Saifullah Ahmadzai, Senior Research Analyst, Abdul Halim Achakzai, Senior Research Analyst, Shoaib Harris, Research Fellow and Abdulhadi Hairan, Research Analyst at the Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies (CAPS) participated in the Regional Network of Strategic Studies Center (RNSSC) conference from 18^th to 22^nd November, 2009. The conference was hosted by the Institute for Defense Studies and Analysis (IDSA) in New Delhi, India.

The conference had been planned to provide a platform for Network participants in order to discuss ongoing research, plan future collaborations, draft publications, and welcome new centers into the network.  To this end, four working groups had gathered to discuss counter terrorism, non-traditional security, democracy & governance, border security and weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, relatively smaller and focused plenary sessions followed to discuss issues concerning water Security in the Near East and South Asia Region, New Challenges and Opportunities in Nuclear Disarmament and Non-Proliferation, Exploring the Region’s Stake in Afghanistan.

Click to read full story.

For a long time, the Afghans have been the victims of policies, ideologies and strategies imported and enforced from outside the country. An internal Afghan solution has never been a priority for the international players of the Afghan conflict. The new Obama strategy, which has two main parts: sending more 30,000 troops to gain the momentum against the terrorists, and invest huge amounts to lure the Taliban fighters to switch sides, is another part of this series.

This strategy is for the next 18 months. The key question is: what will happen after that? The Taliban is not a pure Afghan dilemma. It has local and international powers behind it as supporters. If these supporters continue to support and pay for fighting, the insurgency will never see an end. They will pay to make them fighters and you will pay to switch sides. At the end of the day, Obama, or the next US President, will have to draw another new strategy. Thus, the conflict will continue until the time the basic regional problems and issues are understood and resolved, not through foreign strategies but through local mechanisms.

As an effort to provide a further explanation of the basic problem, for example, we can discuss the role Pakistan does play in the regional conflicts and politics. This nuclear-armed country is seen as the major contributor to the international terrorism and extremism and at the same time a major front to fight against the global threat of terrorism. From the events that have been taking place within this country, we can tell that Pakistan is extremely confused over the issue of fighting against terrorism. Two days back (on Dec. 12, 2009), Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani told reporters in Lahore that the anti-terror operation in South Waziristan was over. This he said after having claimed that the military had cleared the area of local and foreign terrorists and was now in its control. But the next day, while speaking to a different audience in Karachi, he changed his statement and said that the operation was not over but will continue to an indefinite time. This created confusion and suspicion about the coordination between the political officials and the military commanders.

Similarly, there are reports that the country is widely divided on the issue of anti-terror operations. According to these reports, the powerful military, the intelligence agencies, the political-religious parties that were originally created and later supported by the establishment, are against the operations and support the extremist groups for their local as well as international agendas, while the weak political government and the liberal circles want an all-out campaign to be launched against the terror groups that are hiding and operating in the tribal areas as well as the settled and urban areas.

The reasons behind the fact that a majority of Pakistan’s military, political, and religious elements support terrorism or extremism are not very much complicated: Pakistan has a 62-year long enmity with India and its military gets benefited from this conflict. And the use of terrorist groups has proved the most effective and lethal method against India. So, unless the Pak-India conflict is solved, the military will never want to put a complete end to the terror groups. The second reason: Pakistan is not happy with the US presence in the region because that has been harming its strategic role in Afghanistan. As troubling as the Pak-India conflict is the Durand Line issue between Pakistan and Afghanistan. This conflict has deep political dimensions. A remarkable majority of the Afghans believe that Pakistan has illegally occupied the Pashtun-dominated areas. They think that the Pashtun-dominated areas of Pakistan should be a part of Afghanistan or turned into an independent state, known as Pashtunistan. Pakistan’s political powers are aware of these perceptions and know that a stable and peaceful Afghanistan may mean a re-emerge of the Pashtunistan issue. So without resolving this crucial issue, Pakistan’s political powers may never want to stop supporting the Afghan insurgency.

So reconciliation with the insurgents is okay. But there is still a strong need to look at these issues as important factors because only the solution of these problems can bring a long-lasting peace and stability to the region.

The Afghanistan – Pakistan – India Friendship Forum (APIFF) is for peace-loving people of this region. As South Asian countries, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India can play a major role in making the region socially peaceful, politically stable and economically prosper. Fortunately, majority of the people of these countries want these values and hate the warmongers who are always seeking conspiracies and conflict. This group is for people who want peace, stability and prosperity in these countries and the region. Let’s share our thoughts on these matters, be friends and think positive. Let’s throw the wars and conflicts where they have thrown us. To join the group and contribute to this cause, please click on the link and join:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&ref=mf&gid=193145820705

The two-day World Pashto Conference (Oct. 08-09, 2009) in Kabul concluded on Friday with a special focus on education for the Pashtun people in Afghanistan and Pakistan and appealed the militants active in both countries to stop torching schools and other educational institutions.

