Connect with us

ASIA

Dynamics of Afghanistan-Pakistan relations

Published

on

Afghanistan-Pakistan relations are characterized by a complex interplay of historical grievances, geopolitical controversies, security dilemmas, economic dependencies, and ethnic identities. Unless and until, understanding these layers, it could be hard for all those interested in fostering peace and cooperation in this volatile region, which is much more essential for people of both the neighboring countries facing similar security, economic and political issues.

No one can neglect the fact that the historical narrative of Afghanistan and Pakistan is linked in a very complicated manner, characterized by a series of complex interactions and interferences that have frequently involved accusations, blame-shifting, and concealed motives. Beginning from the British colonial period, various events have played pivotal roles in shaping these dynamics. Prior to the British Empire’s involvement in the region laid the groundwork for future geopolitical tensions and alliances, almost all parts and parcels of both the neighboring countries remained part of one or several empires and intruded rulers, which is now considered bone of contention between the two. Following this era, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan marked a critical turning point, as it not only altered local power structures but also drew international attention and intervention into the whole region. This was further complicated by the subsequent involvement of the United States lead allies, which aimed at countering Soviet influence, commenced during the Cold War.

What went wrong in the past five decades

Focusing on the past five decades, Pakistan has consistently altered its approach to each new Afghan government that has emerged following various political transitions and takeovers. This pattern of behavior is often viewed as a strategic maneuver, deeply rooted in Pakistan’s desire for what it terms “strategic depth.” This concept refers to the idea that an unstable Afghanistan serves Pakistan’s geopolitical ambitions by providing a buffer zone against perceived threats, particularly from India. Visibly, the instability in Afghanistan allows Pakistan to exert influence over its neighbor while simultaneously pursuing its own national interests but internally it causes stock of issues and hurdles to its powerful military establishment.

Pakistan’s well discussed “strategic depth”, that was planned or originated in the early years following its independence, aimed to counterbalance India’s regional influence. The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 marked a significant turning point that reinforced this outlook, when Pakistan emerged as a pivotal player in supporting Afghan’s armed resistance by (Afghan Mujahideen calling them freedom fighters, scattered in various armed groups, thereby deepening its involvement in Afghan affairs and solidifying its role in the geopolitical dynamics of South Asia.

The biggest issue is the use of proxy’s forces on the part of Pakistan’s policy toward Afghanistan

The usage of proxies policy represents a significant miscalculation on the part of Pakistan’s policy makers responsible for ups and downs in neighboring Afghanistan. No doubt to mention that this perspective complicates Pakistan’s foreign policy and undermines the possibility of establishing a stable and cooperative relationship with Afghanistan, ultimately jeopardizing Pakistan’s security as well. By framing its approach to Afghanistan apparently through the lens of rivalry with India, Pakistan risks intensifying tensions and conflicts that could further destabilize both nations. Such a strategy fails to acknowledge the intricate socio-political dynamics within Afghanistan and neglects the opportunities for collaboration that could yield mutual benefits for both countries.

Problematic domestic and isolated foreign policies

No one can neglect that the problematic domestic and isolated foreign policies of Taliban-led Afghan government, has further fuelled hardships for Pakistan as, “no other than Pakistan is considered responsible for its (Taliban)re-empowering.” By patronizing Tehrik Taliban Afghanistan also called Emirate Islami Afghanistan, Pakistan’s powerful junta had ignored the fact that TTA founder Mullah Muhammad Omar Akhund has been declared as their unanimous supreme leader by like minded islamists from both the countries. Afghan Taliban in accordance with the guidelines of Mullah Omar are reluctant to honor Pakistan’s demand of either extraditing banned TTP militants or taking action against them. Pakistan is also ignoring another fact that TT established by Mullah Omar Akhund is trying for Islamic State of Khurasan, which is also a threat to geographical limits of several regional countries.

Calling them as Taliban are not new but they are creation or production of US patronized Afghan War. Majority of them were part of different Jihadic groups. Amongst the Jihadis, Haqqannis headed by late Maulvi Jalal Ud Din Haqqani, Hizb-e-Islami Afghanistan faction headed by Maulvi Younas Khalis and several others like Ustad Yasar of Prof. Abdul Rab Rasool Sayaf led Ittehad Islami were the first one who had announced joining of TTA soon after its inception.

