The Afghan people will win #27

The Taliban in Moscow: A Turning Point for the Afghan War?

As the Afghan government suffers more losses on the ground, a landmark peace conference hosted by Russia could mark a shift in the 17-year war. The Taliban is there in its highest level diplomatic engagement in years.

quote:

VIJAY PRASHAD: You know, in 2007 there was a previous summit of this nature. Remember, 2007 is more than a decade ago. So it’s very significant that the last time this kind of grouping was attempted to be arranged was over 10 years ago of this really heartless war. And that time India was offered a seat at the table, and the government said, no, we don’t want to come, because there’s no such thing as a good Taliban and bad Taliban. There’s only the terrorists.

I think that understanding is modulated, to some extent. The way India has understood the Taliban is that they see the Taliban as a proxy force for Pakistan inside Afghanistan. People need to understand that the situation in Afghanistan isn’t merely about the Cold War. You know, the United States and Russia, and so on. It’s also a battlefield where India and Pakistan have been jockeying for power. You know, Afghanistan and Pakistan have a border dispute that goes back to the 1940s. And India has actually had a role in, is sort of perpetuating that tension in the region. And Pakistan has used the Taliban as its sort of forward proxy force inside Afghanistan.

So there is this tension between India and Pakistan manifest tragically inside Afghanistan. And I think now, as I said, there’s a modulation coming in. India is very keen to develop this port in Iran where it has invested hundreds of millions of dollars into the Chabahar Port, which is to take goods from India, through Iran, into Afghanistan, and then out through Central Asia to Russia. It’s a major market for Indian goods. So India is keen to bring some peace into Afghanistan. I think that really is what has brought India to the table in Moscow.

quote:

VIJAY PRASHAD: Inside the Taliban there are two, I think, debates that people need to pay attention to. The first is the Taliban leadership is quite concerned that it’s losing its rank and file to far more radical forces, including the Islamic State, or ISIS, which has a presence in sections of southern Afghanistan. So there is, I think, a tension here upon the Taliban leadership that unless they move the agenda forward, this sort of war of attrition that has been going on for 17 years might lose them their base to far more radical, far more dangerous forces. That’s one, I think, important thing that’s on the minds of the leadership of the Taliban.

I think the second aspect that needs to be paid attention to is that the Taliban is cautious about entering political life, aboveground political life. The government in Kabul led by Ashraf Ghani, former World Bank official, has made it clear that he is at the point where he’s willing to welcome the Taliban as a political party. And there’s this debate inside the Taliban of whether they’ll be able to pivot into becoming a legitimate political party. Because they look back at the earlier period when the mujahadeen or the fighters arrived in Kabul and basically became warlords. This is not something that they are keen on.

So I would say that we need to pay attention to this worry in the Taliban about losing their fighters to the Islamic State. And on the other hand, I think this tension inside the Taliban about whether they are ready to, you know, become a political party, I think that’s what’s driving them towards the table.

And yet another

https://www.voanews.com/a/taliban-us-will-join-russia-hosted-conference-...

It sounds like (could be wrong?) that the US really wants peace in Afghanistan! But why is there no mention of Trump? Or why is Trump, or at least appears to be silent on all of this? Has Afghanistan been lost in the western media? And is the silence from the western media actually a good thing?

With the interest of India, Taliban, China and Iran, I'm optimistic that something solid will come out of this meeting!

Perhaps it was necessary for the US to make serious concessions for there to be peace. This may be perceived as weakness, so better to just hush this away from western media and pretend Afghanistan doesn't matter any more and move on to something else?

All very possible Paladin1. It's promosing to see Iran India China Pakastin among other more local/regional countries involved at some kind of level.

Perhaps with these and other local players involved and at the table discussing, there can be an actual peace? For sure a better chance than NATO!

Unionist wrote:

So helpful of you to tell the Afghan "locals" how to achieve freedom.

I thought so too. Maybe locals isn't the choice word to use, perhaps Afghanistan citizens? Either way there are a lot of foreigners who have set up shop and living in Afghanistan. Businessmen, contractors, foreign workers, Academi (formerly known as Blackwater), all the companies providing various services. 

I think my observation is still accurate.  Either the US will be the puppet government or the Taliban and in the case of the latter there will be lots of obstacles for them to overcome if they become the countries government if we're talking about providing serviced

Definition of winning is subjective here. Is the Taliban and their beliefs in line with the majority of Afghanis? Is banning music, dancing, laughing in public considered winning? Maybe not so much for them but it's time we stop using such righteous reasons to justify medeling other countries affairs. If the Afghan people want change and don't want to live under the Taliban's dictatorship then let them fight that battle themselves.

Unfortunately I can also see Canadian soldiers back in Afghanistan within a year or two in an advisory role or even peacekeeping.