Pompeo Mediates the Intra-Afghan Peace Talks. What’s His Angle?

Published in Cankao
(China) on 12 September 2020
by Shuqun (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Brittany Bradley. Edited by Olivia Parker.
According to Reference News, peace negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban begin today in Qatar. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will also be joining the negotiations. Pompeo called the peace talks a “historic” opportunity to end decades of war and bloodshed in Afghanistan. Will Pompeo’s visit to Doha really bring about peace?

With the U.S. presidential election less than two months away, mediation of peace talks in Afghanistan by Pompeo and other high profile U.S. politicians is clearly just a way for politicians to boost morale for Donald Trump’s presidential campaign prior to the election.

On Sept. 9, Trump once again announced that he would substantially reduce the number of U.S. soldiers stationed in Afghanistan, decreasing the number of troops from approximately 8,600 to 4,000 over a short period of time. He also announced that he would be reducing the number of troops stationed in Iraq as well. This is Trump’s attempt to win over voters by fulfilling the promise he made early on in the 2016 election to reduce the number of troops overseas and allow them to return home.

Trump has said that, since February, not a single U.S. soldier has died in Afghanistan, adding that “... great progress is being made.” The U.S. intends to facilitate the intra-Afghan peace talks with the goal of bringing about peace in order to make its withdrawal of troops seem more legitimate.

Trump claimed that the opening of talks was “a result of a bold diplomatic effort on the part of my administration in recent months and years. The United States will play an important role in bringing the parties together to end the decades-long war.” Negotiations haven’t even begun yet and the first thing the United States does is to act full of itself. It’s hard to say how the talks will turn out, and U.S. politicians are putting on a full show.

For Afghanistan, peace remains a long way off.

In February, the U.S. reached a peace agreement with the Taliban. At the same time, the Taliban declared a cease-fire to create space for peace talks. Pompeo also called this a historic opportunity. However, conflict resumed almost immediately after the agreement was signed.

Will these historic opportunities pass the test of history? I’m afraid most of them are merely American politicians bragging about their actions.

One of the conditions of the peace agreement provides that the Afghan government release Taliban prisoners. The Afghan government and the Taliban have vastly different opinions on this particular condition, and the release has been delayed many times for one reason or another. As a result, the negotiations, originally planned for March, did not begin until today. Whether today’s talks will fare better than the previous meeting is the million-dollar question. On his way to Doha, Pompeo said that the peace talks could be fraught with disagreement.

Even if an agreement is reached and the U.S. withdraws its troops, how will the parties ensure that the treaty is being upheld? This is a question worth paying attention to. The treaty between the U.S. and the Taliban in February never included a clause on how to enforce the agreement. It remains to be seen how binding the agreement will be for the Taliban.

According to the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, in the first half of this year, the Taliban’s activity resulted in 580 civilian deaths and 893 civilian injuries, accounting for 43% of the total civilian casualties. On Sept. 11, Taliban militants attacked a security checkpoint in Nangarhar province in eastern Afghanistan, killing six soldiers and injuring five others. This makes one think about what peace talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban actually mean.

Even if the two sides reach an agreement, there are still extremist militant groups in Afghanistan such as al-Qaida and the Islamic State which still pose a threat to peace. The Afghan government will face greater military pressure after the U.S. withdraws its troops.

The situation in Afghanistan involves all the parties in the region. China has always maintained that intra-Afghan negotiations should be “Afghan-led” and “Afghan-owned;” to prevent any one country from dominating the process, something which would lead to new problems and hidden dangers.

Afghanistan, which has suffered from decades of war, has been left in shambles due to a war started by the U.S. According to UNAMA, there have been more than 100,000 civilian casualties since the organization began counting in 2009. After decades of war, Afghan citizens remain distressed, destitute and homeless. The U.S. cannot deny that it is responsible. Even if peace is truly achieved in Afghanistan, this shouldn’t become an opportunity for some U.S. politician to capitalize on, and it shouldn’t become something to flaunt as if some politician achieved it.


参考消息网9月12日报道 阿富汗政府与塔利班之间的和平谈判将于今日(12日)在卡塔尔多哈开启。美国国务卿蓬佩奥10日启程,也将参加和谈。蓬佩奥称,此番和谈是结束阿富汗数十年战争与流血冲突的“历史性”机遇。蓬佩奥去多哈,真为阿富汗和平?

对美国而言,距离总统选举不到两月,蓬佩奥等美国政客高调斡旋阿富汗内部和谈,其真实意图显而易见,不过是选举前为特朗普提振选情。

特朗普9日再次宣布将大幅削减驻阿美军人数,美军将在很短时间内由目前的约8600人减至4000人。他同时还宣布将削减驻伊拉克的美军人数。这是在履行早在2016年大选前就宣扬的减少海外驻军、让美国士兵回家的承诺,赢得选民支持。

他说,2月以来再无美军在阿富汗丧生,“阿富汗正在取得巨大进步”。让阿富汗政府与塔利班和谈,营造阿富汗即将迎来和平的氛围,才能令其撤军更具正当性。

他说:“此次谈判是我国政府在过去几个月和几年中大胆进行外交努力的结果。美国将在团结各方和结束长达数十年的战争方面发挥重要作用。”谈判尚未开始,先往自己脸上贴金。和谈成色几何难说,美政客政治作秀氛围十足。

对阿富汗而言,和平依然相当遥远。

美国今年2月与塔利班达成和平协议。当时为和谈营造氛围,塔利班宣布停火。蓬佩奥也称其是实现和平的“历史性”机遇。然而协议签署后,冲突几乎立即恢复。

这次所谓的“历史性”机遇,是否能够接受历史的检验?恐怕更多是美国政客在夸大自己的功绩。

美塔和平协议其中一项是阿政府与塔利班释放囚犯。仅此一项,阿政府与塔利班分歧突出,释放多次推迟,可谓一波三折。受此影响,原定3月的谈判直到今天才开始。今天的谈判是否会好于双方之前的接触,恐怕要打上一个很大的问号。蓬佩奥在前往多哈途中也表示,和谈可能充满争执。

即使双方达成和平协议,美国撤军后,如何确保协议执行,也将是值得关注的问题。2月达成的美塔和平协议中,并没有关于如何确保执行的条款。协议对塔利班能有多大约束作用,仍然有待观察。

据联合国阿富汗援助团报告称,今年上半年,塔利班的行动造成580名平民死亡、893名平民受伤,占平民伤亡总数的43%。就在11日,阿东部楠格哈尔省一所安全部队检查站遭塔利班武装分子袭击,造成6名安全部队士兵死亡,5人受伤。这令人们不得不思考,阿政府与塔利班的和谈究竟意味着什么。

即使双方达成协议,阿富汗境内还活跃着“基地”组织、“伊斯兰国”等极端武装组织,这些组织仍然对和平构成威胁。美国撤军后,阿富汗政府将面临更大的军事压力。

阿富汗局势牵涉地区各方力量,中国一贯主张阿人内部谈判应体现“阿人主导、阿人所有”的原则,防止个别国家垄断谈判进程,引发新的隐患和难题。

饱受数十年战乱之苦的阿富汗,本就是美国发动战争留下的烂摊子。联合国阿富汗援助团自该组织2009年开始统计以来,已记录有超过10万阿富汗平民伤亡。数十年的战乱,阿富汗人民流离失所,生灵涂炭,美国难辞其咎。即使有朝一日阿富汗真的实现和平,这也不应成为某些美国政客的政治资本,不应成为其拿来炫耀的事。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Ireland: Donald Trump Could Be Swallowed Up by an Epstein Conspiracy He Helped Create

Taiwan: Tariff Showdown Doesn’t Shake Confidence

Indonesia: Trump’s 19% Tariffs: How Should We Respond?

China: Blind Faith in US ‘Security Commitments’ Is Short-Sighted

Topics

Russia: The Issue of Weapons Has Come to the Forefront*

Colombia: How Much Longer?

Germany: Tariffs? Terrific!

Spain: The New American Realism

Mexico: Trump vs. Cuba: More of the Same

Ireland: US Tariffs Take Shine Off Summer Economic Statement

Israel: Epstein Conspiracy: When the Monster Has a Life of Its Own and Rises Up

Related Articles

China: Blind Faith in US ‘Security Commitments’ Is Short-Sighted

Germany: Trump’s Tariffs: China Acts, Europe Reacts

Australia: As Trump Turns His Back on Renewables, China Is Building the Future

Ethiopia: ‘Trump Guitars’ Made in China: Strumming a Tariff Tune

China: 3 Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China