There certainly is little or no reporting of this peace initiative in the mainstream press even in reports on Bucharest. I read some reports in the Moscow News as well and it all about the issue of the U.S. missile defence system in Eastern Europe and the potential membership of the Ukraine and Georgia in NATO.
In any event it is most unlikely that Canada will take any initiative that is not in support of or approved by the U.S. The standard ritualistic response to negotiation is that "We don't negotiate with terrorists". Of course Karzai himself is not so idiotic as to espouse that line. He offers the Taliban cabinet posts!
This is from Straight Goods..
Canada should broker peace for Afghanistan
Russia and Eastern states to offer NATO a proposal for negotiated settlement of Afghan conflict.
Dateline: Monday, March 31, 2008
by John W Warnock
NATO countries will be meeting in Bucharest, Romania from April 2 to 4. The key issue on the agenda is the war in Afghanistan. For the first time in history, Russia has been invited to attend a NATO meeting. Russia will put forward a recommendation to settle the conflict through negotiation.
In Canada, the debate on Afghanistan has had a very narrow focus. The primary concern has been the role of the Canadian Forces in the counter-insurgency war. Politicians and media have focused on questions such as: How many more Canadians will be killed? How long will our forces be in Kandahar province? What will the US government think if Canada withdraws from the southern zone of conflict? If Canada pulls its forces out of Afghanistan, will there be chaos?
The Russian and Chinese governments believe that the United Nations should be taking the lead in finding a political solution.
The Canadian government has emphasized a "3-D policy: defence, diplomacy and development assistance". It is time for Canadians to consider what the Afghan people want. At the top of the list would certainly be an end to the death, destruction and despair — the other 3-D policy.
A variety of surveys show that at least 70 percent of Afghans do not want to see a return of the dreaded Taliban. Yet an even larger percentage supports a negotiated settlement with the Taliban to end the war.
The US-NATO policy, supported by recent Canadian governments, perpetuates the war.
Outside of Canada, there is widespread understanding that the counter insurgency war is not working. This past year was the most destructive since the US invasion, with at least 6200 Afghans killed, a 24 percent increase in roadside bombs, and a dramatic increase in suicide bombs.
The United Nations, as well as US and UK military leaders, report that the zone of operation of the insurgents is spreading. Attacks are now up to 550 per month.
The NATO meeting offers an opportunity for a new approach to the Afghanistan problem. Russia will be representing the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO). The SCO was jointly created with China and includes several countries that border on Afghanistan. Iran, Pakistan and Turkmenistan have applied for membership.
The Russians and their allies in the two organizations are proposing a joint NATO-CSTO agreement for the settlement of the Afghan conflict. This proposal appears to have the support of the governments of France and Germany and several other European NATO countries. The new governments in Pakistan are supporting a negotiated settlement to the Afghan war.
The Canadian government has an opportunity to take leadership and promote this new peace initiative.
Russia's proposal has been in development for some time. The annual meeting of the SCO at Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan in August 2007 focused on Afghanistan. The organization declared that they are willing to participate in the resolution of the problems in Afghanistan and improve the work of the SCO-Afghanistan Contact Group.
The SCO has expressed concern about the spread of Islamic fundamentalism in the region and the expansion of the drug industry and trade. The nations involved have offered to provide political, military and economic assistance to Afghanistan. The government of Hamid Karzai, which has official observer status at the SCO, is supportive of such a development.
The Russian and Chinese governments believe that the United Nations should be taking the lead in reaching a consensus position and finding a political solution. They argue that the expansion of the resistance in Afghanistan is due to the fact that the counterinsurgency war and the development strategy have been directed by the US government with the support of its NATO allies.
In their view, a successful settlement of the conflict has to be a UN-supported regional agreement. This is not out of the question.
For example, there was the Six-Plus-Two negotiations held in Berlin between March and July 2001 where the United States and Russia, and the six countries bordering on Afghanistan, held negotiations, sponsored by the United Nations. The goal was to get the Taliban government to agree to a broad government of national unity.
If such a government was achieved, the countries involved pledged economic assistance. The main goal of the Bush Administration at the time was to provide a stable Afghan government that would permit the building of the oil and gas pipelines from Turkmenistan to the Arabian Sea.
Since September 14, 2001 Canadian policy on Afghanistan has been to always support US policy. Now is the time for our government to stand up and take a lead in peacemaking. It is time to back the people of Afghanistan who want an end to this war.
Canada's reputation around the world is not based on our ability to fight with the United States in counterinsurgency wars. We are known for peacemaking and peacekeeping. Let us capitalize on that reputation.
