Russia opposes bid to lift sanctions on Hekmatyar

Moscow says it ‘suspended’ the process but not blocked the move at UNSC


Tahir Khan January 04, 2017
Moscow says it ‘suspended’ the process but not blocked the move at UNSC. PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD: The peace deal between the Afghan government and the Hizb-e-Islami Afghanistan (HIA) is facing challenges as Russia has reportedly opposed the process to lift sanctions against the HIA chief Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

Kabul formally recommended to the UN Security Council in mid-December that Hekmatyar’s name be removed from the blacklist that was part of the 25-point agreement inked in September.

Russia, China favour taking Taliban off UN sanctions list

Dr Ghairat Baheer, head of the HIA’s political committee, said a vote was earlier expected in 10 days after the Afghan government delivered a letter to the members of the Security Council.

Baheer, who was also part of the negotiations with the Afghan National Unity government, told The Express Tribune last month that the major powers had assured to help in lifting of the sanctions.

The Wall Street Journal has reported that Russia opposes removal of Hekmatyar’s name from the UN sanctions list. Sections of the media have quoted Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova as saying that Moscow has ‘suspended’ the process but not blocked the move.

The surprising Russian decision on Hekmatyar’s sanctions came just days after Russia and China at the trilateral meeting with Pakistan announced to adopt a “flexible approach to delisting Afghan individuals from the UN sanctions lists as their contribution to the efforts aimed at launching peaceful dialogue between Kabul and the Taliban.”

The Taliban were quick to welcome the outcome of the three-way talks, but it angered the Afghan government which insisted that it would take the decision on any individual under UN sanctions.

The Moscow talks were held at a time when relations between the Taliban and Russia warmed up amid reports that a Taliban delegation recently visited Moscow. The Taliban denied reports about the visit.

Kabul asks UN to clear Hekmatyar's name

Russia and Kabul both are pursing contradictory approaches regarding the UN sanctions as Russia on one hand joined China to help in removal of sanctions on the Taliban but at the same time it has forced suspension of the process to clear Hekmatyar.

Similarly, President Ashraf Ghani’s administration has approached the UN Security Council to remove curbs on Hekmatyar but at the same time Ghani himself asked the UN to slap sanctions on the Taliban chief, Maulvi Haibatullah.

It is widely believed that the Russian stance on Hekmatyar could create obstacles in the implementation of the peace deal as it would delay appearance of the Afghan leader.

Hizb sources had earlier confided to The Express Tribune that preparations were going on to warmly received Hekmatyar, when he will emerge for the first time after 2001.

A six-member Hizb-government committee, which oversees implementation of the peace deal, has identified at least two places where Hekmatyar will live – Kabul and the eastern Nangarhar province.

Taliban demands

The Express Tribune has learnt that the Taliban want talks with the HIA to avoid any confrontation when the party has a new role after Hekmatyar returns to Kabul. Taliban and the HIA are seen as rivals and there are concerns both could engage in hostilities. However, Baheer has dispelled the impression.

Last month the Taliban insurgents attacked the house of Mir Wali – a former senior HIA leader and a sitting MP in Kabul – and killed several people including the son of another MP Ubaidullah Barakzai, also a Hizb leader.

The HIA had not formally reacted to the Taliban attack on its leaders, but an article posted on the Facebook page of Hekmatyar’s son Habibur Rahman Hekmatyar, condemned the attack as ‘barbaric and heinous crime’ by warmongers.

Published in The Express Tribune, January 4th, 2017.

COMMENTS

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