Operation vs negotiations
|
10-30-2010, 04:26 PM
Post: #1
|
|||
|
|||
Operation vs negotiations
According to the reports of CIA and other US intelligence agencies, the Taliban and specially the Haqqani network, have received very little setbacks during the full-fledged military operation launched by the Nato forces in Kandahar against them with senior officials declaring that “the insurgency seems to be maintaining its resilience”.
The paradox of failure of the allied forces in terms of dismantling the terrorist networks, and success in bringing a certain degree of peace and security into Kandahar, a fact that is being blatantly publicized, is indicative of its inherent motives. Firstly; that the failure of the Nato forces implies the US need to fight terrorism at all costs while highlighting the refusal and rejection of the Pakistan authorities for performing the same noble deed (as if we haven’t done enough already!), thus proving without the slightest of doubts that it is harboring a soft corner for the militants. Secondly; the Haqqani network that had hitherto never been a significant force takes on the status of a demonic entity that has, according to the US officials, fled to Pakistan and need to be dismantled urgently. Why can’t these groups be brought to the negotiating table when most of the hardcore militants have shown inclination towards a peaceful resolution? Despite the havoc and destruction created by the resented indiscriminate drone attacks conducted by Washington to break the evil nexus of the Pakistan based Haqqani militant group and for this purpose, the humanitarian Americans will have to take the things in their capable hands which implies that the Pakistani incompetence in managing the security situation would ultimately force the US to teach the Pakistani a few lessons for ; blocking the Nato supply lines, refusing the US demand to launch a military operation in NWA simultaneously with the one in Kandahar, playing a double game, supporting the Taliban, for going nuclear, thinking of their own interests, signing the civil-nuclear deal with China, initiating the IPP agreement with Iran… US admiral Mike Mullen has revealed the same sentiments as he warns that the US would be facing the returning troops suffering from invisible mental wounds and that the "untold costs and an undetermined toll" from nearly a decade of combat would grapple the US for years to come similar to the aftermath of the Vietnam defeat. In this backdrop it is essential that the US restrains its hegemonic trend and remains only a mediator. |
|||
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
User(s) browsing this thread: