Dexter Filkins’ Baradar-capture story yesterday — well, it made me regret a lot of starry-eyed presumptions I made when the capture occurred. But not the logic behind them! Check:
“We picked up Baradar and the others because they were trying to make a deal without us,” said a Pakistani security official, who, like numerous people interviewed about the operation, spoke anonymously because of the delicacy of relations between Pakistan, Afghanistan and the United States. “We protect the Taliban. They are dependent on us. We are not going to allow them to make a deal with Karzai and the Indians.”
Behind that statement is a confluence of interests so utterly fundamental that the inability to capitalize on it diplomatically is a first-order disaster. An envoy from the administration needs to say: We’re on board with that sentiment 100 percent! Pakistan should under no circumstances be cut out of a deal. We’re happy to see that you guys talk to Hamid Karzai’s government now without the binding mechanism of our trilateral summitry. Believe us, we want you doing that, because it should convince you that Pakistan has an interlocutor in Karzai, not an obstacle to Pakistani interests in a post-conflict Afghanistan.
Look, we get it: you sponsor the Taliban because you want strategic depth on your eastern border. You can get that from Karzai; and we’re here to help you get it! Pakistan can have a role in South Asia commensurate with the great power that it is!
And because we’re so sincere about that, we want you involved in the peace talks in a very specific way. We want you to deliver the Taliban and the Haqqanis to the table, under whatever circumstances of amnesty work for you. Then we want you to guarantee that in a post-war Afghanistan, they’re not backsliding on their commitments to backsliding on al-Qaeda. We’re going to put that on you. Look at that: you get an important role in Afghanistan, and it allows us to bring the war to a steady conclusion on mutually-agreeable terms. You win, we win, Karzai wins, the Taliban… kind of win (yeah, we said it), our mutual enemies in al-Qaeda (and the Pak Taliban!) lose. Now who wants flood relief?
Oh, and in case we need to say it: if we start seeing al-Qaeda slipping back into the country, it’s wrath-of-God time.
When people mouth the truism that There’s No Military Solution To The Afghanistan War, they’re both right and typically uncreative about thinking through what A Political Solution To The Afghanistan War looks like. I submit that the imagined diplomatic proposal above is an opening gambit.



3 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
There is no political solution. The globalist neo-cons thugs and the ISI thugs have no reason to stop the profitable violence. The Pakistan Dictatorship commits terrorism time and time again, such as Mumbai. But the “intelligence community”, is similar to the Mafia community or Crips and Bloods community. US spymasters have concealed the crimes of Pakistan, and perhaps even helped the ISI commit mass murder. US Spy David Headley was selecting targets for the ISI.
It is known that Headley infiltrated LeT, the ISI terrorist group or perhaps ISI infiltrated the CIA. Headley’s frequent trips to Pakistan and his missing Visa papers at the Chicago Indian consulate, and his “job” in a travel agency after training with LeT can be suggests he is another double or triple agent. The intelligence community has protected Headley from Indian investigators. Headley should have been extradited to India to face justice for murdering almost two hundred people.
Pakistan also bombed the Indian embassy in Kabul. The US has no credibility in India anymore. Why should Pakistan bother with Peace because the US “intelligence community” needs and protects and profits from their false flag terrorism.
Well, I can’t possibly follow Frank33 into the hall or hell of mirrors. (Frank33, I’m not trying to minimize the shitty situation, I just don’t follow it quite closely enough to know D Headley or anything about the machinations he undetook to kill hundreds. I am, however, pretty sure that double-triple agents don’t get extradited very often, as what they know cuts both, or all, ways.)
Spencer, IMHO this is the smartest, most nuanced post I’ve seen on the topic by an order of mag. _Of course_ the US should be pwning the ISI by accepting everything they say and turning it into a logical argument for support of Karzai. Pwn as you’ve been pwned in turn. It’s a form of respect and a transformation of shit into Shinola all in one blow. Super-good.
The larger point is, basically, the Taliban have built a strong enough hand over the last few years that they need to be brought in from the cold, or the hot, or the dry, or the caves, or the mountains. ISI knows this, and probably embraces it. We’ve recreated the situation that the Soviets created in the 80s: Corrupt and dysfunctional state, opposed by a group that’s probably no less corrupt, but that hasn’t burned its cred with the people _quite_ so badly. It’s coalition-building time. And there’s no coalition to be built without ISI and the Gov of Pakistan. Karzai is, basically, toast. Our shortest route to the end of conflict is to increase the number of power players.
Don’t you mean strategic depth on their western border?