Opinion Afghan Ceasefire

The United States for now is insisting on a “fight,talk,build” strategy that seeks to maintain the military pressure on the Taliban and the Haqqani network,but is keeping the door open for talks with them. The Taliban’s tactics seem no different. They have stepped up the attacks in Afghanistan and is betting that the United States can be compelled to make more concessions.

Rawalpindi has stepped into this breach by insisting that a ceasefire must precede any talks. Speaking on behalf of the Taliban,Pakistan’s security establishment claims that the “Taliban will not engage in meaningful talks” unless there is a formal ceasefire by the US and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

During her visit to Pakistan last month,US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appears to have discussed the idea of a ceasefire as part of a new framework for stability in Afghanistan.

Speaking to the media in Islamabad,Clinton cited the Pakistani argument that the “fight,talk,build” strategy makes no sense. She pointed to Islamabad’s suggestion that “what first needs to be done is try to negotiate a ceasefire. That’s just an example of the discussions that are going to be held. And that is something that we want to discuss,we want to hear the views of,but it’s done in the context of overall agreement about where we’re trying to head.”

The US is obviously quite eager to launch talks with the militants as quickly as possible. Sensing the growing anxiety in Washington,Rawalpindi is pressing for an unconditional ceasefire on the part of the US before it gets its proxies to the table.

The US-Pakistan diplomacy in the next few weeks might largely be about finding an appropriate sequence of steps that would satisfy both sides on the question of a ceasefire.

Boosting Taliban

In any civil war,a ceasefire usually tends to be an important tipping point. Whether it survives the difficult initial negotiations that follow or not,a ceasefire underlines a measure of psychological parity between the government and the insurgents.

This does not matter when a strong government agrees to engage a localised insurgency. It is an entirely different matter when a group that once ruled a country,such as the Taliban,is invited to become a party to the talks. Amidst the perception of an American retreat from Kabul and the weakness of the current Afghan regime,a ceasefire will in any event be a major political boost for the Taliban.

If the United States and NATO accept a ceasefire on Pakistani terms,it will be an even bigger triumph for the Taliban.

US Concessions

Having seen the Obama administration walk back from the threatening noises it had made against Pakistan barely a few weeks ago,Rawalpindi appears quite confident that it can get Washington to accept an unconditional ceasefire. The Obama administration already appears to have made some major concessions to Pakistan.

For one,it is no longer demanding that the Pakistan army launch military operations against the Haqqani network. It merely wants Rawalpindi to mount enough pressure to make them amenable for talks. Second,as reported in The Washington Post on Tuesday,“Pakistan has been offered a principal role” in the negotiations with the Taliban and Haqqani network,“in exchange for curtailing their support for them and helping bring them to the table.”

Clinton also appears to have given Pakistan a seat at the negotiating table. According to the Post,“Until recently,the administration insisted that substantive talks must be between the Afghans and the insurgents,with US facilitation and Pakistani support.” The new administration approach,the Post says,“recognises that talks are more likely to succeed with the direct participation of the four parties with the biggest stake in the outcome.”

This new format of engagement means Pakistan will have two seats at the table,one for itself and another for its Afghan proxies. The new framework should effectively put an end to the cliché that the reconciliation process must be “Afghan-owned and Afghan-led.”

The writer is a senior fellow at the Centre for Policy Research,Delhi