John W Warnock is author of Creating a Failed State: the US, Canada and Afghanistan, to be published by Fernwood Publishing in May 2008.
Showing posts with label Negotiating with the Taliban. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Negotiating with the Taliban. Show all posts
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Sunday, December 30, 2007
Diplomats in Afghanistan expelled 'at behest of US'
This article gives rare insight into what is going on behind the scenes in Afghanistan and who calls the shots to a considerable extent. Don't expect to see this as a CBC headline, even though I see that some in the blogosphere have inhaled so much nitrous oxide that they call it the Communist Broadcasting Corporation!
The article notes that there is a close connection between the CIA and the Afghan NDS (National Directorate of Security) and that it was the US that asked the Karzai govt. to expel the diplomats. With actions like this the US may very well be endangering continued support for their misadventures. Bomber McNeil of the US is still the NATO commander in Afghanistan. Does someone still think that we have an independent mission in Afghanistan? There will be no independent mission as long as Harper and MacKay are around. We might as well have David Dinkins as our spokesperson.
Diplomats expelled 'at behest of the US'
By Eleanor Mayne
Last Updated: 2:05am GMT 30/12/2007
Two European diplomats accused of holding secret talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan were thrown out of the country following a complaint by the US, intelligence officials in Kabul have told The Sunday Telegraph.
Mervyn Patterson, who is British, and Irish-born Michael Semple were flown out of Kabul on Thursday after the Afghan government accused them of "threatening national security".
The pair had been working for the United Nations and the European Union respectively.
But according to a senior Afghan intelligence source, American officials had been unhappy about meetings between the men and high-level Taliban commanders in the volatile Helmand province.
The source claimed that the US alerted Afghan authorities after learning that the diplomats were providing direct financial and other support - including mobile phone cards - to the Taliban commanders, in the hope of persuading them to swap sides.
"This warning came from the Americans," he said. "They were not happy with the support being provided to the Taliban. They gave the information to our intelligence services, who ordered the arrests."
A government source in Kabul said there were close links between Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security (NDS) and the US Central Intelligence Agency, adding:
"The Afghan government would never have acted alone to expel officials of such a senior level. This was information that was given to the NDS by the Americans.
" These claims will reinforce perceptions of a rift between the US and its international partners in Afghanistan, including Britain.
Last year, US commanders expressed frustration with the British decision to withdraw from Musa Qala and allow tribal elders to strike a deal with the Taliban, who quickly reoccupied the town.
The American embassy has strongly denied any involvement in the incident involving the two diplomats, saying it had "no knowledge" of their activities.
Afghan officials, speaking anonymously, have accused the men of giving support to the Taliban in the form of money, food and phone cards for 10 months.
The article notes that there is a close connection between the CIA and the Afghan NDS (National Directorate of Security) and that it was the US that asked the Karzai govt. to expel the diplomats. With actions like this the US may very well be endangering continued support for their misadventures. Bomber McNeil of the US is still the NATO commander in Afghanistan. Does someone still think that we have an independent mission in Afghanistan? There will be no independent mission as long as Harper and MacKay are around. We might as well have David Dinkins as our spokesperson.
Diplomats expelled 'at behest of the US'
By Eleanor Mayne
Last Updated: 2:05am GMT 30/12/2007
Two European diplomats accused of holding secret talks with the Taliban in Afghanistan were thrown out of the country following a complaint by the US, intelligence officials in Kabul have told The Sunday Telegraph.
Mervyn Patterson, who is British, and Irish-born Michael Semple were flown out of Kabul on Thursday after the Afghan government accused them of "threatening national security".
The pair had been working for the United Nations and the European Union respectively.
But according to a senior Afghan intelligence source, American officials had been unhappy about meetings between the men and high-level Taliban commanders in the volatile Helmand province.
The source claimed that the US alerted Afghan authorities after learning that the diplomats were providing direct financial and other support - including mobile phone cards - to the Taliban commanders, in the hope of persuading them to swap sides.
"This warning came from the Americans," he said. "They were not happy with the support being provided to the Taliban. They gave the information to our intelligence services, who ordered the arrests."
A government source in Kabul said there were close links between Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security (NDS) and the US Central Intelligence Agency, adding:
"The Afghan government would never have acted alone to expel officials of such a senior level. This was information that was given to the NDS by the Americans.
" These claims will reinforce perceptions of a rift between the US and its international partners in Afghanistan, including Britain.
Last year, US commanders expressed frustration with the British decision to withdraw from Musa Qala and allow tribal elders to strike a deal with the Taliban, who quickly reoccupied the town.
The American embassy has strongly denied any involvement in the incident involving the two diplomats, saying it had "no knowledge" of their activities.
Afghan officials, speaking anonymously, have accused the men of giving support to the Taliban in the form of money, food and phone cards for 10 months.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Harper: Economic Slowdown Likely
The entire article is at Globe and Mail.
On Afghanistan it seems that Harper is not well briefed. Karzai is clearly and unequivocally interested in negotiating with the Taliban even to the point of offering them positions in the government. Here are two passages from this site.
If a group of Taliban or a number of Taliban come to me and say, 'President, we want a department in this or in that ministry or we want a position as deputy minister ... and we don't want to fight anymore,' ... If there will be a demand and a request like that to me, I will accept it because I want conflicts and fighting to end in Afghanistan," Karzai said.
and then also:
KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai on Saturday offered to meet with the Taliban leader and give militants a government position only hours after a suicide bomber in army disguise attacked a military bus, killing 30 people - nearly all of them Afghan soldiers.
Strengthening a call for negotiations he has made with increasing frequency in recent weeks, Karzai said he was willing to meet with the reclusive leader Mullah Omar and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a former prime minister and factional warlord leader.
"If I find their address, there is no need for them to come to me, I'll personally go there and get in touch with them," Karzai said. "Esteemed Mullah, sir, and esteemed Hekmatyar, sir, why are you destroying the country?"
"I wish there would be a demand as easy as this. I wish that they would want a position in the government. I will give them a position," he said.
The US Embassy in Kabul has said it does not support negotiations with Taliban fighters, labeling them as terrorists,
So Mr. Harper there seems to be a clear difference between you and Karzai and I expect Brown as well. You are with your US buddies on the issues. Karzai's position is clear and unequivocal and not what you say it is.
Economic slowdown likely, PM says
BRIAN LAGHI AND BILL CURRY
Globe and Mail Update
December 20, 2007 at 5:00 PM EST
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper is warning Canadians to brace themselves for a possible economic slowdown in 2008 that will restrict government spending and limit tax cuts.
In an interview with the Globe and Mail earlier this week, the Prime Minister moved to dampen any expectations of big spending on the horizon as he and the cabinet hammer out the contents of the upcoming spring budget.
"Although the fundamentals of the Canadian economy are strong, although we have taken our budget actions very early this year to position ourselves, the fact of the matter is Canada — as an open trading economy — cannot be immune from the growing uncertainty we see in the U.S. economy and the global economy," Mr. Harper said in the year-end conversation.
"There's likely to be a more challenging economic year ahead."
----------
• The Prime Minister responded for the first time to a report his government commissioned to examine polling practices under the previous Liberal regime. Though the Liberals originally decried the appointment of former Parti Québécois cabinet minister Daniel Paille to lead the probe as a "witch hunt," Mr. Paille's report concluded the Tories are actually spending more on polls — averaging two per working day.
"It shows we're doing a massive amount of polling, far more than we should be doing," Mr. Harper told the CBC. "We're going to take some steps to reduce that."
• On the Nuclear Safety Commission, the Prime Minister said the regulator showed "appalling judgment" in shutting down the Chalk River reactor for failing to follow orders.
"I don't believe the actions of Nuclear [Safety] Commission were motivated by partisan considerations," he told the CBC. "I do believe the course of action contemplated was extremely ill-advised; an appalling use of authority and judgment and one that the government had to deal with."
• On the controversy over former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's financial cash payments from Karlheinz Schreiber, Mr. Harper said it would be inappropriate for him to comment and will wait for the advice of University of Waterloo President David Johnston on the terms of reference for a public inquiry.
However, the Prime Minister hinted in several interviews that he would be open to a recommendation against a public inquiry.
• On Afghanistan, The Prime Minister rejected a Radio-Canada reporter's question as to whether he will simply extend the mission again in 2010.
"No," he replied. "For the population and for the government and for the Canadian Forces, there has to be limits to our participation."
He also commented on recent remarks by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, which Mr. Harper said were falsely characterized as calling for peace negotiations with the Taliban.
"It seems to me what Gordon Brown has said, what this government has said, what the American government, what the Afghan government has said are all the same, which is the ideal solution here is for all elements in Afghanistan to lay down their arms and to participate in a constitutional, democratic, political process," Mr. Harper told the CBC. "And [Afghan] President Karzai has from time to time made efforts and had some success in converting ground level commanders or ground level officials to the cause, as has Canada in Kandahar. It's not a general rule. But I think that's a big difference between negotiating with the Taliban as an intact insurgency versus trying to convert some or all of the Taliban to the political process."
