Regional harmony
Afghan President Hamid Karzai has welcomed Iran’s initiative to hold a tripartite meeting between the foreign ministers of Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The offer was made during a meeting in Tehran between Karzai and Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki. Pakistan and Afghanistan have of late been at loggerheads and Iran’s entry into the picture is the result of ongoing consultations between senior officials of the three countries. The volatile situation in Afghanistan is spiralling out of control, as violence is spreading beyond the traditional Taliban strongholds. Moreover, the resentment against the US is gradually on the rise, as is evident from yesterday’s accident in Kabul involving a US military convoy, which led to rioting and bloodshed in the capital.
Afghanistan being a landlocked country is dependent on Pakistan for trade and overland communications. Now, however, Iran has offered Afghanistan road and rail links to its port of Bander Abbas on the Gulf. Improved communication links between Iran and Afghanistan will reduce Afghanistan’s dependence on Pakistan. The reason why Pakistan is not opposing Afghanistan’s decision to explore the Iranian alternative route is because it knows that history is about to transcend geography. Engaging in dialogue is therefore the only, and a better approach. The tripartite talks may help ease Pakistan-Afghanistan bitterness. With the hanging threat of a US attack on Iran, the presence of US troops in Afghanistan poses a grave threat to Tehran. It would dearly love to see the back of the US troops on its western flank. The Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki put this thought in the following words: “The Afghan people and their national pride have always been against occupiers. We hope the ground will be prepared for materialisation of the Afghan people’s will.”
Recent developments also indicate tensions between Pakistan and the US. Even though Pakistan took a 180-degree turn in its Afghan policy in 2001, yet the current scenario has left Pakistan feeling that the US is unappreciative and therefore only a seasonal friend. The continuous US statements about Pakistan not doing enough in the war on terror have left a bitter taste in Pakistan’s mouth. The US would like to reduce its troops in Afghanistan, to be replaced by Nato contingents. Pakistan is trying to anticipate the emergent situation post-US troops’ replacement in the south of Afghanistan by Nato forces, and does not want to be caught by surprise.
From the onset of the installation of Karzai’s government, Pakistan would have been better served if it had gone out of its way to develop good relations with the new government. But Pakistan took a niggardly approach because of lingering reservations about the Northern Alliance and did not engage adequately in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. India then took advantage of the situation by stepping in and offering its help. Islamabad must understand that it is still not too late to engage in negotiations with the Karzai government, bilaterally as well as in the company of Iran, as it would help reduce Indian influence and also ease the tensions between the two countries. A tripartite agreement would not only benefit each country individually, but would also ensure regional peace.
Afghanistan being a landlocked country is dependent on Pakistan for trade and overland communications. Now, however, Iran has offered Afghanistan road and rail links to its port of Bander Abbas on the Gulf. Improved communication links between Iran and Afghanistan will reduce Afghanistan’s dependence on Pakistan. The reason why Pakistan is not opposing Afghanistan’s decision to explore the Iranian alternative route is because it knows that history is about to transcend geography. Engaging in dialogue is therefore the only, and a better approach. The tripartite talks may help ease Pakistan-Afghanistan bitterness. With the hanging threat of a US attack on Iran, the presence of US troops in Afghanistan poses a grave threat to Tehran. It would dearly love to see the back of the US troops on its western flank. The Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki put this thought in the following words: “The Afghan people and their national pride have always been against occupiers. We hope the ground will be prepared for materialisation of the Afghan people’s will.”
Recent developments also indicate tensions between Pakistan and the US. Even though Pakistan took a 180-degree turn in its Afghan policy in 2001, yet the current scenario has left Pakistan feeling that the US is unappreciative and therefore only a seasonal friend. The continuous US statements about Pakistan not doing enough in the war on terror have left a bitter taste in Pakistan’s mouth. The US would like to reduce its troops in Afghanistan, to be replaced by Nato contingents. Pakistan is trying to anticipate the emergent situation post-US troops’ replacement in the south of Afghanistan by Nato forces, and does not want to be caught by surprise.
From the onset of the installation of Karzai’s government, Pakistan would have been better served if it had gone out of its way to develop good relations with the new government. But Pakistan took a niggardly approach because of lingering reservations about the Northern Alliance and did not engage adequately in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. India then took advantage of the situation by stepping in and offering its help. Islamabad must understand that it is still not too late to engage in negotiations with the Karzai government, bilaterally as well as in the company of Iran, as it would help reduce Indian influence and also ease the tensions between the two countries. A tripartite agreement would not only benefit each country individually, but would also ensure regional peace.
Comments