Pakistan is suffering from his persistently unsuccessful policies toward its neighbor Afghanistan

No one having the intention to oppose or under mind Pakistan’s harsh criticisms concerning the presence of Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) sanctuaries on Afghan soil, but no one can neglect the fact that both countries they have suffered significant harm as a result of Pakistan’s persistently unsuccessful Afghan policies. Instead pursuing failed or flop policies, Pakistan is in possession of stock of opportunities, entering into friendly and trustworthy relations with Afghanistan. Moreover, they could strengthen their ties through economic collaboration, including the negotiations of trade agreements, joint infrastructure development projects, and partnerships in the long-awaited mega energy projects in the region. From a geopolitical perspective, Pakistan and Afghanistan have the opportunity to collaborate on initiatives aimed at promoting regional connectivity and engage in diplomatic endeavors to foster peace and stability within the region.

The conflicting narratives from both sides, especially Pakistani leaders’ remarks only serve to fuel mistrust and escalate tensions between  Afghanistan and Pakistan. Instead of working towards resolving their differences and addressing common security challenges, each side continues to point fingers at the other. This vicious cycle of blame and counter-blame not only undermines efforts towards regional peace but also creates an environment conducive to the growth and spread of extremist groups. It’s generally believed in Afghanistan that Pakistan’s assertions are driven by this country’s long-term policy of strategic depth of having an unstable and unsecured Afghanistan in its western border, rather than a genuine concern for security. They think that Pakistan uses the threat of TTP presence in Afghanistan as a pretext to justify its continued involvement in Afghan affairs or to divert attention from internal issues. Others suggest that Pakistan is seeking international support and sympathy by portraying itself as a victim of terrorism.

Meanwhile, Pakistani Taliban (TTP) cannot be defeated through military means

The assertion that the Pakistan establishment is behind the turmoil in Afghanistan is a complex issue with multiple factors at play and holds merit based on historical context, strategic interests, support for insurgent groups, geopolitical considerations, and implications for regional stability.

Regardless of the motives behind Pakistan’s assertions, it is clear that the current strategy of relying on military action alone will not address the security challenges facing Pakistan. The TTP is an adaptive adversary that cannot be defeated through military means alone. A more realistic and comprehensive approach is needed, one that addresses the root causes of extremism and terrorism in Pakistan and Afghanistan, such as poverty eradication, depreciation, lack of education, and political instability.

Pakistan’s interests in Afghanistan are diverse, covering economic, security, stability, and regional influence considerations. However, significant challenges arise when Pakistan engages in proxy conflicts against successive Afghan governments regardless of their prior friendly relations. This long standing policy of supporting armed opposition groups against ruling authorities has persisted for decades, harming trust and posing a dual threat to both countries. From the last couple of years, the exchanges between Pakistani officials and Taliban representatives highlights a complex web of accusations regarding terrorism and security in South Asia. Both sides appear to be deflecting responsibility while emphasizing the other’s role in perpetuating regional instability. Instead, results oriented dialogues may be encouraged for building up consensus on both sides for addressing common issues of security, extremism, poverty and backwardness.

The issue of IS and controversy surrounding Bagram Airfield to the US drones is a big challenge

Across the border in Afghanistan, the reports of Pakistan’s recent engagement with Afghan warlords, the allegations of harboring ISKP terrorists on its soil against Afghanistan, and the controversy surrounding the provision of air bases to U.S. drones are  issues that promote anti Pakistan sentiment and raise concerns for Afghanistan. It is crucial for Pakistan to promptly and effectively address these matters. In their pursuit of military and political strategies, Pakistani policymakers intentionally create an imaginary emotional narrative that positions Pakistan as a nation sandwiched between two antagonistic neighbors, which serves to rationalize their actions on both domestic and international fronts. This approach not only marks a shift from previous alliances but also underscores the intricate nature of regional politics, where allegiances can swiftly alter in response to immediate strategic requirements.

The implications of this evolving policy are profound for both Afghanistan and Pakistan. For Afghanistan, continued instability may hinder economic development and exacerbate humanitarian crises. For Pakistan, while it may gain short-term advantages through manipulation of Afghan politics, its long-term consequences could include increased militancy within its borders and strained relations with international partners who advocate for stability in the region.

