VIEWPOINT: After Bonn what?

Those who came to the much hyped Bonn Conference on Afghanistan early this week were either members of the occupation forces, their allies, or some anxious neighbours wary of the US designs to secure a permanent foothold in the region. Conspicuous by their absence were the other belligerent, the Taliban, and the war's main affectee, Pakistan. Hence instead of discussing the issues at hand and solutions, the participants focussed on the post-2014 Afghanistan, iterating the Western alliance's commitment not to abandon the country after the departure of combat troops.
Pakistan stayed out of the conference to protest last month's unprovoked American attack on two border posts in Mohmand Agency that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers and injured several others. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and some other Western leaders lamented its non-attendance, saying the country has a crucial role to play. Indeed, Pakistan has a key role in resolving Afghanistan due to its geographical location and the ethnic bonds a part of its population shares with the Afghan people. But it has its own concerns that remain ignored, which is why at last month's Istanbul conference on Afghanistan, Pakistan along with Iran, China and Russia took a different line than that of the US and its allies.
As a matter of fact, even if Pakistan wants it has a limited ability to influence the situation. The real party to the conflict is the Taliban. Pakistan can open the door for the international community to talks with the Taliban - something the US has tried bypassing Pakistan, and failed - but it cannot force them to accept the terms of disengagement on offer, especially the demand for military bases. After all, the Taliban are the victors rather than the vanquished. And victors have a habit of setting their own conditions. Their first and last objective for mounting a fierce decade-long resistance was the ouster of foreign occupation; they remain stuck on that position. They rejected the Bonn Conference for being aimed at "further ensnaring Afghanistan into the flames of occupation." There are only two ways to end this war: either the US forces defeat the Taliban or negotiate with them to find a decent exit from the country. There is no third option.
So far the US is unwilling to see reason. It is trying to impose a new strategic agenda on Afghanistan and its neighbours despite being in a weak bargaining position. As per its plan, India gets a prominent role in the post-war Afghanistan as well as easy access, via a new 'Silk Road' to the resource-rich Central Asian states. In furtherance of the plan a while ago President Hamid Karzai visited Delhi where he signed an agreement under which, aside from increasing trade via the Wahga-Torkham route, India is to train Afghan National Army to take over security responsibilities after the Nato forces' departure. Pakistan is not too pleased to see its arch-rival enhance its influence in Afghanistan and outflank it from both eastern and western borders. Common sense suggests that the US cannot promote Indian dominance in Afghanistan at Pakistan's expense and expect it to be supportive, too.
Washington's agenda generates a lot of anxiety among the region's other players as well. Iran, of course, is alarmed, and with good reason. Just last week, it shot down an American stealth drone in its airspace, amid heightening tensions over its nuclear programme. At first Washington feigned ignorance about the incident, but later acknowledged having lost a drone over western Afghanistan. No less worried are China and Russia. The proposed bases in Afghanistan, aimed at controlling the Caspian energy routes, are also intended to keep an eye on China. In Afghanistan's extended neighbourhood, Russia still regards Central Asia as its backyard. And hence views US plan to stay on in the region beyond 2014 as an impingement on its interests, and has been saying so. Standing next to his country's longtime friend India's foreign minister at a recent press conference, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov openly criticised the US agenda for Afghanistan. Said he, the Americans "have been telling us all along that their military presence [in Afghanistan] was time-bound to the removal of the specific threat of terrorism, and not to pursue any longer-term geopolitical goals." He then added a veiled warning "we take a strong view that the US will honour this pledge." Unsurprisingly, his Indian counterpart completely ignored these comments. India is the only country which stands to gain from the American strategic designs for the region and hence is happy to play along.
Pak-India normalisation process has suddenly picked up steam, apparently on the US' urging, which is very welcome. The two countries need to make peace for their own mutual good though it will take time for them to resolve the major issues of conflict. But if history is any guide, even after the most contentious issues are out of the way, old rivalries will continue to cast a shadow on the relationship. At this time, it is unrealistic for the US to think that Pakistan will let it ensconce Indian power in Kabul. Equally unrealistic is its plan to entrench itself in military bases on Afghan soil.
Where the interests of all parties to the conflict and anxious neighbours coincide is finding an honourable exit for the US-led Nato forces. Instead of vying for influence all, including Pakistan, should work towards a negotiated settlement acceptable to Afghanistan's different ethnic communities. That is where Pakistan can help. In the past it has offered to bring the Taliban leadership, Mullah Omar's men as well as the Haqqanis, to the negotiating table. Reports emanating from Western sources have long been saying that the Taliban are willing to make a complete break with al Qaeda. Washington also claims having almost decimated al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Still, guarantees need to be sought and given about preventing the country from becoming a safe haven for extremists with international agendas. In return, the international community should lend financial support to a post-war government that includes the Taliban - whether anyone likes it or not they represent a sizeable portion of the Afghan population - to help the country achieve stability. An Afghanistan at peace with itself, and free from outside interference, is what the hapless people of that unfortunately country need. So does Pakistan which has borne the brunt of America's two Afghan wars.
[email protected]