Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

'Father of Taliban' Urges US Concessions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 'Father of Taliban' Urges US Concessions

    Taliban have a hundred fathers - every Pakistani and his brother-in-law claim to be 'father of the Taliban' - whether it's Naseerullah Babar, or that 'Colonel Imam', etc, etc.
    Pakistanis have no useful contribution to the world to speak of, so all they can do is jockey for credit in having created terror groups. This is how they gain fame for themselves. No 'Kaun Banega Crorepati' for them - it's just 'Kaun Banega Terrorist'


    ‘Father of Taliban’ urges US concessions - FT.com

    November 13, 2011 4:24 pm
    ‘Father of Taliban’ urges US concessions
    By Matthew Green in Akora Khattak

    Sami ul-Haq’s seminary may have a reputation as Pakistan’s premier “University of Jihad”, but these days the sharp-tongued cleric is more eager to talk peace than holy war.
    Known in Pakistan as the “Father of the Taliban” for schooling a generation of Afghan fighters at his Haqqania madrassa, Mr ul-Haq, a stern-looking preacher in his early 70s, has a unique perspective on the way the movement thinks.
    As the Obama administration clings to the seemingly remote hope of negotiating an end to the war in Afghanistan before the vast majority of Nato combat troops leave by the end of 2014, Mr ul-Haq has some frank advice: start making concessions – and fast.
    The Taliban will only take peace overtures seriously, he believes, if the US proves its sincerity by moving to release key commanders, declare limited ceasefires in Afghanistan, and halt drone strikes in Pakistan.
    “America is very confused. No clear road map can be seen for these negotiations. There is no clear picture in front of the Taliban,” said Mr ul-Haq, speaking at the Haqqania complex of dormitories, class-rooms and mosques outside the north-western city of Peshawar.
    “They [the US] should narrow the scope of the war first and then talk to the Taliban directly,” he said.
    The already slim chance of rapidly engaging insurgents in talks was shattered in September when a suicide bomber killed Burhanuddin Rabbani, the former Afghan president, who had been heading the government’s reconciliation initiative. Afghan elders and politicians are due to meet in Kabul on Wednesday to chart a new policy.
    A prominent figure in Pakistani Islamist politics who served for years in the country’s senate, Mr ul-Haq by no means claims to speak for the Taliban. But he was once close to its leaders and says Mr Rabbani consulted him several times.
    The US would be loath to swallow Mr ul-Haq’s prescription, not least because it has no desire to appease the movement that sheltered Osama bin Laden, the founder of al-Qaeda, while he plotted the 9/11 terror attacks.
    Washington has, however, shown some flexibility. The US-sponsored a move by the UN Security Council in June to draw a sharper distinction between members of the Taliban and al-Qaeda when enforcing travel bans and asset freezes.
    While contacting the Taliban’s inner circle, which fled to Pakistan after the US invaded Afghanistan in 2001, is notoriously tricky, Mr ul-Haq’s 64-year-old madrassa is the closest thing the movement has to an alma mater.
    Hundreds of Afghan students memorised the Koran while sitting cross-legged on its carpets before joining the ranks of Taliban fighters who seized power in Afghanistan in the mid-1990s.
    A number of Mr ul-Haq’s protégées became commanders and ministers when the movement seized Kabul in 1996 and he served as an unofficial adviser to Mullah Mohammed Omar, the Taliban’s leader, before he was overthrown.
    The school also has a place in the hearts of the commanders of the Haqqani network, a family-run insurgent dynasty that specialises in Kabul suicide bombings. Jalaluddin Haqqani, the group’s ailing patriarch, studied at the seminary, from which he derives his name.
    The madrassa says it no longer takes foreign students, and has broadened its curriculum to include English and computer science, but it remains an intellectual lodestar for believers in violent jihad.
    “Just like Cambridge in the UK, or Harvard in the US, we’re trying to maintain our standards,” Mr ul-Haq said.
    The US, which has been reaching out to the Taliban and the Haqqanis, has not given up hope. Hillary Clinton, secretary of state, visited Pakistan last month to seek help in starting talks, subtly moderating previous demands that the army crack down on Afghan militants on Pakistani soil.
    Mr ul-Haq is sceptical, but says that if Washington clarifies what kind of role it sees the Taliban playing in Afghanistan’s future, he might be willing to act as a go-between. “The Taliban are very inflexible, and they love to fight,” he said. “Now they are saying the ball is in Nato’s court”.

  • #2
    Is it not logical to understand that there can only be peace in Afghanistan and the region with the complete withdrawal of foreign forces?

    There is no other alternative to this. Peace and freedom loving individuals should understand that there will only peace once the US withdraws.

    The US occupation is the sole barrier to peace within Afghanistan, and the rest of the region.

    In the name of freedom and independence, regional nations thwarted the designs of hegemony at the recent Istanbul conference and cemented their unity against foreign meddling at the SCO summit.

    People want peace and independence, and are opposed to and want the end of this war that has troubled the region and created instability.

    Comment


    • #3
      Foreign forces includes ISI, which was there long before US and NATO.

      ISI foreign forces must withdraw as well, or there cannot be peace.

      Stop pretending that ISI isn't there, as a foreign force. ISI is a foreign force, and it is there to do harm.

      Arabs are also foreign forces. They are the ones who conspired to bring the US and NATO into Afghanistan by launching the 9-11 attacks. They hatched this plan specifically to bring the US and NATO to Afghanistan so they could wage a big jihad against them, like against the Soviets. The foreign forces of the Arabs need to withdraw.

      If the foreign forces of the ISI and Arabs had not been in Afghanistan first, then US and NATo would have never been brought there, and this war would not be happening today.

      Comment


      • #4
        [QUOTE]
        Originally posted by sanman View Post
        Foreign forces includes ISI, which was there long before US and NATO.
        This is mere anti-Afghan propaganda mean to deny legitimacy of the Afghan right to freedom, independence, peace, and self determination. There has never been any Pakistani army divisions stationed in present day Afghanistan. The attribution of Afghan opposition/insurgency to foreigners has been a debunked ploy, and has no merit whatsoever. Pape's research proves this.

        This started when militant communists assassinated Sardar Daud Khan and his entire family since he was moving closer to Muslim nations. Such a wicked act ushered in the resistance against the militant communists and their Russian supporters.

        ISI foreign forces must withdraw as well, or there cannot be peace.
        Again, another meritless and debunked attempt to deny Afghan their rights to self determination, independence and peace.

        Stop pretending that ISI isn't there, as a foreign force. ISI is a foreign force, and it is there to do harm.
        I do not see Pakistani army divisions there. Until it can be proven that the Taliban were in fact Pakistanis who were Punjabis and dressed up as Pashtuns, spoke Pashto, fooling the Afghan people for four years, there is no case at all. Deal?

        Arabs are also foreign forces. They are the ones who conspired to bring the US and NATO into Afghanistan by launching the 9-11 attacks.
        First of all there are very few Arabs in Afghanistan as Pape, a professor has identified that the Afghan opposition/insurgency draws its ranks from Afghans exclusively. secondly, US meddling in the region began in 1953. This is the start point.
        They hatched this plan specifically to bring the US and NATO to Afghanistan so they could wage a big jihad against them, like against the Soviets. The foreign forces of the Arabs need to withdraw.
        Another meritless story meant to disguise the true nature of this conflict and meant to promote further war instead of peace because there will only be peace once the US withdraws from Afghanistan, and the entire region.

        US has attacked Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, and now Uganda for no reason.
        US attacked Iraq for weapons of mass destruction, but truth be told had Iraq ever had weapons of mass destruction, they would not have been attacked. US started meddling and interfering in the region since 1953 when they overthrew Mossadeq. US attacked Afghanistan in 1998, and has been interfering in the region far too long.


        If the foreign forces of the ISI and Arabs had not been in Afghanistan first, then US and NATo would have never been brought there, and this war would not be happening today.
        Wrong. US and NATO need no reason at all to attack peace loving countries. They started a war with Iraq in 1991 and 2003. They started a war with Vietnam, Korea, Yemen, Somalia, and recently Uganda for no reason at all. This meddling and interference of theirs in the region and civilized and free world is the sole barrier to peace and prosperity in the world. Their wicked and meddling ways need to stop, otherwise perhaps day will come when OIL nations will hike up the price of OIL further. They need to come to terms with the fact that Muslims can charge whatever price for OIL whether it be $1 or $5000 per barrel. The Islamic spring which has occurred in Egypt and Tunisia should pave the way forward for future minimum diplomatic relations with the West. The West is facing a return to the Dark Ages, and they should apologize for their constant interfering in the Muslim, free, humane, and peace loving world before they start begging for OIL

        And begging for OIL is inevitable.
        Last edited by Guest; 11-13-2011, 10:46 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Descent into Chaos: ''One senior (U.S.) intelligence analyst told me, "The request was made by Musharraf to Bush, but Cheney took charge—a token of who was handling Musharraf at the time. The approval was not shared with anyone at State, including Colin Powell, until well after the event. Musharraf said Pakistan needed to save its dignity and its valued people. Two planes were involved, which made several sorties a night over several nights. They took off from air bases in Chitral and Gilgit in Pakistan's northern areas, and landed in Kunduz, where the evacuees were waiting on the tarmac. Certainly hundreds and perhaps as many as one thousand people escaped. Hundreds of ISI officers, Taliban commanders, and foot soldiers belonging to the IMU and al Qaeda personnel boarded the planes. What was sold as a minor extraction turned into a major air bridge. The frustrated U.S. SOF who watched it from the surrounding high ground dubbed it "Operation Evil Airlift." Another senior U.S. diplomat told me afterward, "Musharraf fooled us because after we gave approval, the ISI may have run a much bigger operation and got out more people. We just don't know. At the time nobody wanted to hurt Musharraf, and his prestige with the army was at stake. The real question is why Musharraf did not get his men out before. Clearly the ISI was running its own war against the Americans and did not want to leave Afghanistan until the last moment.''


          http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3340165#.TsEAtbJkFDY (Airlift of Evil)


          BBC, News, BBC News, news online, world, uk, international, foreign, british, online, service


          The Airlift of Evil refers to the evacuation of thousands of top commanders and members of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, their Pakistani advisors including Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence agents and military personnel, and other Jihadi volunteers and sympathizers, from the city of Kunduz, Afghanistan, in November 2001 just before its capture by the forces of the U.S. and its allies Northern Alliance during the War in Afghanistan. All these anti-U.S. combatants were safely evacuated from Kunduz and airlifted by Pakistan Army cargo aircraft to Pakistan Air Force air bases in Chitral and Gilgit in Pakistan's Northern Areas.[1][2][3][4][5][6][7]
          The revelation that the U.S. had acquiesced to the escape of potentially dangerous individuals including the top leadership of the Taliban and Al Qaeda was a controversial and politically contentious topic that sparked off a debate in the western media and elicited denials of knowledge of this event from top Bush administration officials including Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld[2]. Although numerous articles mentioning such an ongoing airlift of Pakistani and other anti-U.S. combatants from Kunduz appeared around that time in several international newspapers (such as the New York Times[7], The Independent[7] and The Guardian[7]), the first reference to the specific term Airlift of Evil appeared in a column on the website of the MSNBC news network[2]. It is generally thought that the U.S. administration agreed to the airlift in an attempt to appease Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf and avoid destabilizing the Pakistani government, who, although overtly an ally of the U.S. in the War on Terror, had always supported the Taliban. This Pakistani evacuation of anti-U.S. fighters belonging to the Taliban, Al Qaeda and the ISI is also detailed in the BBC documentary Secret Pakistan: Double Cross and Backlash.[8][9]
          Last edited by Guest; 11-14-2011, 07:53 AM.

          Comment

          Working...
          X