US, Russia not to accept ‘Islamic emirate’ in Afghanistan

Published March 9, 2020
Taliban vow to restore ‘Islamic’ govt that existed before US forces toppled their rule. — AA
Taliban vow to restore ‘Islamic’ govt that existed before US forces toppled their rule. — AA

WASHINGTON: The United States and Russia have agreed to work together to ensure that the international community does not accept or support the restoration of the “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan”.

In a joint statement released by the US State Department in Washington earlier this weekend, the United States and Russia also welcomed the Taliban’s commitment to “a political process and their prospective role in a new post-settlement Afghan Islamic government as determined by the intra-Afghan negotiations”.

But they “reaffirmed that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan is not recognised by the international community and at the United Nations, and furthermore, the international community will not accept or support the restoration of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan”.

On Saturday, the Taliban issued a statement as well, insisting that it’s their duty to restore the “Islamic government” that existed before US forces toppled their government in Kabul in 2001. But they too avoided using the term, Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.

American representatives drafted a joint statement in Doha on Feb 28, a day before signing a peace deal with the Taliban.

Taliban vow to restore ‘Islamic’ govt that existed before US forces toppled their rule

The deal calls for an intra-Afghan dialogue to create a new administrative setup in Kabul and lays down conditions for the ultimate withdrawal of all 14,000 US and Nato troops from Afghanistan.

The Taliban, however, insisted that their leader Mullah Haibatullah was “the only legal ruler of Afghanistan” and after the withdrawal of foreign forces from the country, they were duty-bound to restore an “Islamic government” in Afghanistan, a term also used in the US-Russia joint statement.

The Taliban said the Doha agreement aimed at ending 19 years of war in Afghanistan, but it “will have no impact” on their “legitimate claims”.

In the joint statement, the United States and Russia expressed readiness for commencement of intra-Afghan negotiations to “review the status of sanctions designations” on Taliban leaders “in order to support the peace process”.

But they also noted that Taliban action to further reduce violence and otherwise cease to “engage in or support activities that threaten the peace, stability and security of Afghanistan or other countries will affect the review”.

The two countries encouraged all countries to support the Afghan people and contribute to a lasting peace settlement in the interest of all.

They pledged to work with the Kabul government, Afghan political leaders, civil society and the Taliban to “bring about a comprehensive and sustainable peace agreement that ends the war and contributes to regional stability and global security”.

They also reiterated that a “comprehensive and sustainable peace can be achieved only through an inclusive negotiated political settlement among Afghans”.

The joint statement appreciated the Feb 22-28 reduction of violence in Afghanistan and urged all sides to further scale down violence in order to create an environment conducive to intra-Afghan negotiations.

Russia and the United States called on the Taliban and other Afghan groups to take concrete steps to ensure that the territory of Afghanistan was not used by Al Qaeda, the militant Islamic State group or other international terrorist groups to threaten or attack other countries.

They said they expected all sides would observe a ceasefire for the duration of intra-Afghan negotiations to enable participants to reach agreement on a political roadmap for the country’s future and the modalities of a permanent and comprehensive ceasefire.

They called on all Afghans to begin discussions immediately on issues of mutual concern, such as prisoner releases and a ceasefire.

Washington and Moscow pledged to provide political support and economic assistance to a future Afghan government if it respects the rights of all Afghans, including women, youth and minorities.

Published in Dawn, March 9th, 2020

Opinion

A crisis of trust?

A crisis of trust?

Most damaging fallout of the constant demonisation of opponents by political leaders is erosion of public trust in politicians.

Editorial

An unseemly dispute
08 Aug, 2022

An unseemly dispute

THERE is clarity, but perhaps not of the kind that Chief Justice of Pakistan Umar Ata Bandial hoped to achieve when...
Unfair on taxpayers
Updated 08 Aug, 2022

Unfair on taxpayers

Unfair move has drawn valid criticism as it coincides with drastic increase in income tax on salaried people and corporates.
Polio nightmare
08 Aug, 2022

Polio nightmare

AS if the resurgence of polio in southern KP were not enough, officials and international monitoring bodies must now...
Political stunt
Updated 07 Aug, 2022

Political stunt

The former PM is attempting to make a very expensive point with his decision to contest all 9 NA seats going up for by-election.
Monsoon emergency
07 Aug, 2022

Monsoon emergency

AS another wet weather system has entered Pakistan, and the federal government has declared a “monsoon...
Taliban’s denial
07 Aug, 2022

Taliban’s denial

THE Afghan Taliban’s recent statement denying any knowledge of the now deceased Al Qaeda chief Ayman...