WASHINGTON: US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told a congressional panel on Thursday that any Afghan-led peace process would have to include the Quetta Shura and its leader Mulla Omar.
Her statement before the House Committee on Foreign Affairs also emphasised several other key points reflecting a major change in US approach towards seeking a peaceful end to the Afghan conflict. “There is no solution in the region without Pakistan and no stable future in the region without a partnership.”
The US needs to negotiate with the Haqqani network while continuing to work with Pakistan to destroy the safe havens it has inside Fata.
The US aid to Pakistan should not be conditioned to disbanding Lashkar-i-Taiba. And the “real game-changer in the region” would be a stronger relationship between Pakistan and India.
Her statement indicated that the new US approach had evolved further after Secretary Clinton’s visit to Afghanistan and Pakistan last week where she discussed this strategy with the leaders of those two countries as well.
After the visit, she told the US media that the United States and Pakistan had reached 90-95 per cent agreement on the issues that at one stage appeared close to breaking up their relationship.
The lawmakers, who still seem upset with Pakistan over its alleged links to the militants, created several opportunities for the secretary to browbeat Pakistan but she refrained from doing so.
Congressman Steve Chabot, a Republican, asked Secretary Clinton if the US was prepared to negotiate with Mulla Omar. “And if so, under what circumstances and what would our conditions be?” he asked.
“Well, Congressman, the negotiations that would be part of any Afghan-led peace process would have to include the Quetta Shura and would have to include some recognition by the Quetta Shura which, based on everything we know, is still led by Mulla Omar, that they wish to participate in such a process,” she responded. “We are pursuing every thread of any kind of interest expressed.”
Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the panel’s chairperson, questioned the wisdom of engaging the Haqqani network while it continued to attack US soldiers in Afghanistan. “What’s the US strategy, crackdown or negotiate with the Haqqani network or a little bit of both,” she asked.
“It’s both,” said Secretary Clinton.
Later, while responding to Congressman Chabot, she said the US agreed to meet the Haqqani network because that the ISI had asked them to do so.
“This was done in part because I think the Pakistanis hope to be able to move the Haqqani network towards some kind of peace negotiation and the answer was an attack on our embassy” in Kabul.
The US still wanted to stay engaged with the Haqqani network to test whether these organisations had any willingness to negotiate in good faith, she told Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen.
“There is evidence going both ways, to be clear. Sometimes we hear that they will, that there are elements within each that wish to pursue that, and then other times that it’s off the table.” she added.
Secretary Clinton noted that only last week the US had launched a major military operation in Afghanistan that rounded up and eliminated more than 100 Haqqani network operatives. “And we are taking action to target the Haqqani leadership on both sides of the border,” she said. “We are already working with the Pakistanis to target those who are behind a lot of the attacks against Afghans and Americans.”
Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen asked Secretary Clinton to comment on a recent statement by Afghan President Hamid Karzai that if there was war between Pakistan and America, he would side with Pakistan.
Secretary Clinton said that as soon as she heard this statement, she asked the US ambassador in Kabul to figure out what Mr Karzai meant and the ambassador reported back that Mr Karzai was talking about the long history of cooperation between Afghanistan and Pakistan, in particular the refuge that Pakistan provided to millions of Afghans during the Soviet occupation.
“This was not at all about a war that anybody was predicting,” she said. Responding to a question about recent remarks by US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta and former military chief Admiral Mike Mullen, who blamed Pakistan for continuing to support the militants, Secretary Clinton said that neither Mr Panetta nor Admiral Mullen ever questioned the need to stay engaged with Pakistan.
She said that everyone in the US administration believed that the Haqqanis had safe havens inside Pakistan and used these hideouts for attacking US and Afghan soldiers.
“And we also agree, however, ... that there is no solution in the region without Pakistan and no stable future in the region without a partnership.”
Congressman Ed Royce, another Republican, reminded her that another congressional panel had asked the Obama administration to condition US assistance to Pakistan to shutting down the LeT and asked her if she was willing to do so.
“We have had intensive discussions with our Indian counterparts” on the LeT and on the attacks it allegedly carried out in India. But “I do not want to commit at this time to taking such a path because I think it’s important that there be further consideration of all of the implications,” Secretary Clinton said.
“Certainly, every time we meet with the Pakistanis, we press them on the LeT about the continuing failure, in our view, to fulfil all of the requirements necessary for prosecution related to the Mumbai attacks and we will continue to do so,” she said.
Secretary Clinton said that like the congressman, she too worried about the possibility that LeT attacks inside India could trigger yet another war between India and Pakistan. “And we discuss it in great depth with our Indian counterparts, because it is, first and foremost, a concern of theirs. It is obviously also concerning to us.”
Congressman Joe Wilson, also a Republican, noted that Pakistan was developing a most-favoured nation trade status with India and asked what the US could do to promote a level of trade and positive contact between India and Pakistan.
“Well, Congressman, I agree with you that the real game-changer in the region is not so much our bilateral relationship as the relationship between Pakistan and India. And the more that there can be progress, the more likely there can be even more progress,” the secretary said.
“So we have in Pakistan today a leadership, both civilian and military, that wants to see progress with India, and we have the same on the Indian side.”
Dear visitor, the comments section is undergoing an overhaul and will return soon.