The conference was arranged by two cultural and literary groups working for the promotion of the Pashto language in Kabul; it was the first World Pashto Conference in Afghanistan and the eighth of overall World Pashto Conferences; all of the previous World Pashto Conferences were held in Pakistan. The first World Pashto Conference was held in Peshawar in 1988.

Delegations and representatives of Pashto literary organizations from India, Pakistan, European countries, Gulf countries, Canada and the United States participated in the Conference. Several government officials, governors, members of Parliament, and tribal elders were also present.

There were four workshops in the Conference to discuss the problems the Pashtuns and their language – Pashto – has been facing in the world today. They discussed the overall situation of the Pashtuns, the lack of educational institutions for Pashtun children, the faults in the jirga system, and the apathy the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan have towards the Pashto language.

There was a poetry reciting gathering on the first day and a music and dance session on the second day. Nearly all of the poems were about the current war-like situation in the tribal areas and Afghanistan and Pakistan. They said the war had destroyed not only their land and people, but also the history, culture, and the future.

At the concluding session, the participants unanimously passed a resolution which:

• appealed the anti-government elements on both sides of the border to stop torching schools;

• asked the governments of Pakistan and Afghanistan to support the Pashto language and work for its promotion;

• asked the relevant government institutions, literary and cultural organizations, and the civil society to cooperate with each other and find implementable mechanisms for the solutions of the problems the Pashtuns have been facing and for the promotion of the Pashto language; and

• asked the international community and the governments of Afghanistan and Pakistan to provide more and modern educational opportunities to the Pashtuns for their progress and prosperity.

Interesting notes:

• The Chairman of the first World Pashto Conference – a well-known progressive Pashtun writer, Salim Raaz – was not invited to the Conference. He told a news conference in Peshawar that the Kabul Conference was not part of the World Pashto Conferences and he didn’t know who had arranged it.

• All of the participants from Pakistan said they felt at home in Afghanistan because the country was their mother land.

• A speaker from Pakistan continuously used the term ‘Occupied Afghanistan’ for the tribal areas and the settled Pashtun-dominated districts of Pakistan (reminding the people that these areas are a part of Afghanistan but occupied by Pakistan).

• Most of the speeches and the poems focused on the current situation in the tribal areas and the worst conditions the Pashtuns live in.

• A Working Committee established the World Pashto Network and there was a demand for a World Pashto Conference every year.

• Several of the participants complained about bad arrangements of the conference.

 The Pakistani government in the restive northwest province on Sunday arrested Maulana Sufi Mohammad, father-in-law of Mullah Fazlullah, the militant leader in Swat, and head of Tanzim-e-Nifaz-e-Sharia-e-Mohammadi (TNSM).

 “He killed a lot of people. Again he was planning for this. We will not allow anyone to destroy peace at Malakand and Swat,” said Mian Iftekhar Hussain, Information Minister of the province, as quoted by AFP.

 Interestingly, Mr. Hussain is a part of the same government which freed the Maulana in February 2008 and allowed him to go home comfortably. He then brokered a peace deal between his son-in-law and the government. The government then did not consider the fact that he had ‘killed a lot of people.’ How a peace deal can work when it is brokered by a killer? The government ignored this question, the Swat peace deal did never work, and it had to arrest him again.

 It is not just one example of the game that the government of Pakistan, its army and its secret agencies have been playing in the region: it places the blame of the assassination of the country’s most popular leader and two-time Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, on Pakistani Taliban chief Baitullah Mehsud and wants to kill or capture him, yet it failed to provide protection to a tribal commander, Qari Zainuddin, who rebelled against his network. Similarly, the government is fighting against the militants in many parts of the tribal and settled areas, yet it failed to support the tribal lashkars (armies) that wanted to wipe out the militants from their areas. This is enough evidence of the actual fact: Pakistan wants neither to win nor lose this game.

 As most of the Pakistanis thought the militants as their ‘strategic assets’ because their government was fully supporting them in their campaign against Afghanistan, their uprising against the Pakistani government and people has still not changed the minds and interests of some powerful elements within the government and the army. These elements are the key stakeholders of the power and they want to continue the war against terrorism in just a confusing and complicated way in order to keep both the international community and the insurgents engaged in the region. These elements need the international community for huge aids and the insurgents to use against India. The result: they can neither win nor lose this war.