The Future Deal Between the United States and the Taliban

The Afghanistan government questioned the future deal between the United States and the Taliban on Wednesday, saying officials need more information about the risks. Well, US envoy May Khalilzad was in Kalbul this week and agreed to the "principle" that Afghan officials and Washington would forge with the Taliban and withdraw US troops. The prospect of the US-Taliban agreement caused a lot of concern for many Afghans, beating the United States to escape Afghanistan in 18 years, feeling alienated in the process and fearing that Islamists would return to power. Brutal warfare.

Afghanistan's spokesman Cediq Sediqichi, said

The Kabul administration supports the progress of the ultimate peace process, but wants to prevent negative consequences. Sediqqi said on Twitter, “Kabul is concerned, so we carefully analyze the risks and potential negative consequences and seek to explain this article so that we can avoid the risks that result. This statement is Kabul's first reaction to the anticipated deal issued by Khalilzad on Monday. Gany and his government have so far been largely unfair in negotiations between the United States and the Taliban, who insisted that Afghanistan should be considered illegal and deal with Americans first.

Five american bases

According to some of the trades disclosed so far, the Pentagon will pull about 13,000 troops from five bases throughout Afghanistan by early next year if the Taliban stick to its security pledge. The militants said they would give up al-Qaeda and fight a group of militant Islamic nations and stop Jihad from using Afghanistan as a safe haven. Ultimately, however, Kabul does not say whether the United States and the Taliban negotiated, but only hope that the rebels will respect their commitment to a separate agreement with the Afghan government.

The United States and the Taliban have been tent-turning the Afghans for weeks and are physically looking at what they see as the final details of the deal. President Donald Trump was due to review the proposed agreement this week. If he and the Taliban leaders approve it, it can be signed and announced at any time. However, despite the fact that negotiations have reached an apparent final stage, violence has surged throughout Afghanistan.

On Monday, the Taliban launched a large-scale attack in Kabul, where the target was fortified compounds used by foreign aid groups and institutions. At least 16 people died and more than 100 were injured. On Saturday, the Taliban tried to occupy the northern capital city of Kunduz, and on Sunday began operations in the city of Pul-e-Khumri, the capital city of Bahllan province. The presence of post-trade US security in Afghanistan means regular forces are less uniform and focus more on special forces.

CIA paramilitary forces, intelligence collectors and analysts, and aviation support. Michael O'Hanlon, senior researcher at the Brookings Institution, suggests that the United States and its allies still have to deploy 3,000 to 6,000 people on the ground, based on threat locations, surveillance needs, and air support operations. I think three or four large bases will do so," he said in an e-mail. "If you think about 1,000 to 1,500 people per base as an approximate number, you can get the scale you need," he said.

US Defense Secretary James Mathis

Their common interests are to maintain a cautious relationship with the humble expectations of the United States and Pakistan, according to former US Defense Secretary James Mathis. In his autobiography call sign Chaos, Trump's first defense minister pointed out that the complex relationship between Pakistan and India has forced Islamabad to seek a friendly government in Kabul. After a lot of success in the Marine Corps, Mattis entered Trump's cabinet with much expectation, but resigned in January 2019 due to other issues with Afghanistan's president.

The general who served in Afghanistan and commanded the US Central Command opposes the rapid withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan. His book stood on Tuesday afternoon. The former defense minister said the two sides should have modest expectations of each other. In reviewing US relations with Pakistan, Mattis said, “It is a common interest to ultimately have a low expectation of cooperation and maintain a cautious and prudent relationship.

We were able to manage issues related to Pakistan, but our department was too deep and too shallow to solve them. This is the state of our relationship today. On Tuesday Matt Matt Gen participated in a group discussion at the Washington Foreign Relations Council and asked why the mediator described Pakistan as the “most dangerous country” in his book. Rapid evolution of society. By the way, that's the view of members of the Pakistan army, ”he said.

They realized what they did. He admits it. The relationship between the US and Pakistan is "very wrong. When we bring about the rapid evolution of society and add the fastest-growing nuclear weapons, I know why in the world we should focus on arms control and nonproliferation,” he said. "This is a much worse problem than anyone I think today.

In many places in the book

Matt Matts emphasized the long-standing ties between the US and Pakistani troops, but opinions about the country's political leadership were very low. Pakistan was an affectionate country and there was an active self-defeating march in political culture," he said. "They don't have leaders who care about the future. General Mathis argues that Pakistan "sees all geopolitics through the prism of hostility to India," and Islamic Mabad "wanted a friendly government in Kabul to resist India's influence," forming a policy for Afghanistan. Claimed.

The former defense minister noted that Pakistani forces lost more troops fighting terrorists at the border than the NATO coalition lost in Afghanistan. But they thought they could or could at least manipulate terrorists. But once planted, terrorism is not growing in a way that even Pakistan's secret services are unpredictable or out of control. ”
Previous Post
Next Post

0 comments: