and houses were snatched from people. They even tried to take away Chief Justice of Sindh’s employment.

The PPP chairman said that Imran Khan had promised to provide 5 million houses and 10 million jobs. But instead, houses were demolished in the name of encroachment. “Young people from Kashmir to Karachi are walking around with degrees in their hands but are not getting jobs,” he said. “Even those who had jobs have been laid off in the last three years.”

He pointed out that 10,000 employees of Steel Mills had been laid off, and now 16,000 more families were being deprived of jobs.

Bilawal went on to say that the PTIMF deal has benefited the rich and harmed the poor. The people of Pakistan are now looking to the Pakistan People’s Party, which always speaks for the poor and gives them relief. This is why Pakistanis are now looking towards PPP to save them – they want a government that solves the problems of the poor and gives them relief.

https://dunyanews.tv/en/Pakistan/617121-Bilawal-slams-govt-over-inflation-unemployment-poverty-in-country

#Pakistan #PPP - China’s concerns must be removed: Bilawal

A day after the ruling party basked in the glory of its success, Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari claimed that the people were not satisfied with the three-year performance of Prime Minister Imran Khan.“PTI had promised to provide houses and jobs to the people, but instead, jobs and houses were snatched from people. They even tried to take away Chief Justice of Sindh’s employment,” he said while addressing a press conference in Thatta. The PPP chief was in the city to offer condolences to Sindh Assembly member Muhammad Ali Malikani on the death of his mother.

“I am going to reveal puppet Prime Minister Imran Khan’s performance to the people and ask them how they spent three years under the selected PM,” Bilawal said.

Taking a jibe at the PTI’s promises, he alleged that the government instead of providing jobs and housing demolished homes in the name of encroachment. The PTI-IMF deal has benefited the rich and harmed the poor, the PPP leader claimed.

He also spoke about the prevailing situation in Afghanistan and condemning the terrorist incidents in Kabul.

“Neither the people of Afghanistan nor the people of Pakistan want such terrorism,” he said, “Together, we must not allow anyone to use the territory of both countries against anyone. The border has been fenced, and we hope that our borders will be protected.”

Bilawal emphasised that the situation in Afghanistan was bound to have an impact on Pakistan as well.

He stressed that the issue was important not because of the US or Afghanistan but because the government wanted to protect its citizens and ensure no extremists harm them.

“The government should review the security situation of the country,” he said, “The National Security Plan has not been implemented yet even though the nation is in dire need of it.”

He added that CPEC’s security also needed to be reviewed since it was an asset to Pakistan’s economy, and the country’s enemies would try to target it. “China’s objections regarding the recent terrorist incidents must be removed,” Bilawal said.

To a question, the PPP chairman said that Afghan citizens coming from Afghanistan would stay in the city for a short period and then move to the US.

When asked about water scarcity in Sindh, PPP Chairman Bilawal alleged that the role played by IRSA during the incumbent government’s rule has been oppressive. Despite objections of the three provinces, he added the TP link canal was opened, and it remained open. “This government is harming the federation, and IRSA must make its decisions impartially,” he added.

To another query, he said that public service commissions were set up all over the country, but the Sindh Public Commission has been kept closed.

“In the current economic climate, such decisions raise questions about our federation, democracy, and the judiciary. We will protest in front of parliament and the people,” he said.

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2317495/chinas-concerns-must-be-removed-bilawal

Imran Khan has brought the country to the brink of disaster in three years – Chairman PPP Bilawal Bhutto Zardari

Pakistan Peoples Party Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has said that the hallmark of Imran Khan’s three-year performance is skyrocketing inflation, unemployment, and poverty levels. In a statement, the PPP chairman commented on the performance of PTI’s three-year tenure and said that Imran Khan has left Pakistan completely internationally isolated, and his foreign policy seems to be desperately waiting to receive a phone call from the US President.

“Imran Khan talks a big game but he constantly fails to perform. He can no longer fool the people with bold statements.” said the PPP Chairman. He further said that everything stated by the Prime Minister begins with him and ends with him. It is time he realized that in reality, everything needs to begin and end with the people of Pakistan. Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari further said that in the last three years, only the PTI mafia has benefited in Pakistan. Flour thieves and sugar thieves are on the rise, whereas the general public is offered basic necessities such as medicines at exorbitant prices. “The people buying their monthly ration understand how well Imran Khan has performed” said Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. “They are the ones who have to worry about their basic survival every time prices increase.”He added that Imran Khan had brought the country to the brink of disaster in three years, and it may take Pakistan more than a decade to recover.

He further said that the measure of a government’s performance not based on the false figures parotted by government officials, but rather by the conditions ordinary people find themselves dealing with. Chairman Bilalwal Bhutto Zardari said that if one were to try to find proof of the country’s positive performance, as claimed by government officials and advisors of Imran Khan, it would be easier to find a needle in a haystack. “The puppet Prime Minister himself knows he has destroyed the administrative institutions of the country, but he is not ready to leave power due to his insatiable lust for power, his stubbornness and his ego,” he said.

https://www.ppp.org.pk/pr/25377/

During his three years in office, he gave neither a house nor employment to the people of Thatta. Imran Khan is a false Prime Minister – Chairman PPP Bilawal Bhutto Zardari

Pakistan Peoples Party Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari has stated that the people of Pakistan are not satisfied with the three-year-long performance of puppet Prime Minister Imran Khan. PTI had promised to provide houses and jobs to the people, but instead, jobs and houses were snatched from people. They even tried to take away Chief Justice of Sindh’s employment.

After offering condolences to the Sindh Assembly member Muhammad Ali Malikani on the death of his mother, Chairman PPP addressed a press conference at his residence. “I am going to reveal puppet Prime Minister Imran Khan’s performance to the people and ask them how they spent three years under the selected Prime Minister.”

He said that Imran Khan had promised to provide 5 million houses and 10 million jobs. But instead, houses were demolished in the name of encroachment. “Young people from Kashmir to Karachi are walking around with degrees in their hands but are not getting jobs,” said Chairman PPP. “Even those who had jobs have been laid off in the last three years.” He pointed out that 10,000 employees of Steel Mills had been laid off, and now 16,000 more families were being deprived of jobs.

He further said that the people of Pakistan were now calling out to be saved from the present incompetent and failed government.Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari said that the PTIMF deal has benefited the rich and harmed the poor. The people of Pakistan are now looking to the Pakistan People’s Party, which always speaks for the poor and gives them relief. This is why Pakistanis are now looking towards PPP to save them – they want a government that solves the problems of the poor and gives them relief.

Speaking on the situation in Afghanistan, the PPP chairman condemned the terrorist incidents in Kabul yesterday. He said that he hoped a proper investigation would be conducted against those involved in these incidents. “Neither the people of Afghanistan nor the people of Pakistan want such terrorism,” he said. “Together, we must not allow anyone to use the territory of both countries against anyone. The border has been fenced, and we hope that our borders will be protected.”

Chairman PPP emphasised that the situation in Afghanistan is bound to have an impact on Pakistan as well. He stressed that the issue is important not because of the US or Afghanistan but because we want to protect Pakistan’s citizens and ensure no extremists harm them. “The government should review the security situation of the country,” he said. “The National Security Plan has not been implemented yet even though the nation is in dire need of it.” He said that CPEC’s security also needs to be reviewed since it is an asset to Pakistan’s economy, and Pakistan’s enemies will try to target it. China’s objections regarding the recent terrorist incidents must be removed. Responding to a question, the PPP chairman said that Afghan citizens coming from Afghanistan would stay in the city for a short period and then move to the United States. When asked about water scarcity in Sindh, Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari responded that the role played of IRSA during Imran Khan’s rule has been oppressive, and this has never happened in the past. Despite objections of the three provinces, the TP-Link Canal was opened, and it remains open. This government is harming the federation, and IRSA must make its decisions impartially. Replying to another question, Chairman PPP stated that public service commissions were set up all over the country, but the Sindh Public Commission has been kept closed. “In the current economic climate, such decisions raise questions about our federation, democracy, and the judiciary. We will protest in front of the parliament and the people,” he said. “If water, gas, and jobs are taken away, we will have no choice but to protest,” he added.

Meanwhile, Chairman PPP Bilawal Bhutto Zardari reached the residence of PPP District Sujawal President and Member Sindh Assembly Muhammad Ali Malikani in Thatta and consoled with Muhammad Ali Malikani, Haji Shaukat Malikani, and Dr. Niaz Malikani on the demise of their mother . He offered his condolences and prayed for the soul of the deceased to rest in peace. Accompanying the Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari were Chief Minister Syed Murad Ali Shah, Nisar Khuhro, Manzoor Wasan, Aajiz Dhamrah, Sadiq Memon, Gahram Khan, Jam Khan Shoro, Zulfiqar Shah, Ayaz Shirazi, Shafqat Shirazi, Arbab Wazir Memon, Qasim Naveed, Susui Palejo, Rehana Leghari, Abdul Wahid Soomro and Heer Soho.During the visit, the PPP chairman was warmly welcomed by the people from Karachi to Thatta. When Chairman PPP Bilawal Bhutto Zardari reached Makli on the Makli Bypass, they greeted their leader with full throated slogans.

Pakistan Peoples Party Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari was also received at the Makli Bypass, where the bypass resounded with the slogans of Jeay Bhutto. Thousands of people, including women and children, were present at the reception camp. Speaking on the occasion, the PPP chairman said, “Imran Khan says that he has brought change and development. During his three years in office, he gave neither a house nor employment to the people of Thatta. Imran Khan is a false Prime Minister.”

After the visit to Thatta, Chairman Bilawal Bhutto Zardari left for Tando Muhammad Khan.

https://www.ppp.org.pk/pr/25381/

Video - ‘Why did the US lose in Afghanistan?’ A new book explores decades of mistakes

COVID-19: The dangers of misinformation | COVID-19 Special

Video Report - President Biden Holds a Bilateral Meeting with Naftali Bennett, Prime Minister of Israel

Video Report - #StateDepartment #DepartmentofState #Diplomacy Daily Press Briefing - August 27, 2021

The Tragedy of Afghanistan

By The Editorial Board

The rapid reconquest of the capital, Kabul, by the Taliban after two decades of a staggeringly expensive, bloody effort to establish a secular government with functioning security forces in Afghanistan is, above all, unutterably tragic.

Tragic because the American dream of being the “indispensable nation” in shaping a world where the values of civil rights, women’s empowerment and religious tolerance rule proved to be just that: a dream.

This longest of American wars was code-named first Operation Enduring Freedom and then Operation Freedom’s Sentinel. Yet after more than $2 trillion and at least 2,448 American service members’ lives lost in Afghanistan, it is difficult to see what of lasting significance has been achieved.It is all the more tragic because of the certainty that many of the Afghans who worked with the American forces and bought into the dream — and especially the girls and women who had embraced a measure of equality — have been left to the mercy of a ruthless enemy.The Biden administration was right to bring the war to a close. Yet there was no need for it to end in such chaos, with so little forethought for all those who sacrificed so much in the hopes of a better Afghanistan.

Numberless Afghans who had worked for years alongside American troops, civil society groups, aid organizations and journalists, including the many who had worked with The New York Times, abruptly found themselves in mortal danger on Sunday as the Taliban swept into Kabul as leaders of the Afghan government, including President Ashraf Ghani, headed for the airport.

It was tragic, too, because with the bitter political divide of today’s America, efforts to draw critical lessons from this calamitous setback have already been enmeshed in angry recriminations over who lost Afghanistan, ugly schadenfreude and lies. Within hours of the fall of Kabul, the knives were already out.

While the speed of the collapse of the Afghan government was shocking, the result should not have come as a surprise. This calamity cannot be laid alone at President Biden’s feet, but it is incumbent on the current administration to make right what has gone wrong with the withdrawal plans. The U.S. military is, if nothing else, a logistical superpower, and it should move heaven and earth and anything in between to rescue those people who have risked everything for a better future. Mr. Biden on Monday said that evacuation efforts will continue, a welcome development. Red tape shouldn’t stand between allies and salvation.

The war in Afghanistan began in response by the United States and its NATO allies to the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, as an operation to deny Al Qaeda sanctuary in a country run by the Taliban. How it evolved into a two-decade nation-building project in which as many as 140,000 troops under American command were deployed at one time is a story of mission creep and hubris but also of the enduring American faith in the values of freedom and democracy.

The Afghanistan papers published in The Washington Post — including a confidential project to identify “Lessons Learned” conducted by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, an agency created by Congress — painted a devastating picture of corruption, incompetence, lack of motivation and other flaws among the Afghan forces that the United States and its allies were trying to mold into a serious military.

One Navy official said Afghans viewed their police as “the most hated institution” in Afghanistan. Other officials described systematic looting by soldiers and officers, as well as Afghan casualties so huge — 60,000 killed since 2001, by one estimate — that the government kept them a secret. The corruption was so rampant that many Afghans began to question whether their government or the Taliban were the greater evil. The Pentagon and the U.S. Congress deserve a share of the blame for the debacle, and certainly for the rosy progress reports that so often emerged. But what the United States or its allies could or should have done differently — and whether that hoary cliché about Afghanistan as the graveyard of empires has been validated once again — is a debate that should consume politicians, pundits and historians for years to come. The responsibility lies with both parties. President George W. Bush launched the war, only to shift focus to Iraq before any stability had been achieved. President Barack Obama was seeking to withdraw American troops but surged their levels instead. President Donald Trump signed a peace deal with the Taliban in 2020 for a complete withdrawal by last May.

When Mr. Biden came to office, some Defense Department and other officials urged him to keep a small counterterrorism force in Afghanistan for several more years. But Mr. Biden, old enough to remember Vietnam and a veteran of foreign relations from his years in the Senate, became convinced that a few thousand troops remaining for a few more years in Afghanistan would not prevent an eventual Taliban victory. On April 6 he told his staff that he wanted all the troops out by Sept. 11. “I was the fourth president to preside over an American troop presence in Afghanistan — two Republicans, two Democrats,” he said later. “I would not, and will not, pass this war on to a fifth.” It was a decision that took courage and wisdom. The president knew full well what his critics would make of it — what they are already making of it. 

There will always be the what-if, that if only American troops had stayed longer, the outcome would have been different. Mr. Biden himself has been somewhat disingenuous in blaming Mr. Trump for his deal with the Taliban, which the president said “left the Taliban in the strongest position militarily since 2001.” It has long been clear that an American withdrawal, however or whenever conducted, would leave the Taliban poised to seize control of Afghanistan once again. The war needed to end. But the Biden administration could and should have taken more care to protect those who risked everything in pursuit of a different future, however illusory those dreams proved to be.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/15/opinion/afghanistan-taliban.html

د ترکیې ولسمشر وايي د کابل هوايي ډګر فعال ساتلو لپاره طالبانو سره خبرې کوي - د بي بي سي نړۍ دا وخت

OP-ED: #Afghanistan: Sanity in Surrender

 By Abdul Hadi Mayar

When Afghan National Defense and Security Force (ANDSF) surrendered to Taliban unit after unit, people and media viewed it with contempt; describing it as an act of cowardice. But now when the dust of the Taliban’s rampaging victory is subsiding, the army’s refusal to fight back appears rather saner as it stopped Afghanistan from sliding into a Syria-like situation.

As soon as the US resumed the drawdown of its remaining troops from Afghanistan on May 1 this year, a large number of districts in rural areas of the country fell to the Taliban without any resistance. Those initial gains of the Taliban exposed many weaknesses of the Afghan National Army. It came out that ANDSF foot soldiers had been working without salary for many months. Besides, they also faced a scarcity of equipment and fuel.

Despite that, journalists and analysts covering Afghanistan, in keeping with the Afghan history, overlooked the Taliban’s gains as far-flung rural districts had never had any significance in Afghan warfare. The government’s authority in Afghanistan has always remained restricted to big cities.

Secondly, Afghanistan never had an organised army, which we can expect in any modern state. Traditionally, the loosely organised Afghan military force had consisted of regional warlords, given ranks according to the force under their tribal command. Even the ANDSF, which the US and NATO raised into an army over the last 20 years, was not immune to this drawback. There have been accusations of a large number of ghost soldiers present in the army and non-payment of salaries to many genuine staff members. Such a roughly combined force could not be expected to counter the Taliban in rural areas where logistic support and reinforcement are difficult to reach on time.

However, by the time the Taliban reached the thresholds of major cities, ANDSF and its special operation force, equally supported by the popular uprising militias, forcefully resisted their initial attacks in Helmand, Herat, Kandahar and the eastern Nangarhar and Paktya provinces.

Any resistance against the violent and jihad-emboldened Taliban would have obliterated whatever Afghanistan was left with.

The situation in the non-Pashtoon northern provinces was a bit difficult as the regional and local warlords under the command of Uzbek General, Abdul Rashid Dostum Tajik chieftains, Atta Muhammad Nur and Ahmad Masud, had practically been weakened as their ethnic leaders were sidelined over the recent decades.Emboldened by the victories in the southern, western and eastern provinces just a week before the Taliban’s final march on Kabul, the Afghan Army took to the north as General Dostum and Atta Muhammad Noor were hastily restored to their might in Mazar-e-Sharif.

Several major controversial steps, including replacement of the Army, the transfer of General Sami Sadat, a triumphant corps commander in the strategic Lashkargah city in the middle of the war and total shifting of focus to the north, left the southern and western provinces vulnerable.

Despite that, compromises and secret deals were seen more at work behind the Taliban’s abrupt victories than any weakness of ANDSF commanders. While General Dostum was preparing to launch a counteroffensive against the Taliban in the northwestern Jawzjan province, Dawood Laghmani, the governor of the southern Ghazni province, surrendered to the Taliban without a fire-shot. Earlier, Zaranj city of Nimroz province on the Iranian border has fallen to the Taliban in the same manner. Yet, it did not have as much impact as it was a far off desert province.

Simultaneously, Ismail Khan, the governor of the western Herat province, who had pushed back a Taliban attack with massive public support just days back, capitulated to the Taliban without any visible justification.

At the very moment, Zabihullah Mohmand, the corps commander of Mazar-e-Sharif, surrendered to the Taliban while General Dostum and Atta Muhammad Nur had to flee to Uzbekistan; accusing the former of handing over all ANDSF ammunition to the Taliban.

These unexpected defeats greatly demoralised the remaining units. Thus, commanders of the Afghan army, President Ashraf Ghani and other government leaders were left with no option but either to surrender or be perished. While fleeing the country, Ghani said the siege of Kabul at the hands of Taliban left him with only two options: to fight back and confront hundreds of thousands of Kabul residents to bloodshed or to defect. He said he had chosen the second option to avoid bloodshed. This act of the president not only left his government virtually dissolved but also melted away the army.

