Afghanistan's killing fields

The US' longest war abroad in its history shows few signs of winding down anytime soon. This despite Washington's clear signals that it would like nothing better than to close this embarrassing chapter, in which its invasion and occupation of Afghanistan in the aftermath of 9/11 overthrew the Taliban regime but failed to prevent its supporters and members from fleeing across the border into Pakistan, which led to the US getting bogged down in a quagmire. As we know by now, Osama bin Laden too followed that route and was only killed by an American SEALS raid in 2011 in Abbottabad. Despite the then president Pervez Musharraf's ostensible agreement to support the US' war on terror after 9/11, the presence of the Taliban on Pakistani soil, and the discovery and elimination of Osama bin Laden here has roiled US-Pakistan relations to the point that, with the advent to office of President Donald Trump, relations have fallen to a new low. This is reflected in the John S McCain Defence Authorisation Act just passed by the US Senate that cuts security aid and reimbursements for help in the Afghan war to Pakistan. The US has even weighed in with adverse remarks about any IMF bailout for Pakistan being used to retire Chinese loans. Mercifully, the bill underplays India's role in Afghanistan while seeking a strategic relationship with New Delhi. This too has become a source of irritation between Washington and Islamabad. Meanwhile a burqa-clad suicide attack on a Shia mosque in Gardez that killed 29 people and wounded 80 on August 3 came as a grim reminder that the killing fields of Afghanistan still extract their undue cost to the civilian population that has been the worst sufferer in the protracted conflict. The Taliban have denied involvement so suspicion turns to the new menace in the shape of the Islamic State (IS) that has 'retreated' to Afghanistan and this region after its defeats in Iraq and Syria. Urban areas throughout Afghanistan have been under increasing attacks by IS and the Taliban, although the latter have not claimed any major attack in weeks, a reflection of the pressure on them to join peace talks. The turf war between the Taliban and IS has stepped up of late. After years of resisting the Taliban demand for direct talks with Washington while bypassing the Kabul government that the Taliban consider a foreign-imposed puppet, the US has recently held talks with the Taliban in Doha. This round of initial talks was reportedly between US diplomats and the Taliban's Doha office, which marks a positive departure from the US focusing on its military commanders leading the talks whenever and wherever they have fitfully been held. The military inherently remains fixated on the Taliban 'surrendering' or being defeated. The introduction of US diplomats leading the talks is a positive development, given that the long running war does not lend itself to simplistic military solutions. But to achieve the goal of a negotiated peace settlement, even this is not enough. Washington has to realize that without the involvement of Pakistan and regional powers such as Russia, China and the Central Asian states, all of them stakeholders in peace in the region inherently and concerned to scotch the spread of terrorism beyond Afghanistan's borders, peace will remain a dream and Washington's desire for an exit unfulfilled. In this context, it is also important to mention that the UN should be brought into the picture. Unlike the US-led war in Iraq, the invasion of Afghanistan carried the imprimatur of a UN Security Council approval. Over the years since 2001 though, the UN has been sidelined. Perhaps the time has come to reintroduce the world body's mediatory efforts into the complex mix that characterises the bloody Afghan war.