
MTT - Afghanistan - Rising casualties of US soldiers in Afghanistan mounting anger in across America.
Going by what transpired in the London Moot of January 28, 2010, the Afghan premiership and its western allies have commonly fathomed that negotiated settlement with the fanatically purist Talibs is indeed the cooperative path out of the morass after nine years of often directionless drift. Centrality of the message is that a concerted act may wave over Afghanistan, making the insurgents to wither away with pledges reintegrating them back in the social and political fabrics by offering security, vocational training, jobs and amnesty for past crimes. Among the high profile Talib cock-ups, the US, however, is in favour of engaging mid- and low-level militants, 70 percent of whom are believed to fight for money and reasons other than ideological and may lay down arms if given a viable alternative. Fragmenting the Taliban on good and bad standards, the good probably refers to a newer generation that might be more willing to cut deals with foreign forces than the older generation, which partnered with the likes of Osama bin Laden. It is being believed that the disenchanted folks can be accommodated in the political mainstream if they renounce violence and sever links with Al Qaeda. Then there is the perennial talk of wooing moderate Taliban over to the government’s side. However, the hurdles lie ahead must be brought to light: How to identify the modes of reconciling the Pastun dissidents? Will the new Strategy work? Did the London summit on Afghanistan signal a bold new approach or offer a blueprint for the US-led coalition’s exit strategy? It is also no secret that the west wants out of Afghanistan as quickly as possible. The success is thus oscillatory and it is yet to be seen whether the US-led west could win by this process of discriminatory chicaneries, subtly fomenting discord among Pashtun Taliban in order to achieve the good objective.
Read more...