Many Afghan and international journalists and analysts, including Americans, equally blamed the debacle of Afghanistan on the hasty and unplanned decision of the Biden administration to withdraw the remaining US forces by September 11 this year.The withdrawal of the remaining US-NATO troops from Afghanistan was very much on the cards and no one had disputed its need. President Biden was correct when he announced on April 29 this year to end this “forever war” as it “was never meant to be a multi-generational undertaking of nation-building.”However, it also remains a fact that it was not a war wished by the Afghan people themselves, nor had any Afghan invited the US forces to their country. If Al Qaeda had attacked the US and the Taliban had hosted it in Afghanistan, Washington could return as soon as it had accomplished its objective of bombing both Taliban and Al Qaeda into “stone-age.”

But if Americans remained in Afghanistan and took upon themselves the task of national-building, which, according to President Biden, Washington had never meant at all, then the war-weary Afghans, and of course their government and civil and military officials who had served Americans during all these long years, deserved to be taken care of while planning to withdraw the US forces from the country.

There were even conspiracy theories aired on social media that this was all part of the deal between the US and Taliban though sanity would not give any credence to such accusations.

Whatever might be the reasons for the disgraceful capitulation of the Afghan army, the fact remains that any resistance against the violent and jihad-emboldened Taliban would have not only obliterated whatever Afghanistan was left with, but also unleashed such a destructive civil war, which might have faced Afghanistan with the same fate as that of Syria.

https://dailytimes.com.pk/808283/afghanistan-sanity-in-surrender/

Pakistan’s Support for the Taliban: What to Know

By Manjari Chatterjee Miller

Pakistan’s government and military generally favored a Taliban victory in Afghanistan. But maintaining support for the Taliban is risky.

Why did Pakistani officials cheer the Taliban takeover of Afghanistan?

It is important to note Pakistan’s government and military are not monolithic institutions but rather groups with competing interests. With that in mind, it is true that these groups were generally in favor of a Taliban victory. After the Taliban took over Kabul, Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan declared that the Taliban were “breaking the chains of slavery.”

There are three long-standing and overlapping reasons for Khan’s public show of support. First, Pakistan has vested ideological interests in the Taliban. Pakistan was created in 1947 as a Muslim nation and Islam was the glue that was supposed to hold together many otherwise disparate communities with diverse linguistic and ethnic identities. But this was a struggle. In 1971, after a bitter civil war, a large portion of Pakistani territory in the east dominated by the Bengali-speaking community broke away to become Bangladesh. That loss made the Pakistani government particularly paranoid about the western territories of Balochistan and Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, which have large Pashtun or Pashto-speaking populations. Pakistan established madrassas in these territories to emphasize and teach a particularly strict brand of Islam in the hopes that Islamic nationalism would suppress Pashtun nationalism. Taliban leaders, who also espouse Islamic nationalism, were trained in those madrassas.

Afghanistan-Pakistan Border Divides Pashtun Communities

TURKMENISTAN

CHINA

Pashtun areas

Kabul

Peshawar

AFGHANISTAN

Islamabad

IRAN

Quetta

Durand Line

PAKISTAN

INDIA

0

500 km

ARABIAN SEA

0

200 mi

Note: Data as of June 2021.

Source:  Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich (ETH Zurich).

Second, Pakistani officials worry about the border with Afghanistan and believe that a Taliban government could ease their concerns. Since 1947, Afghan governments have rejected the Durand Line, which separates Pakistani Pashtun-dominated territories from Afghanistan. Afghanistan, home to a Pashtun majority, claims these territories as a part of a “Pashtunistan” or traditional Pashtun homeland. Pakistan’s government believes that the Taliban’s ideology emphasizes Islam over Pashtun identity.

Third, it is imperative for Pakistan to have a Pakistan-friendly government established in Afghanistan. Pakistan accuses India of seeking to exploit its ethnic and linguistic divisions to destabilize and break up the country. India’s good relationship with former Afghan President Ashraf Ghani’s government did nothing to assuage this concern. A Taliban government could help Pakistan counter India, including by providing a haven for anti-India jihadi groups.

How has Pakistan’s relationship with the Taliban changed since 9/11? 