ASIA

Daesh targets religious minorities in Afghanistan; 14 Hazaras just killed

Published

on

The Islamic State (IS), also known as the Daesh terrorist group, has repeatedly attacked Hazaras and other religious minorities across Afghanistan. The Daesh terrorists targeted them in their schools, shrines, workplaces, clinics, hospitals, universities, courses, and even during prayers inside their mosques. This targets are going on since many years and both the governments ( the republic system) and the current Taliban Emirate have done little to protect these communities from suicide attacks, unarmed attacks or provide them with necessary security measurements.

In the latest deadly attack, Daesh claimed responsibility for an attack on Shia Hazaras that claimed the lives of 14 Shias. The incident took place on Thursday in the Karyudal area, which lies between Daykunid and Ghor, the two provinces mainly populated with Shia people. Another four Shias received injuries.

Local sources said that the victims were traveling along the route between the two provinces to welcome the relatives returning from a visit to the Karbala, when they were brutally gunned down by the Daesh armed men. Hazaras considered Karbala as a holy city in Iraq where millions of Shia Muslims had converged for the Shiite pilgrimage of Arbaeen, marking the 4th day of mourning for the martyrdom of Imam Hussein, the grandson of the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH).

A local source told Harici that the armed men halted the bus carrying the residents under the pretense of taking photographs and suddenly opened fire on them.

Attack on Hazaras draws widespread condemnations

The Afghan citizens and the politicians have strongly condemned the attack on Hazara civilians and denounced the attack as “terrorist act.” Abdullah Abdullah, former head of Afghanistan’s High Council for National Reconciliation, expressed his deepest regret for the brutal killing of 14 innocent residents of Daikundi.

“We strongly condemn the merciless killing of our innocent countrymen,” he added.

Former president of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzia termed the brutal killing and shooting of civilians in Daikundi as a terrorist act and a crime against humanity and against Islam. He extended his deepest condolences to the families of the victims and condemned “this crime in the strongest terms.”

Former head of National Directorate of Security, Rahmatullah Nabil also condemned the killing of Hazara people and called it the most heartbreaking form of violence.

“This is the most heartbreaking kind of violence that takes the lives of innocent people just for the crime of trying to live a peaceful and civil life. These disasters are not only a wound on the bodies of our Hazaras, but also on the souls of all Afghan people,” he said in a post in X. 

He furthered, “today, more than ever, we need to join hands and create a new narrative for this country; a narrative in which all ethnic groups, regardless of religion and ethnicity, have equal rights and security. Otherwise, this vicious cycle of extremism and the killing of innocent people in the name of religion will continue and several generations will become victims of this violence.”

Vicious cycle of extremism and the killing of innocent people in the name of religion

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanani said that Iran strongly condemned the criminal attack by Daesh terrorists on those welcoming the pilgrims of Karbala in Ghor province. Kanani called for immediate action to punish the perpetrators of this crime and reiterated support to the government of Afghanistan on its anti-terrorist measures.

The UN special rapporteur for Afghanistan, Richard Bennett also condemned the attack on the Hazara people, stating that the “appalling SKIP-claimed killings of Hazara from Daikundi traveling in Ghor bears the hallmarks of international crimes.”

He furthered: “I am alarmed about the spate of SKIP-claimed attacks. Need for prevention, protection and international accountability in Afghanistan.”

A Taliban spokesman confirmed the incident and said that 14 people were killed and six others wounded in the brutal attack carried out by the enemies of humanity. “We strongly condemn this brutal act, and consider it our duty to protect the nation’s property and lives. While we share our condolences with the victims of this incident, we are also making serious efforts to find the perpetrators and bring them to justice,” the spokesman added.

Meanwhile, a resident of Sang-e-Takht district of Daikundi said that 14 people were killed just a few days after the Taliban governor promised to provide security in the province. He said that the Taliban governor had recently visited the district and promised that he would ensure the security of the roads between Ghor and Bandar. However, on Thursday 14 people were killed on the road between the same village.

Continue Reading

ASIA

Scrambling for power: Differences between the Haqqani Network and the Taliban

Published

on

For the past 20 years, the Haqqani Network has been fighting alongside the Taliban for a common goal and has carried out the bloodiest attacks across the country. However, in these 20 years, the responsibility of all the attacks of this network was taken by the Taliban, and they tried not to recognize this network as a group separate from the Taliban.

Although the name of the Haqqani network was mentioned a lot in the media, the Taliban spokesman always had said that all are members of the Taliban and that there are no separate structures of the Haqqani’s and the Taliban.

During over 20 years, the Taliban managed to introduce the Haqqani network as a part of itself, and the responsibility of all the attacks of Haqqani’s were assumed by the Taliban spokesperson.

Even after the collapse of the republic system, following the withdrawal of US troops and the return of the Taliban into power, Taliban officials and leaders of the Haqqani network tried hard to hide the identity of their network and consider themselves part of the “Islamic Emirate” of the Taliban.

But with the passage of time and for various reasons, the Haqqani network has returned to its origin and tends to reveal its hidden identity. This network has recently released a series of videos of its fighters who have carried out suicide attacks in the past 20 years, targeting the then Afghan security forces and the foreign troops across Afghanistan.

Haqqani network is willing to reveal its hidden identity

In the latest video published by the Haqqani network, had showed Sirajuddin Haqqani, the leader of the Haqqani network and the current Interior Minister along with his brother Badruddin Haqqani where both saying goodbye to a young suicide bomber and explaining the attack plan to him.

Badruddin was the youngest brother of Sirajuddin, whom the Taliban’s official website identified as the initiator of the suicide attacks, and according to the Taliban, he had designed and implemented 75 suicide attacks, including the attack on the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul. His name was in the US blacklist and eventually he was killed in an American drone attack in 2012.

Though, apparently the Haqqani network is now part of the Taliban government, but in addition to the military structures, its propaganda section is also separate. Last Thursday, Haqqani network commemorated the death anniversary of Maulvi Sangin, the former military officer of this network in Paktika province. This was despite the fact that senior Taliban officials did not even write anything about him on social platforms and did not even make a small reference to him. But members of the Haqqani network commemorated this day by releasing a documentary film on the life of Sangin and called him a national hero.

Taliban didn’t broadcast Haqqani commander documentary film in national tv

The spokesperson of the Kabul Police Command, who is a member of the Haqqani network and a member of Molavi Sangin’s family, called him his role model. However, this documentary film was not broadcasted on the national television under the control of the Taliban, but in Shamshad, a private tv channel and on big screens in the provinces of Kabul, Khost, Nangarhar and some other provinces.

Sangin, originally from Zirok district of Khost province and from the Zadran tribe. He was born in North Waziristan and had close relations with the Pakistani Taliban.

He had a history of war not only in Afghanistan, but also in Waziristan, and he was involved in armed battles with different people. His name was on the US blacklist, he was killed by an American drone on September 9, 2013 in North Waziristan of Pakistan.

He was one of the important commanders of the Haqqani network. US soldier Beau Bergdahl, who was later exchanged with five current senior Taliban officials, was captured by the fighters under Sangin’s command, which the Haqqani network considers his greatest heroism. The Haqqani network held Bergdahl from 2009 to 2014. The Haqqani network called Sangin a heroic fighter in the documentary it made about him.

But the noteworthy point is that in this documentary he is not introduced as a member of the Taliban, but is called a member of the Haqqani network or the Haqqani group.

This is despite the fact that during the last 20 years, the Haqqani network did not consider itself as a separate armed structure from the Taliban. Meanwhile, in this documentary, an audio file of Rahimullah Yousafzai, a former BBC reporter, is played, calling him one of the important commanders of the Haqqani network.

Internal dispute between the Taliban and Haqqani network is getting serious

In parts of the documentary, videos of his battles are played. In one of these videos, he is seen next to Baitullah Mehsud, the former leader of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP). In this documentary, all the talks about him were done by members of the Haqqani network, many of whom now hold various positions in the Taliban’s Ministry of Interior in Kabul.

In this documentary, no one except members of the Haqqani network talked about Sangin. At the end of the documentary, he is mentioned as a member of the Haqqani network, not a member of the Taliban.

The point is that after three years since the return of the Taliban into power, and internal disputes among the Taliban and Haqqani over government positions, now the Haqqani’s are apparently trying to reveal their true identity in the Taliban government.

The frequent release of videos of suicide fighters by the Haqqani network may be a message to the Taliban that the heavy burden of the war is on the shoulders of this group and the regime should have a bigger share of it. Previously, the leader of the Haqqani network criticized the monopoly of power and considered this practice as the detriment of the Taliban government.

