Ahmad Rashid is widely considered to be the best journalist on Afghan and related Pakistani issues. And he has a scoop over the secret U.S. negotiations with the Taliban. I respect him though I dont necessarily agree with him. And Rashids points must be integrated into the U.S. and Western debate over Afghanistan.
Heres the key section:
The talks are premised on the essential realisation that neither a successful western withdrawal from Afghanistan nor a transition to Afghan forces can take place, without an end to the civil war and a political settlement that involves the Afghan government and the Taliban, but also Pakistan, the US and the region.
Think about that, whether or not it is accurate. What Rashid is saying is that the U.S. government knows that it has to make a deal with the Taliban to withdraw from Afghanistan. And since the Obama Administration is eager to get out (for political reasons more than strategic ones), it has a strong need to reach agreement with the Taliban, which means that unilateral concessions are likely.
North Korea has apparently cut food rations in half. The potato crop is failing and people don't know what they are going to do until the corn crop comes in this fall. There is still some rice. NorK soldier reports half his unit is malnourished. Why do they feed half the unit differently than the other half?
Moved to Opinion because it's a blog post.
tw at 9:08 a.m. EDT
[Dawn] As an imperious all-rounder who dominated the cricket pitches he graced for more than two decades, Imran Khan ... who isn't your heaviest-duty thinker, maybe not even among the top five... exhibited a self-belief that often made Pakistain's opponents crumble.
But that lordly demeanour may not serve him as well on the political wicket as a self-proclaimed saviour of the strife-torn country, despite his status as a national hero for leading Pakistain to its only World Cup title in 1992.
Khan brims with confidence that he can solve Pakistain's myriad and devastating problems.
Striding into an interview, kitted out in tiny running shorts and drenched in sweat after an afternoon workout in 80 percent humidity, he swats away any doubts about his prospects at the ballot box.
Nuclear-armed Pakistain returned to civilian rule in 2008 after nearly a decade under military dictator Pervez Perv Musharraf ... former dictator of Pakistain, who was less dictatorial and corrupt than any Pak civilian government to date ... . Elections are due by 2013 at the latest.
Asked whether he would contest the next polls after boycotting the last vote, the 58-year-old was emphatic.
"Stand for election? We will sweep the election. What are you talking about -- 'stand'? The next party in power is going to be Tehreek-e-Insaf," Khan said, referring to the Movement for Justice party he founded.
"I'm taking bets with anyone. You know I played five World Cups, never did I ever tell anyone, except in the last World Cup, that we would win it," he added at his sprawling hilltop home overlooking the capital Islamabad.
Twenty-one years on the cricket pitch, he says, honed a "killer instinct" and with Pakistain lurching from political to economic to security crisis under the fragile People's Party coalition, he believes power is within his grasp.
But Khan's party has no seats in parliament and it is criticised for lacking grassroots support and the infrastructure needed to win an election.
While Khan was long a darling of the Western media, dazzled first by his "playboy" lifestyle and then celebrity marriage to -- and divorce from -- British heiress Jemima Goldsmith, his reputation at home is more circumspect.
Secular commentators, Western journalists and officials also express alarm at his policies -- in particular his call for an end to Pak military operations against the Taliban and his populist anti-Americanism.
Yet last week US pollsters Pew Research Center named Khan as the most popular politician in the country, with an approval rating of 68 percent. Pew gave President Asif Ali President Ten Percent Zardari ... sticky-fingered husband of the late Benazir Bhutto ... a miserly rating of 11 percent.
Khan says Pew's findings were a vindication of his call for an independent judiciary, his anti-corruption drive and demands for an end to the "insane" war on terror conducted by the US-allied Pak leadership.
"The ruling elite, just for the sake of US support and dollars, is killing its own people, paid to kill its own people. It is the most shameful part of our history," he said.
The government, opposition and military have undoubtedly been discredited by rampant Taliban and al Qaeda-linked violence, economic meltdown, perennial political crises and the US raid against the late Osama bin Laden ... who has made the transition back to dust... on May 2.
Khan rejects conspiracy theories that bin Laden was not killed in Abbottabad but describes his death at the hands of US Navy SEALs as "cold-blooded murder", comparing it unfavourably to the courtroom justice meted out to the Nazis.
Khan is a man of contradictions who straddles cultural divides; the elite world of his education at Oxford University, and that lived by the masses who are drawn to his cricketing appeal and calls to tax the rich.
His recommended reading is the "brilliant" "My Life with the Taliban" by Abdul Salam Zaeef, once the Islamists' ambassador to Pakistain and later an inmate at Guantanamo Bay.
Yet Khan rubbishes any prospect of Talibanisation in Pakistain, a country he says is dominated by the mystical Sufi strand of Islam.
His solution to the semi-autonomous tribal belt, where a homegrown Taliban insurgency is concentrated and foreign Islamic fascistiare based, is a peace agreement.
He compares his appeal to the popularity of prime minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, who was voted in on a socialist ticket in 1970 before being hanged nine years later following a military coup.
But few share his confidence.
Veteran political analyst Hasan Askari says Khan will struggle to translate crowds into votes and will suffer for his stance on the Taliban and his name-calling of opponents.
"People in Pakistain cast their votes with a lot of considerations, and Imran's problem is that he is calling every leader a thief," he said.
Posted by: Fred ||
06/30/2011 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[3 views]
Top|| File under: Govt of Pakistan
#1
And if he cannot figure out some internal policy, would that mean he's stumped?
#2
A bit of hyperbole there in the title, but then again that seems to be the blogger's motus operandi.
I wouldn't call it 'laughing' - certainly not laughing uncontrollably. The idea that it's a result of being a 'dhimmi' (to use an overworked and often-misapplied term) is ludicrous.
What I see is are overtures to Iran, who they view as becoming the 'strong horse' soon. JohnQC pretty much nailed the reason why. We also have a pretty crappy record of supporting allies over the past fifty years, especially when it comes to a certain political party.
Add in the Saudis becoming rather preoccupied with their own neighborhood (no small thanks to Iran), and it isn't hard to see why the 'allies' are doing what they're doing.
#6
Apples and oranges, Lord Vader. Russians, for all their faults, understand reciprocity.
Indeed MAD was built on it.
As you would know.
Posted by: S ||
06/30/2011 18:55 Comments ||
Top||
#7
Apples and oranges, Lord Vader. Russians, for all their faults, understand reciprocity.
Let's see - we forgave them the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact that opened the way for the Nazi invasion of Western Europe and sent huge amounts of materials that Khrushchev acknowledged were vital to the Soviet war effort. The Soviets repaid us by waging war against us by proxy - in Korea and Vietnam - resulting in the deaths of 100,000 Americans. Note that the PLO and sundry other terrorist groups were trained in the Soviet Union, and much of the black propaganda (the alleged CIA-AIDS connection, et al) used by al Qaeda and other enemies of the US was developed by Soviet disinformation units. The Russian understanding of reciprocity is that we give and they accommodate us by taking. The Islamist threat is nothing like the Soviet threat, which was larger by a couple orders of magnitude. The Soviets could have killed hundreds of thousands of Americans by detonating a single nuke. Al Qaeda's greatest hit - accomplished with three weapons - was 3000 dead, compared to the 100K dead inflicted by the Soviets.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
North Korea has apparently cut food rations in half. The potato crop is failing and people don't know what they are going to do until the corn crop comes in this fall. There is still some rice. NorK soldier reports half his unit is malnourished.
[Dawn] As an imperious all-rounder who dominated the cricket pitches he graced for more than two decades, 
Pervez 
Asif Ali 