Pakistan continues to be a major source of financial and logistical support for the Taliban. The Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency has supported the Taliban from their inception with money, training, and weaponry. The ISI also maintains strong ties with the Pakistan-based Haqqani network, a militant group that works closely with the Taliban. (Sirajuddin Haqqani, the leader of the Haqqani network, has also been a deputy leader of the Taliban since 2015.) The Taliban own real estate in Pakistan and receive large donations from private individuals in the country.

At the same time, under pressure from the United States, Pakistan has over the years detained—and allegedly tortured—Taliban commanders, including Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, a Taliban founder who is now back as one of the group’s chief leaders. Moreover, the current Pakistan Army chief, General Qamar Javed Bajwa, is reportedly more wary of the Taliban’s potential to destabilize Pakistan.

Going forward, Pakistan’s influence with the Taliban could decrease. The Taliban have been politically savvy in attempting to build ties with China, Iran, and Russia. If China, a close Pakistani ally, chooses to recognize the Taliban-led government, it will do so without enthusiasm for the virulent religious nationalism espoused by both the Taliban and Pakistan. This is because it could spill over into China’s Xinjiang region, where the Chinese government has used claims of separatism to crack down on Uyghur Muslims.

What consequences could the Taliban takeover have for Pakistan?

Pakistan is playing a risky game in supporting the Taliban. Its goal to contain Pashtun nationalism and counter India by having a Pakistan-friendly government in Afghanistan does not account for either the quirks of the Taliban or the warring religious fundamentalist forces within Pakistan.

Showing its sensitivity to the Durand Line, Pakistan has spent millions of dollars over the past few years to reinforce and demarcate the border. Yet, the Taliban, in conformity with other Afghan governments, have neither accepted the Durand Line nor Pakistan’s attempts to physically demarcate it. Nor have the Taliban ever renounced or condemned the Afghan goal of a Pashtunistan.

To complicate matters further, the Taliban maintain close ties with the Tehrik-e-Taliban (TTP), sometimes referred to as the Pakistani Taliban. The TTP comprises small Pashtun militant groups that are sympathetic to the Taliban, operate along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border, and vow to war with Pakistan until it secures an independent Pashtunistan. The TTP is responsible for the deaths of many thousands of Pakistani civilians. Recognizing the link between the Afghan Taliban and the TTP, General Bajwa reportedly warned Pakistani lawmakers that the groups are “two faces of the same coin.”

Moreover, if Afghanistan once again descends into civil war, Pakistan will have to cope with another huge flow of refugees. Last year, an estimated 1.4 million Afghan refugees were living in the country.

Finally, Pakistan could jeopardize its relationship with China if Afghanistan (as well as Pakistan) becomes a haven for Muslim separatists, including disaffected Uyghurs from Xinjiang.

How could the United States and its allies work with Pakistan on the situation in Afghanistan? 

The United States faces a complex situation in South Asia, and in its bilateral relationship with Pakistan. The U.S. government has a long-standing record of investment in Pakistan in return for cooperation on terrorism, but this has yielded limited dividends given Pakistan’s own regional security interests.

Now, Washington has two additional elements to consider. The first is its deepening strategic partnership with India. Over the past few years, India has become more receptive to U.S. overtures for closer security ties. Given these gains in the U.S.-India relationship, the United States should be extremely careful in its relationship with Pakistan; any sense that Washington is not using what clout it has to rein in Pakistan’s backing of cross-border terrorism will jeopardize its relationship with New Delhi.

The second element is China’s growing interest in the region. Although the Chinese government is unlikely to stir up religious terrorism in the region, it will seek to work with the Taliban and possibly even incorporate Afghanistan into its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Any U.S. strategy should seek to offset Chinese investments. And China also has clout with Pakistan. One option for the United States is to utilize China’s fears about religious nationalism and militancy spilling over from Afghanistan to initiate space for a U.S.-China-Pakistan cooperative strategy to pressure the Taliban.

https://www.cfr.org/article/pakistans-support-taliban-what-know