|
|
British must end double-track policy Faheem Dashty The Pakistani
governments recently signed an agreement with the Pakistani Taliban to end
all attacks on Pakistan in exchange for an end to military operations against
the Taliban. After signing the agreement, the Taliban leader in Waziristan,
Baitullah Masood, announced that while confrontations with Pakistan would
end, the jihad in Afghanistan would continue. Pakistan is
considered a key ally in the war on terror. In recent years, the Pakistani
government deployed 100,000 troops along the border areas with Afghanistan
upon Gen. Musharraf's insistence. In the last few years, fighting had
escalated between the Pakistani army and the Taliban. More than 300 Pakistani
soldiers, 600 Taliban and 200 civilians were killed in those clashes. The Afghan
government expressed deep reservations about the agreement. Earlier this
week, a Nato spokesperson in Afghanistan told the press that the agreement
has resulted in an expansion and intensification of Taliban activities in
Afghanistan. The U.S., meanwhile, has talked about apprehending Masood. The reaction of
the British was quite different. British officials said that fighting is not
the only tool to ending the region's security challenges. Even before the
agreement was signed, British officials expressed optimism about the
Pakistani negotiations. Two days after
the agreement was signed, the British Defence Minister Des Brown made a
surprise visit to Afghanistan. Mr. Brown visited British forces stationed in
Helmand and met with Afghan officials including President Karzai. In
comments, Mr. Brown said that terrorism is a problem for both Afghanistan and
Pakistan. He said that both governments should be concerned about their
interests when taking actions in this regard. Mr. Brown's opinion was not
made clear. He did not directly state the British government's position on
the agreement. By stating that
terrorism is only a problem for Afghanistan and Pakistan, he's either not
well informed or he's denying that the U.K. is part of an international
effort to end terrorism. We all know that terrorism is a global problem and
six years ago British forces entered Afghanistan as a part of international
war on terror. Moreover, the U.K. was the first nation to strike an agreement
with the Taliban, essentially handing them control of Musa Qala for almost a
year. Then British forces attacked Taliban positions in Musa Qala, but the
Taliban took advantage of their year in power by opening new front lines in
other parts of Helmand. In a deal between the Taliban and British, the former
benefited. The U.K. is one
of the oldest players in this region. Obviously, the British implement
policies based on knowledge gained years ago. However it's not only the U.K.
that has a stake in Afghanistan. Other Nato member states also have interests
at stake. Perhaps British
politicians believe that by giving concessions to terrorists and extremists
in Pakistan and Afghanistan they will hold on to their interest in the long
term. But the fact is that today's situation is much more different compared
to the situation in late nineteenth or early twentieth centuries. At the moment,
Afghanistan and Pakistan are at the frontlines of the battle against terror
and this fight must be won at the frontlines. Losing this war will have regional
and global consquences. If British politicians believe that by establishing
links with terrorist and extremists they can prevent the negative
consequences of the war on their public, they may reach their goal in the
short-term, but if Afghanistan becomes a safe heaven for terrorists and
extremists again, the flames of this fire will reach even British soil. The
U.K. is a member of the European family and it cannot remain out of the reach
of terrorists. This would only be possible if the British were behind the
founding of the Taliban and had close cooperation from the beginning. One point is
clear. If the U.K. is not a partner of extremists and terrorists in the
region it must show its cards. Their policies must consist of open and direct
confrontation with extremism and terrorism. The current double-track politics
of the U.K. cannot fool Afghans. A continuation of such policies will result
in sever consequences against the British in Afghanistan.
|
|
