Pakistan pulls out of Bonn Conference

[Talal]

There you go boys dont complain about us meddlin now

Pakistan will boycott the forthcoming international conference in Bonn on the future of Afghanistan, in protest at the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers who were killed when a Nato helicopter fired on their border posts.

The incident on the Afghan-Pakistan frontier on Saturday has thrown into disarray the coalition's strategy for stabilising Afghanistan and bringing the Taliban into peace talks. Washington has been pressing Pakistan to use its influence to bring the Taliban and the allied Haqqani network to the negotiating table. The insurgents' leadership is believed to be based in Pakistan.

The decision to boycott Bonn was taken at a cabinet meeting in Lahore.

A statement from the prime minister's office after the meeting read: "Pakistan looks forward to the success of this conference, but in view of the developments and prevailing circumstances has decided not to participate in the conference.

"Despite Pakistan's continued efforts to play a positive role for stability and peace in countering terrorism and militancy in the region, the sacrifices of the nation have not been recognised. Actions such as these attacks were contrary to the spirit of partnership, and business as usual was no longer possible."

In addition to the 24 Pakistani troops who were killed, 13 were injured in the incident, on the poorly defined, mountainous border of Mohmand and the Afghan province of Kunar.

The Bonn conference, to be held on 5 December, already appeared unlikely to produce international agreement on the way forward in Afghanistan, but its chances of making progress will be handicapped further by Pakistan's absence. The gathering will mark a decade since the first Bonn conference on Afghanistan, which followed the US-led toppling of the Taliban regime there.

Islamabad, China and Iran oppose US plans to keep military bases in Afghanistan past the 2014 deadline for ending the coalition's combat operations there.

Pakistan has already blocked supplies for Nato troops crossing its border into Afghanistan and barred the US from using an airbase in retaliation for the border casualties. Anger in Pakistan is growing over the deaths, which are being likened to the humiliation the country suffered on 2 May when a US squad unilaterally entered Pakistani territory to find and kill Osama bin Laden.

Pakistani and US officials have given conflicting versions of the chain of events that culminated in the Nato air strikes.

Afghan and US officials say a combined team of Afghan soldiers and US special forces called in strikes after taking fire from a position across the border. Pakistan, however, says no firing from its side of the border preceded the bombardment from Nato helicopters.

According to accounts appearing from Washington in the US media, some US military officials believe Taliban insurgents may have staged the attack deliberately in such a way as to draw fire on to the two outposts, located just 300 metres into Pakistani territory. The hilltop posts were mistaken by a coalition commander on the scene for insurgent encampments.

According to a report carried by the Associated Press, before calling in the attack helicopters coalition forces contacted the Pakistani military, which said the area contained none of its personnel.

And a story in the Washington Post quoted an unnamed Pakistani official as admitting that troops from his side had fired first, in the belief they had been ambushed by the Taliban.

Officially, the Pakistani military maintains that the two-hour clash was unprovoked and that coalition forces ignored their pleas to hold fire.

Late on Monday, the US military appointed a senior officer, air force brigadier Stephen Clark, to investigate the incident.

But coalition sources' off-the-record explanation of the incident as self-defence has generated further anger in Pakistan.

"The US has been nowhere near as apologetic as it should be for the killings, even if they were accidental, of a supposed ally," said an editorial in Express Tribune. "As long as the US refuses to take responsibility for its actions and punish those responsible for the strike, it will be hard for Pakistan to allow Nato trucks to cross through its territory."

[Al Hanif]

not enough, you have to side with the mujahideens to repair your prejudice

[Shehbaz Khan]

not enough, you have to side with the mujahideens to repair your prejudice

Which Mujahideens?

[Talal]

not enough, you have to side with the mujahideens to repair your prejudice

for all we know they could have been the one that instigated the shoot out

one of the officers who died had a three year old daughter..what kind of mujahideens are these

[unknownprince]

Bonn conference is a hegemonic tool to promote further war and occupation of Afghanistan. The only sincere nation that attended the past Bonn Conference was Japan.

This conference is then a meaningless political gesture.

[unknownprince]

for all we know they could have been the one that instigated the shoot out

one of the officers who died had a three year old daughter..what kind of mujahideens are these

Pakistan has been supporting the US war in Afghanistan with supply routes and have been permitting drone attacks.

Thousands of Afghans have been killed in this war. Is this insignificant?

Does Afghan blood mean nothing?

The tragic thing about this incident is that Pakistan has only lashed out when soldiers were killed. When civilians are killed by US drone attacks, there is no objection? This is inconsistent. It is doubtful that any other nation would permit attacks like this on people they call "their own." Drone attacks were permitted by Pakistan via Shamsi airbase.

No nation should support war on others.

Secondly, how does one know that these soldiers were killed because they did not fire on Afghans?

To put blame on Afghans for this is simply pathetic.

Pakistan's support for the US war and occupation of Afghanistan is a historical fact that can never be erased.


Afghanistan will be free and independent, and Pakistan's support for the US war and occupation of Afghanistan is a historical fact that will be in the history books forever.

[Al Hanif]

Which Mujahideens?

the people who fight against the invaders in Afghanistan

for all we know they could have been the one that instigated the shoot out

one of the officers who died had a three year old daughter..what kind of mujahideens are these

who cares if he has a daughter

he belongs to an apostate army which follows taghut's orders, not Allah's (SWT) orders

you think everybody in muslim countries will go to jannah ?

you think that 2Pac and Michael Jackson will go to paradise ? c'mon, look at them, they are good people, you can't tell me that Mother Theresa will go to hell, c'mon, she is a good christian lol

when a Talib and a Paki are fighting, and one of them dies, that means that one of them is an apostate

and which one of them fought along with kuffars gives you a hint about who is the apostate

[tor_khan]

There you go boys dont complain about us meddlin now

... Of course, this has less to do with Pakistan not meddling, but more to do with the home constituency following the NATO strike. That part is to be expected. At the least the conference would have given the Pakistanis the opportunity to be frank about their intentions. Meanwhile, don't be surprised if Pakistan continues to try to influence events in Afghanistan using their more damaging covert tactics.

[Talal]

... Of course, this has less to do with Pakistan not meddling, but more to do with the home constituency following the NATO strike. That part is to be expected. At the least the conference would have given the Pakistanis the opportunity to be frank about their intentions. Meanwhile, don't be surprised if Pakistan continues to try to influence events in Afghanistan using their more damaging covert tactics.

This conference went down the drain the minute those helis opened fire..before that i actually had sorta high hopes cuz things really were moving towards stability

[unknownprince]

Tor Khan,

Is it not clear that the Taliban do not answer to Pakistan? US wants Pakistan to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table to accept a limited US occupation, but Pakistan is unable to do this even if it wanted to (which it does not for its own interests). A sudden convergence of interests does not make anything a proxy. Viet Cong were no proxies of Russia or China. The Iraqi resistance were no proxies of Syria or Iran.

This issue of rejection of the US occupation is not even an issue to discuss, as it will never be tolerated.

Viet Cong in Vietnam did not answer to either China or Russia, and Pakistan in that regards does not play a role similar to the one China/Russia played in the Vietnam conflict simply and solely due to the FACT that Pakistan supports the US war and occupation of Afghanistan. Pakistan also permitted the flight of Hamid Karzai from Pakistan abroad American aircraft into Afghanistan way back in 2001.

This is why Pakistan can never have any clout over the "insurgent" groups because it simply lacks any credibility. By the way, logically, the term insurgents is actually wrong since Hamid Karzai presides over a illegal government propped up and supported by outside forces. Insurgency implies a resistance to the legitimate and standing government which the Karzai government is not and never will be for as long as it is propped up in the background of a foreign occupation.

For Pakistan to gain any ground with the "insurgents," a complete end to the the support for the US war and occupation of Afghanistan would be the way forward for any meaningful peace to accomplished in Afghanistan.


For peace in Afghanistan, and for the fighting to cease, there needs to be a complete withdrawal of the US and an end to the occupation of Afghanistan by Western Afghan expatriates like Hamid Karzai and Rangin Spanta too. The US occupation is the barrier to peace in Afghanistan. It is that simple.

[Shehbaz Khan]

the people who fight against the invaders in Afghanistan


I guess we still hear complains like Pakistan is helping the Talibans in Afghanistan?

[Shehbaz Khan]

If the US talks with the Talibans than it's ok but if Pakistan does the same than it's a problem.. A pointed to be noted is that just recently the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan said that we are not doing any attacks and that we are having talks with the Pakistani govt officials and after a few days we get this !!

[unknownprince]

This conference went down the drain the minute those helis opened fire..before that i actually had sorta high hopes cuz things really were moving towards stability

No, it did not. Pakistan "aggressive" response to the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers is disproportionate to the response that there should be to the countless thousands of people killed in the US war in Afghanistan and the drone attacks and "Pakistani citizens." (< dont know if they are really considered Pakistani citizens since there seems to be no outcry) Their response is rather awkward in that sense, but then it is a fact that Pakistan were also supporting the drone attacks too (Shamsi Airbase). In addition, obviously, Pakistan would not condemn the deaths of countless Afghan people due to US airstrikes and night raids because they are supporting the US war and occupation of Afghanistan.

Pakistan is not to Afghanistan what China and Russia were to Vietnam in their struggle for independence, or what Iran was to Iraq in their struggle for independence.

In regards, to the Bonn Conference, a hegemonic tool to promote and justify the US war and occupation, it is meaningless as long as it continues to support occupation.

The US occupation of Afghanistan is the barrier to peace in Afghanistan. The US occupation is the reason Afghans are fighting. Logically, peace can only come to Afghanistan when the US occupation and war is ended.

There is no alternative to this, and there never will be, so the Bonn conference will be meaningless waste of time if this central issue is not addressed.


Having said all this, Imran Khan, while not president/pm yet, has virtually ended the Pakistan support for the US war and occupation with his demands.

Pakistan is now forced to permanently end its association with the US war and occupation of Afghanistan.

The history of Pakistan's support for the US war and occupation (and of ferreting Hamid Karzai abroad American aircraft from Pakistan to Afghanistan is there forever), it will be in the history books thousands of years from now if this world still exists.

It is a stain on Pakistan.

[tor_khan]

Unknown. Opinions on how far Pakistan's influence over the Taliban goes, varies. In general however, somethings are acknowledged. Pakistan did have a hand in training jihadi movements to counter India in Kashmir and some of these later morphed into groups that are now affiliated with anti-state activities. Pakistan also openly supported the Taliban when they marched into Kabul in 1996.

Since the famous/infamous Musharraf u-turn, elements within Pakistan have continued to support the Taliban for strategic interests. The problem appears to continue to be that successive Pakistan governments see Afghanistan as a backyard should there be a future conflict with India. Unless this policy changes, Pakistan is likely to continue to try to exert influence in Afghanistan - and that too by any means available to them.

[unknownprince]

Tor Khan,

Is it not clear that the Taliban do not answer to Pakistan? US wants Pakistan to bring the Taliban to the negotiating table to accept a limited US occupation, but Pakistan is unable to do this even if it wanted to (which it does not for its own interests). A sudden convergence of interests does not make anything a proxy. Viet Cong were no proxies of Russia or China. The Iraqi resistance were no proxies of Syria or Iran.

This issue of rejection of the US occupation is not even an issue to discuss, as it will never be tolerated.

Viet Cong in Vietnam did not answer to either China or Russia, and Pakistan in that regards does not play a role similar to the one China/Russia played in the Vietnam conflict simply and solely due to the FACT that Pakistan supports the US war and occupation of Afghanistan. Pakistan also permitted the flight of Hamid Karzai from Pakistan abroad American aircraft into Afghanistan way back in 2001.

This is why Pakistan can never have any clout over the "insurgent" groups because it simply lacks any credibility. By the way, logically, the term insurgents is actually wrong since Hamid Karzai presides over an illegal and unacceptable government propped up and supported by a foreign occupation which is resented by the people. Insurgency implies a resistance to the legitimate and standing government which the Karzai government is not and never will be for as long as it is propped up in the background of a foreign occupation,and even after that since its history is tied to foreign war and occupation.

For Pakistan to gain any ground with the "insurgents," a complete end to the the support for the US war and occupation of Afghanistan would be the way forward for any meaningful peace to be accomplished in Afghanistan.


Furthermore, for peace in Afghanistan, and for the fighting to cease, there needs to be a complete withdrawal of the US and an end to the occupation of Afghanistan by Western Afghan expatriates like Hamid Karzai and Rangin Spanta too, whose legitimacy is lost since they are in Afghanistan solely due to the US war and occupation. The US occupation is the barrier to peace in Afghanistan. It is that simple.