Mediaboss Marketing

Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistans former military dictator, had secretly authorized the drone strikes, and some of the drones operated from bases inside Pakistan a policy that continued under his civilian successors. Under his rule, Pakistan audaciously denied having anything to do with the Afghan Taliban or its most sinister component, the Haqqani network.

But the United States presented evidence of Pakistans links to Afghan militants just as Pakistan transitioned from military to civilian rule in 2008. As Pakistans ambassador to the United States for the new civilian government, I urged Pakistans civil and military leaders to engage with Americans honestly instead of sticking to blanket denials.

Islamabads response was to argue that Pakistan does, indeed, support insurgents in Afghanistan, but it does so because of security concerns about India, which is seen by generals and many civilian leaders as an existential threat to Pakistan.

But that excuse is based on exaggerations and falsehoods. India has no offensive military presence in Afghanistan and there has never been any evidence that the Afghans are willing to be part of Indias alleged plan for a two-front war with Pakistan.

Afghanistans president, Ashraf Ghani, recently asked India to train Afghan military officers and repair military aircraft after frustration with Pakistan, which failed to fulfill promises of restraining the Taliban and forcing them to the negotiating table.

Pakistans leaders question Afghanistans acceptance of economic assistance from India even though Pakistan does not have the capacity to provide such aid itself.

It seems that Pakistan wants to keep alive imaginary fears, possibly to maintain military ascendancy in a country that has been ruled by generals for almost half of its existence. For years Pakistani officials falsely asserted that India had set up 24 consulates in Afghanistan, some close to the Pakistani border. In fact, India has only four consulates, the same number Pakistan has, in Afghanistan.

Lying about easily verifiable facts is usually the tactic of governments fabricating a threat rather than ones genuinely facing one. As ambassador, I attended trilateral meetings where my colleagues rejected serious suggestions from Afghans and Americans to mitigate apprehensions about Indian influence in Afghanistan.

While evidence of an Indian threat to Pakistan through Afghanistan remains scant, proof of the presence of Afghan Taliban leaders in Pakistan continues to mount. Mullah Omar, the Talibans leader, reportedly died in a Pakistani hospital in 2013 and his successor, Mullah Akhtar Mansour, was killed in an American drone strike in Baluchistan Province in Pakistan last year.

The United States should not let Pakistan link its longstanding support for hard-line Pashtun Islamists in Afghanistan to its disputes with India.

Both India and Pakistan have a lot of blood on their hands in Kashmir and seem in no hurry to resolve their disagreement, which is rooted in the psychosis resulting from the subcontinents bitter partition. The two countries have gone through 45 rounds of summit-level talks since 1947 and have failed to reach a permanent settlement.

Linking the outcome in Afghanistan to resolution of India-Pakistan issues would keep the United States embroiled there for a very long time. The recent rise in Islamophobia in India and a more aggressive stance against Pakistan by Prime Minister Narendra Modi should not detract from recognizing the paranoiac nature of Pakistans fears.

The Bush administration gave Pakistan $12.4 billion in aid, and the Obama administration forked over $21 billion. These incentives did not make Pakistan more amenable to cutting off support for the Afghan Taliban.

The Trump administration should now consider taking away Pakistans status as a major non-NATO ally, which would limit its priority access to American military technology. Aid to Pakistan should be linked to a sequence and timeline for specific actions against Taliban leaders.

Sanctions against individuals and institutions involved in facilitating Pakistan-based Taliban leaders and pursuing Taliban reconciliation talks without depending on Pakistan could be other measures signaling a firmer United States stance.

Moving away from an incentive-based approach would not be punishing Pakistan. The United States would be acting as a friend, helping Pakistan realize through tough measures that the gravest threat to its future comes from religious extremism it is fostering in its effort to compete with India.

Negotiating a peaceful settlement with the Taliban also remains desirable, but it is important to remember the difficulties 21st-century negotiators face while seeking compromise with seventh-century mind-sets.

Husain Haqqani, director for South and Central Asia at the Hudson Institute in Washington, was Pakistans ambassador to the United States from 2008 to 2011.

Follow The New York Times Opinion section on Facebook and Twitter, and sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter.

A version of this op-ed appears in print on July 7, 2017, in The International New York Times.