After 20 years of the Haqqani network defending its identity and the Taliban’s indifference to the killed commanders of this group, even to the extent that the national television controlled by the Taliban did not allow the broadcast of a documentary of one of the commanders of this network, it shows that the hidden battle between the Haqqani network and the Taliban is unfolding and expanding.

Continue Reading

ASIA

Japanese PM Kishida meets South Korean counterpart Yoon for ‘farewell’ talks

Published

on

The leaders of Japan and South Korea pledged on Friday to work on new cooperation, including on immigration procedures and the evacuation of citizens in emergencies, at a summit that marked a period of warming bilateral ties fuelled by their personal relationship.

Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida arrived in Seoul earlier in the day for a farewell meeting with South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol. Kishida will leave his post as prime minister in early October after the election of the new leader of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party later this month.

Over the past two years, we have done our best with a reliable partner like President Yoon, who has a strong desire to strengthen bilateral relations, and we feel that we have turned a new page in Japan-South Korea relations. Both Japan and South Korea should continue this progress in the future.

Yoon also stressed the need to continue efforts to improve relations.

“It is important to continue the positive momentum of bilateral cooperation that Prime Minister Kishida and I have built,” Yoon said, according to a statement from his office. Next year will mark the 60th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic ties between Seoul and Tokyo, and Yoon said he hoped to take the relationship to a “new level” in 2025.

Kishida and Yoon agreed to start studying in detail ways to facilitate immigration procedures. They also reaffirmed that Japan and South Korea will work together to evacuate their citizens in case of emergencies in third countries.

They also discussed security issues related to North Korea and said they would continue to work with their common ally, the United States, on Pyongyang and Russia.

This is the prime minister’s second visit to South Korea for a bilateral summit with Yoon during his tenure. In May last year, Kishida became the first Japanese prime minister to attend a bilateral summit in South Korea in 12 years.

Kishida announced in August that he would not run for another term in the LDP leadership race.

The importance of Japan-South Korea relations will remain unchanged in the future,” Kishida said, adding, “I will do my best to make Japan-South Korea relations more solid and broad-based no matter what position I assume”.

The US factor in bilateral relations

Kishida and Yoon have joined forces to bring the two historically rival countries closer together, with the support and encouragement of the United States.

The conservative Yoon took office in May 2022, less than a year after Kishida’s inauguration nearly three years ago, and has called for a “future-oriented” rebuilding of the long-divided bilateral relationship with Japan.

Analysts say cooperation between the two East Asian countries will continue after Kishida’s departure.

“While Prime Minister Kishida deserves credit for breaking the ice with Seoul, I don’t see the continuation of Japan-South Korea cooperation as dependent on his presence,” Rob York, director of regional affairs at the Hawaii-based Pacific Forum think-tank, told Nikkei Asia.

“The current government in Seoul has devoted much of its agenda to enhancing its diplomatic standing within the US-led order, and the US will continue to encourage this cooperation,” York said.

The two leaders held their first summit when Yoon travelled to Tokyo in March 2023. Before travelling to Japan as the first South Korean president to attend a bilateral summit in 12 years, Yoon announced a plan to pave the way for a new beginning between the two Asian countries and staunch US allies.

At the heart of this vision was the creation of a fund, with donations from private companies, to compensate South Koreans who were forced to work for Japanese companies during the Second World War. The issue of financial compensation for the workers has long been a source of tension between Seoul and Tokyo, with the workers, their descendants and some civil society groups insisting on a formal payment by the Japanese government.

Tokyo, on the other hand, insisted that such wartime and colonial-era issues were settled in a 1965 agreement under which Japan provided financial aid and the two sides established formal diplomatic relations. Japan ruled the Korean peninsula from 1910 until its defeat in World War II in 1945.

Yoon’s plan drew criticism from the country’s left-wing opposition and civil society groups, but the two sides continued to increase trade and security cooperation in the months that followed. Seoul and Tokyo lifted trade restrictions imposed because of historical disputes between them.

In August last year, Kishida and Yoon hosted a summit with US President Joe Biden near Washington, which resulted in the three countries deciding to work together.

In a joint statement, they pledged to ‘operationalise’ the real-time exchange of missile warning data.

Washington, which welcomes the ‘friendship’ between Seoul and Tokyo, sees the two countries and their reconciliation as critical to its military and security strategy of containing China’s influence in the region, and is working hard to promote this unity.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey