And Biden elucidated that in an unambiguous way during his landmark April 14th speech – thereby also debunking suggestions this or that country may be the major beneficiary of the pullout.
Biden’s questions indeed amounted a big spurn to all the affiliates of war lobbies, who thrived and trying to thrive on, by demonizing this or that country. War-mongers or merchants of negativity, despair and falsehoods?
How could The New York Times let an opinion piece go uncensored by one of the authors of this article, the Delhi-based Mujib Mashal? A close look at Mashal’s Twitter handles that he has been using over the past several years as NYT reporter in Kabul, betrays his anti-
A journalist may not personally like the course of events but to project personal biases into an article is professionally incorrect and needs critical scrutiny. Not only this, such articles usually draw on like-minded intellectuals for endorsement of their personal views.
And this NYT article is a perfect case study of this phenomenon.
In a professionally dishonest way, the anti-Pakistan advocacy mentions all the Taliban-related problems in isolation of the refugee presence in Pakistan and the security challenges it poses to the host country. The Pakistan-based senior reporter also contributed to the aforementioned article. But strangely, he did not bother – for the sake of journalistic objectivity – to seek comments from dozens of analysts in Pakistan who think otherwise but he relied on comments made in a satiric talk show by a former ISI chief and a tweet by a Pakistani politician who is currently facing corruption charges and under detention.
They would still have the world believe that Pakistan exercised total control over the Taliban. But, why would Pakistan go to Kabul for help in order to get TTP bases dismantled in Afghan border areas if it held such control over the Taliban? It would simply ask them to cleanse the areas under influence of TTP and other terrorists operating against Pakistan out of Afghan border areas that are either mostly controlled or contested by the Taliban was
Pakistan may be one of the factors but repeated American studies, led by the Special Inspector General for Afghan Reconstruction (SIGAR), blame corruption and warlordism along with tens of thousands of Afghan civilian casualties caused by US-backed Afghan forces – a big factor that has helped Taliban intensify their propaganda campaign against foreign troops.
Warlords like Abdurrashid Dostum, called a rapacious warlord and a born killer, has been accused of ordering the rap of an elderly political opponent and suffocating to death hundreds of Taliban prisoners was rewarded by Afghan President Ashraf Ghani promoted the notorious Uzbek commander to the rank of Marshal rather than bringing him to justice. Another warlord did not hesitate from ordering his private militiamen to shoot down Afghan special forces’ helicopters in recent weeks in a bid to defend their territorial influence.
Agents of despair and lobbyists for various components of the war economy need to take into account the endless bloodshed Afghans have suffered so far; “this war has killed nearly 241,000 people, including at least 71,344 civilians, 2,442 American service members; 78,314 Afghan military and police; and 84,191 opposition fighters,” according to The Costs of War Project, housed at Brown University’s Watson Institute and Boston University’s Pardee Center.
All those dumping blame here or there or insinuating against this or that stakeholder should have mercy on hapless Afghans and pressure their leaders into a consensus over the country’s future. Digging up dead horses or parroting old clichés does not help peace. Collective peace is much more important than the livelihoods of a few. Investing in Biden’s anti-peace efforts or questioning Pakistan’s past motives will not take away the credit that belongs to it and is acknowledged by all regional powers.