June 29, 2010
Towards Peace in Afghanistan
By Saeed Qureshi
 The kind of skepticism expressed by both president Obama and CIA director Leon 
E. Panetta about the prospects for an Afghanistan peace deal pushed by Pakistan 
between the Afghan government and some Taliban militants is  a natural outcome 
towards an unpredictable situation that remains fluid and subject to unforeseen 
changes. President Obama expressed his views after the Group of 20 meeting in 
Toronto while Mr. Panetta articulated his point of view on ABC’s “This Week.” 
Show.
The skepticism of both the president of United States and CIA director stems 
from their main concern that the “The fundamental purpose, of  disrupting and 
dismantling Al Qaeda and their militant allies may not be hampered by inclusion 
of Taliban into a power sharing arrangement with the government in 
Afghanistan.” 
If viewed and analyzed logically, the mission launched by Pakistan government 
is well- intentioned and can be carried out in three phases. The first phase is 
to make the Taliban agree on joining the government in Kabul. This step should 
not be difficult to achieve, because even the Taliban should be wanting to end 
the deadly war raging in Afghanistan and across the border in Pakistan’s 
territory for a decade now. 
Pakistan with the support of friendly Taliban can even prevail upon Sirajuddin 
Haqqani faction, the so known supporters of Al-Qaida, to agree to join the 
peace efforts and to become part of the power sharing in Kabul. This phase 
might be more bumpy but with the will and consent of Karzai government and with 
the support and backing of Pakistan, the desired pacification can be brought 
about.
If these stages are achieved, this should be construed as a stupendous victory 
for America, because as a result of that rapprochement, the fighting can recede 
and one can look forward to the next step, which is to hunt down the Al-Qaida 
militants so that Afghanistan and Pakistan is cleared of their existence and 
calamitous operations. It would be naive to pre-suppose that Sirjuddin Haqqani 
group would not agree to the complete annihilation of the terrorist band that 
was primarily responsible for the deadly attacks within America and prompting 
the NATO and US troops to come all the way to Afghanistan in their pursuit. 
If Taliban, ten years ago, had handed over the Al-Qaida leaders to the United 
States, the horrendous decade long war could have been avoided. I find it 
extremely difficult to agree with some Islamic revolutionary ideologues that 
al-Qaida was fighting for Islam. They could have fought for Islam through 
media, preaching, peaceful and non-violent means. With their stubborn 
insurgency Afghanistan and the whole region has bathed in blood and horrifying 
devastation.
America under no circumstances would budge from its mission of disbanding the 
Al-Qaida network and break their militancy for all time to come. After all 
al-Qaida does not represent the Islamic world in matters of Islamic ideology or 
the faith. There are countless diverse schools of faith in Islam and most of 
these may not look eye to eye with Al-Qaida’s perception or philosophy of 
Islam. If al-Qaida was so much in defense of Islam then why it fought in 
support of the Christian armies against the Soviets who were as heathen and 
anti Islam as the Christian world is. It means that their love, outlook, or 
perspective of Islam is not in harmony or in conformity with the other shades 
and genres of Islam.
If Sirajuddin Haqqani outfit lifts its hands off al-Qaida, then it should not 
be difficult for the United States to approve the formation of such a coalition 
administration in Afghanistan in which not only the warring factions including 
Haqqani faction could join, but which the Pakistan and Afghanistan governments 
would also safeguard and promote. If this arrangement fructifies then the 
United States would be able to achieve peace at its bidding, which it had not 
been able to obtain through a decade long war at huge monetary and human cost. 
This set up would definitively isolate al-Qaida, which would not be able to 
maintain its physical presence in Afghanistan and continue its heinous 
activities all by itself.
Therefore, the central idea is to snatch the sanctuaries that are now available 
to al-Qaida in the form of Sirajuddin Haqqani and some Taliban factions. As 
such, the efforts being mounted by Pakistan should be appreciated and 
encouraged. The indications are that Karzai and Pakistan governments are 
nearing a tacit understanding on this crucial way-out which essentially serves 
America better than the NATO coalition partner do.
For the United States, this would spell a diplomatic triumph, which would be 
more durable, and far reaching than the elusive military victory. Once an 
American friendly government with the participation of Taliban of various 
brands, both from Pakistan and Afghansintan come into being, the task of the 
United States to chase and annihilate Al-Qaida would become much easier.
 Still it would be irrational and fanciful to expect that the entire army of 
al-Qaida would be netted. If America manages to capture arch leaders, it would 
be a gigantic breakthrough. To the lower ranks and ordinary members, America 
can offer an amnesty so that they can lay down tbeir arms and also join the 
mainstream of a civilized life and turn away from their murderous mandate. 
If concurrently, a solution to the Middle East tumult can also be found by 
creating the promised independent land for the Palestinians, there is no 
gainsaying that the friction that exists between Muslims on one hand and Israel 
and United states on the other would eventually evaporate. If Muslims, can live 
along with the Christians and Jews in Spain for 700 years, there is no reason 
as to why they can’t coexist in the modern times when the world is moving 
towards a contiguous abode commonly known as the global village.
 For comments or unsubscribe write us at qureshisa2...@yahoo.com
You can read this and other articles at www.uprightopinion.com 
 


 
 


Saeed Qureshi

Website:: http://www.uprightopinion.com


 

Reply via email to