On Afghanistan it seems that Harper is not well briefed. Karzai is clearly and unequivocally interested in negotiating with the Taliban even to the point of offering them positions in the government. Here are two passages from this site.
If a group of Taliban or a number of Taliban come to me and say, 'President, we want a department in this or in that ministry or we want a position as deputy minister ... and we don't want to fight anymore,' ... If there will be a demand and a request like that to me, I will accept it because I want conflicts and fighting to end in Afghanistan," Karzai said.
and then also:
KABUL, Afghanistan - Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai on Saturday offered to meet with the Taliban leader and give militants a government position only hours after a suicide bomber in army disguise attacked a military bus, killing 30 people - nearly all of them Afghan soldiers.
Strengthening a call for negotiations he has made with increasing frequency in recent weeks, Karzai said he was willing to meet with the reclusive leader Mullah Omar and Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a former prime minister and factional warlord leader.
"If I find their address, there is no need for them to come to me, I'll personally go there and get in touch with them," Karzai said. "Esteemed Mullah, sir, and esteemed Hekmatyar, sir, why are you destroying the country?"
"I wish there would be a demand as easy as this. I wish that they would want a position in the government. I will give them a position," he said.
The US Embassy in Kabul has said it does not support negotiations with Taliban fighters, labeling them as terrorists,
So Mr. Harper there seems to be a clear difference between you and Karzai and I expect Brown as well. You are with your US buddies on the issues. Karzai's position is clear and unequivocal and not what you say it is.
Economic slowdown likely, PM says
BRIAN LAGHI AND BILL CURRY
Globe and Mail Update
December 20, 2007 at 5:00 PM EST
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper is warning Canadians to brace themselves for a possible economic slowdown in 2008 that will restrict government spending and limit tax cuts.
In an interview with the Globe and Mail earlier this week, the Prime Minister moved to dampen any expectations of big spending on the horizon as he and the cabinet hammer out the contents of the upcoming spring budget.
"Although the fundamentals of the Canadian economy are strong, although we have taken our budget actions very early this year to position ourselves, the fact of the matter is Canada — as an open trading economy — cannot be immune from the growing uncertainty we see in the U.S. economy and the global economy," Mr. Harper said in the year-end conversation.
"There's likely to be a more challenging economic year ahead."
----------
• The Prime Minister responded for the first time to a report his government commissioned to examine polling practices under the previous Liberal regime. Though the Liberals originally decried the appointment of former Parti Québécois cabinet minister Daniel Paille to lead the probe as a "witch hunt," Mr. Paille's report concluded the Tories are actually spending more on polls — averaging two per working day.
"It shows we're doing a massive amount of polling, far more than we should be doing," Mr. Harper told the CBC. "We're going to take some steps to reduce that."
• On the Nuclear Safety Commission, the Prime Minister said the regulator showed "appalling judgment" in shutting down the Chalk River reactor for failing to follow orders.
"I don't believe the actions of Nuclear [Safety] Commission were motivated by partisan considerations," he told the CBC. "I do believe the course of action contemplated was extremely ill-advised; an appalling use of authority and judgment and one that the government had to deal with."
• On the controversy over former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's financial cash payments from Karlheinz Schreiber, Mr. Harper said it would be inappropriate for him to comment and will wait for the advice of University of Waterloo President David Johnston on the terms of reference for a public inquiry.
However, the Prime Minister hinted in several interviews that he would be open to a recommendation against a public inquiry.
• On Afghanistan, The Prime Minister rejected a Radio-Canada reporter's question as to whether he will simply extend the mission again in 2010.
"No," he replied. "For the population and for the government and for the Canadian Forces, there has to be limits to our participation."
He also commented on recent remarks by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, which Mr. Harper said were falsely characterized as calling for peace negotiations with the Taliban.
"It seems to me what Gordon Brown has said, what this government has said, what the American government, what the Afghan government has said are all the same, which is the ideal solution here is for all elements in Afghanistan to lay down their arms and to participate in a constitutional, democratic, political process," Mr. Harper told the CBC. "And [Afghan] President Karzai has from time to time made efforts and had some success in converting ground level commanders or ground level officials to the cause, as has Canada in Kandahar. It's not a general rule. But I think that's a big difference between negotiating with the Taliban as an intact insurgency versus trying to convert some or all of the Taliban to the political process."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)