Pak-Afghan relations: Bilateral ties only solution to Taliban
Speakers underscore importance of tackling problem together.
Speakers stressed the need to tackle the insurgency issue jointly. PHOTO: EXPRESS
ISLAMABAD:
Pakistan and Afghanistan need to engage on a host of issues, directly. Without such a framework of engagement, bilateral ties between the two countries will continue to remain hostage to the Taliban.
Speakers at the launch of a report on Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan by the Pakistan Institute for Peace Studies stressed on working together to finding a solution.
Former senator Afrasiab Khattak, who also wrote in the journal, argued how Pashtuns have been at the receiving end of the Pak-Afghan relations.
He recalled that when the Taliban captured Kabul, one of the first things they banned were Afghan national anthem and the Afghan flag, besides demolishing the statue of the Buddha. In the same vein, Taliban in Pakistan tried to erode the symbols of modern state structure. “The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan was basically about eroding the state,” Khattak said, warning against making differences between the two.
He called for reviewing Afghan policy, which ultimately impacts Pakistan.
Khattak warned that instability in Afghanistan would not portend well for Pakistan.
Meanwhile, Regional Peace Institute Executive Director Raoof Hassan wondered if there was any Afghan policy in the country. Instead, he said, “our [Afghan] policy revolves around our India policy.”
He set aside several assumptions made on Pakistan’s influence over the Taliban, saying even when they were ruling, Pakistan could not convince them over issues such as the Durand Line.
Hassan said Pakistan was committed when it came to the Quadrilateral Coordination Group to take action against the irreconcilable elements within the Taliban, but there were doubts if that was done.
Pakistan People’s Party Senator Farhatullah Babar said that when Ashraf Ghani became president in 2014, there were high hopes of improved relations between the two countries.
Ghani took several measures aimed at building trust with Pakistan. Yet, the relations could not get off, much because of the dichotomy between the two countries over the issue of the Taliban.
He argued that it was wrong to pin blame on refugee camps, asking from where did Mullah Mansoor get a Pakistani identity card.
Senator Babar argued that “Afghan Taliban are to Afghanistan, what Pakistani Taliban are to Pakistan,” adding that, while Afghanistan should take action against Fazlullah, Pakistan should take action against the successors of the likes of Mullah Mansoor.
Meanwhile, former foreign minister Inamul Haq argued that the Foreign Office was the implementing body of the policy, which was supposed to be shaped by the executive including the cabinet.
He wondered what the role of the parliament was, if it was not making the policy.
Meanwhile, China expert Fazalur Rehman dispelled the impression that China’s presence in Afghanistan would counter India’s influence in Afghanistan, adding that they might even converge.
Dr Ishtiaq Ahmad said that he could recall how similar points have been made since the late 1980s, again and again. It appears, he said, little has changed.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 24th, 2016.
Pakistan and Afghanistan need to engage on a host of issues, directly. Without such a framework of engagement, bilateral ties between the two countries will continue to remain hostage to the Taliban.
Speakers at the launch of a report on Pakistan’s relations with Afghanistan by the Pakistan Institute for Peace Studies stressed on working together to finding a solution.
Former senator Afrasiab Khattak, who also wrote in the journal, argued how Pashtuns have been at the receiving end of the Pak-Afghan relations.
He recalled that when the Taliban captured Kabul, one of the first things they banned were Afghan national anthem and the Afghan flag, besides demolishing the statue of the Buddha. In the same vein, Taliban in Pakistan tried to erode the symbols of modern state structure. “The Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan was basically about eroding the state,” Khattak said, warning against making differences between the two.
He called for reviewing Afghan policy, which ultimately impacts Pakistan.
Khattak warned that instability in Afghanistan would not portend well for Pakistan.
Meanwhile, Regional Peace Institute Executive Director Raoof Hassan wondered if there was any Afghan policy in the country. Instead, he said, “our [Afghan] policy revolves around our India policy.”
He set aside several assumptions made on Pakistan’s influence over the Taliban, saying even when they were ruling, Pakistan could not convince them over issues such as the Durand Line.
Hassan said Pakistan was committed when it came to the Quadrilateral Coordination Group to take action against the irreconcilable elements within the Taliban, but there were doubts if that was done.
Pakistan People’s Party Senator Farhatullah Babar said that when Ashraf Ghani became president in 2014, there were high hopes of improved relations between the two countries.
Ghani took several measures aimed at building trust with Pakistan. Yet, the relations could not get off, much because of the dichotomy between the two countries over the issue of the Taliban.
He argued that it was wrong to pin blame on refugee camps, asking from where did Mullah Mansoor get a Pakistani identity card.
Senator Babar argued that “Afghan Taliban are to Afghanistan, what Pakistani Taliban are to Pakistan,” adding that, while Afghanistan should take action against Fazlullah, Pakistan should take action against the successors of the likes of Mullah Mansoor.
Meanwhile, former foreign minister Inamul Haq argued that the Foreign Office was the implementing body of the policy, which was supposed to be shaped by the executive including the cabinet.
He wondered what the role of the parliament was, if it was not making the policy.
Meanwhile, China expert Fazalur Rehman dispelled the impression that China’s presence in Afghanistan would counter India’s influence in Afghanistan, adding that they might even converge.
Dr Ishtiaq Ahmad said that he could recall how similar points have been made since the late 1980s, again and again. It appears, he said, little has changed.
Published in The Express Tribune, June 24th, 2016.