November 23, 2001	Friday	Ramazan 7, 1422

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

NEW YORK, Nov 22: As the US special envoy for Afghanistan, James Dobbins, expressed optimism over the formation of a new transitional government in Afghanistan following the Bonn meeting, the Northern Alliance expressed pessimism.

Besides the wrangling of the intra-Afghan groups, differences in approach to the military campaign between the United States and its staunchest ally, Great Britain, have also surfaced.

A report in the New York Times says the representative here of the Northern Alliance, which has taken over Kabul, has voiced concern about the inclusion of groups Mr Dobbins said were backed by Iran and Pakistan, and said the meeting intends to avoid a fresh round of civil war after the Taliban left, but would end without concrete result.

The paper says the diplomats are hoping that the lure of millions of dollars of international aid and pressure on all sides will induce the Afghan factions to reach an agreement and end 22 years of almost continuous civil war.

After meetings in South and Central Asia, the American envoy, James F. Dobbins, told the NYT that “I return a good deal more optimistic than when I left that we actually have an opportunity to promote the early development of abroad-based government. They’re more convergent than they themselves understand.”

However, the paper says that “Wali Massoud, the senior Northern Alliance diplomat in London and the brother of the group’s slain military leader, Ahmed Shah Massoud, was much more pessimistic about the Bonn talks, convened by the United Nations envoy for Afghanistan, Lakhdar Brahimi, and scheduled to begin Monday.”

Mr Dobbins told the paper that “it may show that the United Nations is able to get a group of Afghans together for a meeting. That may be something for the United Nations and for the media, but it won’t really be anything.”

The New York Times report observes that disputes among the Afghans are not the only complication. Even the US and Britain, close allies in the war on terrorism, have seemed at odds.

Prime Minister Tony Blair was obliged to assure the House of Commons on Wednesday that Britain and the US were in “complete agreement” after it appeared that Washington was stalling deployment of 6,000 troops Mr Blair put on standby last week.

A senior American official indicated that the Bush administration had not thrown its weight behind the British plan. “Washington is still debating”, the official said, adding that “Washington has not made a determination as to whether it believes there should be international forces for functions beyond fighting terrorism and facilitating humanitarian assistance.”

Clare Short, the chief British official for international aid, complained to a parliamentary committee on Tuesday that the American military was not doing enough to support aid workers inside Afghanistan.

Evidence that the US and Britain differ arose after some 100 British Special Boat Service commandos flew into Bagram airbase, north of Kabul, last Thursday. The commandos were intended to be an advance party for a larger contingent of several thousand troops that London hoped would serve as a stabilization force for Afghanistan.

The arrival of the British forces brought an angry response from the victorious Northern Alliance, which said that the British had not asked permission and that large foreign forces were not needed to stabilize the situation. Washington, the paper said, had not rushed to support the British stance.

The report says that another complication is the hostility between the Northern Alliance and Pakistan, which has a long, porous border with Afghanistan, over the future Afghan government.

According to a US official, the immediate aim of the Bonn talks is to encourage the formation of an executive council of roughly 15 members that could serve as a provisional government. The groups taking part in the talks include the Northern Alliance and Pakhtoon leaders. The latter have gathered under the banner of the elderly, exiled king, Mohammed Zahir Shah.