Link:
To Win Afghanistan, Get Tough on Pakistan - New York Times

Afghanistan is ready for the "huge honour" of making their landmark Lord's debut, officials said ahead of next week's match, after a fairy-tale rise catapulted them into the elite club of Test nations last month.

The young side will be taking on the Marylebone Cricket Club (MCC), led by former New Zealand skipper Brendon McCullum, in what officials hope will be an "historic" 50-overs match at the Home of Cricket on July 11.

Quick Single: ICC announces two new Test nation

Sri Lanka legend Kumar Sangakkara and West Indies great Shivnarine Chanderpaul, both of whom are playing domestic cricket in the United Kingdom, will also feature for the MCC.

The Afghan side includes Indian Premier League stars Mohammad Nabi and teenage leg-spinner Rashid Khan, who took 17 wickets in his debut this year. Nabi was previously on the MCC Young Cricketers scheme.

Other players include captain Asghar Stanikzai, Noor Ali Zadran, Javed Ahmadi, Nasir Jamal, Samiullah Shenwari, Afsar Zazai, Shafiqullah Shafaq, Rahmat Shah, Gulbadin Naib, Dawlat Zadran, Shapoor Zadran and Farid Malik.

Both Afghanistan and Ireland were confirmed as full members at an International Cricket Council (ICC) meeting during its annual conference in London late June and will be eligible to play five-day Test cricket, widely regarded as the sport's supreme format.

"It will be a huge honour and experience for the team, as we will be playing for the first time there (at Lord's)," an Afghanistan Cricket Board spokesperson told AFP on Thursday.

Walking onto the pitch at Lord's will cap a dizzying rise for cricket-mad Afghanistan. Many Afghans' first contact with the game only took place during the 1980s and 1990s, in Pakistani refugee camps sheltering millions who fled the Soviet invasion.

The game struggled in the late 1990s under the regime of the hardline Islamist Taliban, who viewed sports as a distraction from religious duties.

But it has become hugely popular in the country since the Taliban were toppled in a US-led invasion in 2001.

Recent successes, particularly in last year's ICC World Twenty20 where Afghanistan defeated eventual champions West Indies in the group stage, have further raised the country's profile.

View post:
Afghanistan's fairy-tale begins at Lord's - cricket.com.au

In essence, Afghanistan and Turkmenistan fight against terrorism and radicalism by reducing extreme poverty.

By M. Ashraf Haidari for The Diplomat

July 06, 2017

Since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, relations between Afghanistan and Turkmenistan have consistently grown. But the past two years under the National Unity Government of Afghanistan have seen rapid expansion of bilateral ties between the two countries. Afghan President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani and his Turkmen counterpart, President Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedov, share a vision of win-win economic cooperation, demonstrated through the initiation and implementation of numerous bilateral and multilateral economic and connectivity projects. These projects foremost bolster the two countries own economic growth, while ensuring prosperity and security throughout the region.

In essence, Afghanistan and Turkmenistan fight against terrorism and radicalism by reducing extreme poverty, which enables regional and global terrorist networks to prey on destitute, prospectless youth for radicalization and recruitment to destabilize South Asia and Central Asia. It is also poverty and a lack of job opportunities that enable a permissive environment for drug production and drug trafficking, which feeds regional and transnational criminality. Revenues from a criminalized economy in turn finance terrorism, undermining regional stability and thus impeding economic growth across South Asia and Central Asia.

Following a number of high level state visits exchanged between the two countries, Ghani visited Ashgabat on July 3, 2017 and signed seven bilateral cooperation agreements and MOUs with his counterpart. The two leaders built on their previousprogress in pushing forward bilateral and multilateral infrastructure, energy, and transportation projects that would further connect South Asia and Central Asia through Afghanistan and Turkmenistan. Progress in the implementation of these much-needed projects would enable Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, and others to harness their massive energy and connectivity potential for meeting their sustainable development goals (SDGs) at the heart of a rising Asia.

More specifically, in line with Afghanistans economy-centric foreign policy with a focus on promoting regional economic integration through full-spectrum connectivity, Ghani emphasized in Turkmenistan the importance of implementing multilateral energy and transportation projects. He and his counterpart welcomed continuing progress on the building of the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) natural gas pipeline, whose full realization would help create economic inter-dependency against zer0-sum designs that stall regional economic growth.

Moreover, the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TAP) and Turkmenistan-Uzbekistan-Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan (TUTAP) electricity projects were discussed. Their realization would increase urban and rural access to electricity, most benefiting households and small- and medium-sized businesses across the region. Electrification of rural Afghanistan and Pakistan would particularly help the two countries improve their dismal social development indicators in the areas of education and healthcare, where qualitative and quantitative improvements would generate a healthy, productive workforce needed to drive the two countries sustainable development.

The two sides also discussed the Afghanistan-Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan-Georgia-Turkey (Lapis Lazuli) trade and transit corridor, as well as the Tajikistan-Afghanistan-Turkmenistan (TAT) railway, whose implementation would open alternative trade routes for the whole region. Two-way flow of not just trade and investment but also expansion of people-to-people contacts among South Asia, Central Asia, and Europe would help Afghans regain their countrys former status as the roundabout of the Silk Road.

That is why Afghanistan is an active member of every regional organization with a core objective of enhancing infrastructure and transportation connectivity. This year, Afghanistan joined the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and strongly supports Chinas Belt and Road Initiative. Thanks to Turkmenistan, Ashgabat will host the 7thRegional Economic Cooperation Conference on Afghanistan (RECCA VII) this November. RECCA VII will highlight the progress Afghanistan and its neighbors have made on a number of key energy, infrastructure, and transportation projects, while presenting bankable investment opportunities to be taken advantage of by regional and international businesses.

Afghanistan renews its call on regional and global stakeholders to come together for win-win economic cooperation, even in the midst of war and violence imposed on the Afghan people. The expanding economic relationship between Afghanistan and Turkmenistan offers an example for emulation by others. Afghans continue extending a hand of friendship to all of our neighbors, including Pakistan, realizing that their collective secure future can only be achieved through a win-win economic vision pursued by the Afghan government.

A Visiting Fellow at the Observer Research Foundation (ORF) and the Afghan Institute for Strategic Studies (AISS), M. Ashraf Haidari is the Director-General of Policy & Strategy of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan, and formerly served as the countrys Deputy Chief of Mission to India. Prior to this, he was Afghanistans Deputy Assistant National Security Advisor, as well as Afghan Charg dAffaires to the United States. He tweets @MAshrafHaidari

Original post:
Afghanistan and Turkmenistan: A Model for Regional Economic Cooperation - The Diplomat

Regional leaders attending the CASA-1000 meeting said stability in Afghanistan was important for the whole region.

Member countries of the CASA-1000 power project attended a meeting in Dushanbe in Tajikistan on Thursday where they stressed the need for more effort to be made in ensuring security and economic development in Afghanistan.

Tajikistan President Emomali Rahmon said peace and stability in Afghanistan was critical in terms of implementing the project in the country.

Afghanistan was one of our main topics of discussion. Overcoming the Afghanistan situation and ensuring enduring peace and stability in the neighboring country is very important for our (regional countries) governments. We decided to have bilateral and quadrilateral cooperation in order to ensure lasting peace and stability (in Afghanistan), he stated.

Pakistans Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said the project was in the interests of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

CASA-1000 project will not only bring the avenues for Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan but will also mitigate electricity shortages in Pakistan and Afghanistan and increase the prospects for growth. It will also be a source of revenue for Afghanistan opening up greater business and investment opportunities , he said.

The Afghan government meanwhile said the meeting was a good opportunity to improve Kabul-Islamabad relations.

The goal of the project is to reiterate the commitment of all countries and banks who will finance the project, said Abdul Basir Azimi, deputy minister of energy and water.

The Presidential Palace said a trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Pakistan was one of the main purposes for President Ashraf Ghanis visit to Dushanbe.

One of the policies of the National Unity Government is to connect the interests of regional countries in the form of economic, trade and transit projects, Ghanis spokesman Shahussain Murtazawi said.

The CASA-1000 project will eventually transfer at least 1,000 megawatts of power from Kyrgyzstan to Pakistan via Afghanistan.

Work on the project kicked off last year and is expected to be completed in 2020. The project will cost more than one billion USD.

Go here to read the rest:
Regional Countries Agree To Work For Peace In Afghanistan - TOLOnews

By Ray Takeyh By Ray Takeyh July 5

Ray Takeyh is a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations.

In recent congressional testimony, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson sensibly stressed that the United States should work towards support of those elements inside of Iran that would lead to a peaceful transition of that government. The commentariat was aghast, and the Islamic republic registered a formal protest note. Both parties seemed surprised that the United States has long assisted those seeking democratic change. During the Cold War, secretaries of state routinely assured those trapped behind the Iron Curtain that America supported their aspirations. Given that Iran is ruled by an aging Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the United States should be prepared for a transition of power there that may yet precipitate the collapse of the entire system.

In a region littered with failed states, Iran is often mischaracterized as an island of stability. The history of the Islamic republic, however, is a turbulent one, featuring a constant struggle between an authoritarian regime and restive population seeking democratic empowerment. When they first assumed power, the clerical oligarchs waged bloody street battles to repress other members of the revolutionary coalition who did not share their desire for a theocratic dictatorship. In the 1990s, they faced the rise of a reform movement that remains the most exhilarating attempt to harmonize religion and pluralism. The reformists spoke about reconsidering Khameneis absolutist pretensions and expanding civil society and critical media. The regime reacted with its usual mixture of terror and intimidation to eviscerate the movement. And then came the Green Revolt in summer 2009 that forever delegitimized the system and severed the bonds between state and society.

The one thing certain about Irans future is that another protest movement will rise at some point seeking to displace the regime.

Today, the Islamic republic lumbers on as the Soviet Union did during its last years. It professes an ideology that convinces no one. It commands security services that proved unreliable in the 2009 rebellion, causing the regime to deploy the Basij militias because many commanders of the Revolutionary Guards refused to shoot the protesters.

The seminaries in the shrine city of Qom appreciate the damage that the government of God has done to Islam as the mosques remain empty even during important religious commemorations. Young men dont wish to join the clergy, and women dont want to marry clerics. The system is engulfed by corruption, which is particularly problematic for a regime that bases its power on divine ordinance. And Iran just underwent a presidential election where the winner, Hassan Rouhani, promised freedoms he has no intention of delivering and further delegitimized the government by airing its dirty laundry on issues of craft and repression. Today, the Islamic republic will not be able to manage a succession to the post of the supreme leader as its factions are too divided and its public too disaffected.

The regime does, however, have one thing in its favor: its nuclear agreement with the international community (officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.) Historically, arms-control treaties have generated their own constituency. During the 1970s, at the height of U.S.-Soviet arms-control diplomacy, influential voices in the West did not want to pressure the Kremlin for fear that it would disrupt the agreements. The Islamic republic can count on similar forbearance from critical sectors of Washington. Many will feign concern about Irans terrorism or human rights abuses, but will rebuff attempts to impose truly crippling sanctions on Tehran. The legitimacy and longevity of the regime will not be questioned by those whose foremost priority is sustaining a deficient arms-control accord. And it was this sentiment that Tillerson challenged when he called for making common cause with those struggling for freedom inside Iran. The amorality of arms control has little room for such lofty and idealistic ambitions.

The task of a judicious U.S. government today is to plan for the probable outbreak of another protest movement or the sudden passing of Khamenei that could destabilize the system to the point of collapse. How can we further sow discord in Irans vicious factional politics? How can the United States weaken the regimes already unsteady security services? This will require not just draining the Islamic republics coffers but also finding ways to empower its domestic critics. The planning for all this must start today; once the crisis breaks out, it will be too late for America to be a player.

In March 1953, when Joseph Stalin died, President Dwight Eisenhower asked to see his governments studies about how to exploit the Soviet succession crisis. There were none. An exasperated Eisenhower exclaimed, For about seven years, ever since 1946, I know that everybody who should have been concerned with such things has been sounding off on what we should do when Stalin dies. Well he did and we want to see what bright ideas were in the files of this government, what plans were laid. What we found was that the result of seven years of yapping is exactly zero. We have no plan. For his part, Tillerson has established the guidepost that should direct U.S. foreign policy. The task for the administration now is to study ways that we can take advantage of Irans looming crisis to potentially displace one of Americas most entrenched adversaries.

Continue reading here:
It's time to prepare for Iran's political collapse - Washington Post