UPDATE 1145 GMT: The Washington Post this morning has a very different view of US-Pakistan relations and the Mullah Baradar case:
The capture of senior Afghan Taliban leaders in Pakistan represents the culmination of months of pressure by the Obama administration on Pakistan’s powerful security forces to side with the United States as its troops wage war in Afghanistan, according to U.S. and Pakistani officials.
A new level of cooperation includes Pakistani permission late last month for U.S. intelligence officials to station personnel and technology in this pulsating megacity, officials said. Intercepted real-time communications handed over to Pakistani intelligence officials have led to the arrests in recent days of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the Afghan Taliban’s No. 2 commander, and two of the group’s “shadow” governors for northern Afghanistan.
—
Gareth Porter, writing for Inter Press Service, goes behind the official story of the US-Pakistan joint operation to break the “Old Taliban” in Afghanistan with the capture of the organisation’s second-ranking leader:
Contrary to initial U.S. suggestions that it signals reduced Pakistani support for the Taliban, the detention of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the operational leader of the Afghan Taliban, represents a shift by Pakistan to more open support for the Taliban in preparation for a peace settlement and U.S. withdrawal.
Statements by Pakistani officials to journalists prior to the arrest indicate that the decision to put Baradar in custody is aimed at ensuring that the Taliban role in peace negotiations serves Pakistani interests. They also suggest that Pakistani military leaders view Baradar as an asset in those negotiations rather than an adversary to be removed from the conflict. Read the rest of this entry »
After eight tumultuous months, during which attention from all sides of Iran’s political spectrum as well as anxious watchers around the world focused on a series of street clashes between protesters and the government’s security forces, an eerie calm has taken hold in Iran.
The government’s ability to control the aesthetics of street demonstrations on the occasion of the revolution’s 31st anniversary on Feb. 11 has once again confirmed the robust nature of the Iranian state, which used its long experience with government-sponsored demonstrations to stage what it now claims was a decisive “show of unity” involving “50 million” people “to bury the corpse of sedition.”
This is a significant development insofar as it disabuses policymakers outside Iran, as well as a large number of Iranian exiles, of the fantasy of the impending doom of the Islamic Republic or the belief that substantive change in Iran can or will come quickly.
Evidence now available from various sources, including recently declassified U.S. State Department documents, shows that the Taliban regime led by Mullah Mohammad Omar imposed strict isolation on Osama bin Laden after 1998 to prevent him from carrying out any plots against the United States.
The evidence contradicts the claims by top officials of the Barack Obama administration that Mullah Omar was complicit in Osama bin Laden’s involvement in the al Qaeda plot to carry out the terrorist attacks in the United States on Sep. 11, 2001. It also bolsters the credibility of Taliban statements in recent months asserting that it has no interest in al Qaeda’s global jihadist aims.
A primary source on the relationship between bin Laden and Mullah Omar before 9/11 is a detailed personal account provided by Egyptian jihadist Abu’l Walid al-Masri published on Arabic-language jihadist websites in 1997.
On the surface, it would seem unlikely that Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who presides over a politically feeble government and is highly dependent on the U.S. military presence and economic assistance, would defy the United States on the issue of peace negotiations with the leadership of the Taliban insurgency.
But a long-simmering conflict between Karzai and key officials of the Barack Obama administration over that issue came to a head at last week’s London Conference, when the Afghan president refused to heed U.S. signals to back off his proposal to invite the Taliban leaders to participate in a nationwide peace conference.
The peace negotiations issue is imbedded in a deeper conflict over U.S. war strategy, which has provoked broad anger and increasing suspicions of U.S. motives among Afghans, including Karzai himself.
The current source of tension is Karzai’s proposal, first made last November, to invite Taliban leaders – including Mullah Omar – to a national “Loya Jirga” or “Grand Council” meeting aimed at achieving a peace agreement.
We have argued since 2007 that the politics of Iraq were well beyond its US occupiers. The myth of the “surge” might obscure that reality, but it could not displace it. Gareth Porter, who has always been one journalist who could see beyond the US military, offers another compelling case for the ascendancy of the manoeuvres between Iraqi parties. Doing so, he also shatters the far-from-constructive storyline that Iran was responsible for American troubles in Iraq.
The agreement announced Monday between Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki and a Shi’a resistance group called the “League of the Righteous” (Asa’ib al-Haq) formally ended the group’s armed
opposition to the regime in return for the release of its leader and eight other Shi’a detainees. This deals a final blow to the U.S. military’s narrative of an Iranian “proxy war” in Iraq.
Over the last two years, we paid a good deal of attention to the story of five Iranian officials seized in March 2007 by US forces in Erbil in northern Iraq. It is a measure of how far the world has moved away from the Iraq story, and indeed of how much internal developments in Iran have come to the fore, that the release of the five by the Americans last week received so little attention (apart from Iranian state media, which eagerly featured the return of the men, pictured at left, this weekend).
That’s a mistake because this complex tale leaves two long-lasting lessons. The first is that, despite the tensions of Iran’s post-election crisis, there are officials in the Obama Administration who want to remove obstacles to long-term negotiations. The second is even more important: as Gareth Porter outlines below in a story for Inter Press Service, the release of the five Iranians points to the emergence of an Iraqi Government that is no longer subject to the demands of the US military:
Behind Detainee Release, a US-Iraqi Conflict on Iran
WASHINGTON – The release Friday of five Iranians held by the U.S. military in Iraq for two and a half years highlights the long-simmering conflict between the U.S. and Iraqi views of Iranian policy in Iraq and of the role of its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) there. Read the rest of this entry »
Perhaps the most striking response to President Obama’s speech is coming from Hamas officials, who are cautiously signalling that they are ready for discussions. Just after the speech, Hamas political director Khaled Meshaal told Inter Press Service, “The speech was cleverly written in the way it addressed the Muslim world… and in the way it showed respect to the Muslim heritage. But I think it’s not enough. What’s needed are deeds, actions on the ground, and a change of policies.” Read the rest of this entry »
Most of the US media are still caught up in euphoria over the proposed Obama strategy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, concentrating on the headlines of expanded US military presence, aid, and civilian participation instead of considering how local groups and communities will responded to an increased American intervention.
Once again, Gareth Porter — who chronicled the internal Obama Administration debates over the strategy — offers a different perspective. Writing for Inter Press Service, He lays out the concerns of those who think that expanded US strikes on northwest Pakistan will enhance, rather than diminish, the position of Al Qa’eda and local insurgents.
Some Strategists Cast Doubt on Afghan War Rationale
The argument for deeper U.S. military commitment to the Afghan War invoked by President Barack Obama in his first major policy statement on Afghanistan and Pakistan Friday – that al Qaeda must be denied a safe haven in Afghanistan – has been not been subjected to public debate in Washington. Read the rest of this entry »
UPDATE 1145 GMT: The Washington Post this morning has a very different view of US-Pakistan relations and the Mullah Baradar case:
Over the last two years, we paid a good deal of attention to the story of five Iranian officials seized in March 2007 by US forces in Erbil in northern Iraq. It is a measure of how far the world has moved away from the Iraq story, and indeed of how much internal developments in Iran have come to the fore, that the release of the five by the Americans last week received so little attention (apart from Iranian state media, which eagerly featured the return of the men, pictured at left, this weekend).
Most of the US media are still caught up in euphoria over the proposed Obama strategy on Afghanistan and Pakistan, concentrating on the headlines of expanded US military presence, aid, and civilian participation instead of considering how local groups and communities will responded to an increased American intervention.
Entries (RSS)