Recently, The New American published an article chronicling the concessions being consistently made to our named enemy in Afghanistan, the Taliban. The story in the Telegraph (of London) reports:
A Western official in Kabul confirmed the United States was in direct contact with the Taliban following a sea change in American policy this year.
Marc Grossman [pictured above], the replacement for special envoy Richard Holbrooke, has been nicknamed “Mr Reconciliation” and told to focus efforts on trying to facilitate a political deal which would ease a US exit.
“Those are no longer preconditions, they are being seen as negotiated outcomes,” said the Western official. At the same time, the Taliban has weakened its demand that no talks can take place before foreign troops leave.
Another account of the story goes on to record an appalling concession being made to these sought-after suzerains. “Apparently, terrorist attacks on U.S. soil aren’t off-limits either. Incredibly, these “negotiations” with the Taliban began last fall, just five months after the attempted Times Square bombing attack by Faisal Shahzad, which was funded by the Taliban.
The ultimate aim is a sort of power-sharing arrangement wherein the United States can save face by not completely abandoning Hamad Karzai in the deal to return the Taliban to the palaces of power.
An article published online should be enough to crack this coalition, however. In a seminar held on June 11 in Peshawar, Pakistan, representatives of a diverse cross-section of Pakistani and Afghani religious and civil leaders called for the union of the disparate groups to oppose the “new world order” that is being imposed upon them by the United States, Great Britain, and NATO.
A spokesman at the confab declared that if Afghanistan and Pakistan did not stand up against the West and its beloved “new world order,” then Iraq and Afghanistan would be joined by Libya as the next theater of operations in the global war on terror.
Leaders implored attendees at the conference to “put down their clash [sic]” and turn their attention to a common enemy -— the United States of America.
The chief sponsor of the seminar was the Hiazab Islami Youth. The keynote speaker was Professor Ibrahim, the Emir of Jumat Islami. He was joined on the program by Afghani leaders Jamal Udin Hikmat Yar, and Dr. Ghairat Bher. All these prominent speakers declared that the purpose of the American occupation was not the rooting out of terror, but the “targeting of innocent people in Afghanistan.”
The presenters were not shy about outlining precisely how the United States and its allies were prosecuting this war. Principally, they told the rapt audience, that the United States created a “hoax of Al-Qaeda” and used the destruction of this “terrorist organization” as a means of shielding its true aim, the growth of the New World Order in the Muslim world.
The United States was not the first to attempt this gambit, Professor Ibrahim said. He asserted that the war in Afghanistan fought by the USSR, as well the colonization activities of Great Britain were both previous unsuccessful attempts to carve a foothold for the New World Order in the middle east.
According to the speeches presented at the meeting, one of the primary obstacles in the pathway toward cooperation and ouster of the Americans and their allies is the government of Hamid Karzai that they consider a mere American puppet.
Finally, the talks turned to the future of the region, specifically Pakistan and Afghanistan. After recounting the breakdown of recent negotiations between the Taliban and other regional opponents of the Americans, speakers called for a renewed effort at reconciliation “for the better [sic] of Afghanistan.”
While such rhetoric will be dismissed by American and British government officials, there is evidence that the spirit of these discourses is apparently inspiring the diplomatic policy of these two traditional allies. As recounted in a previous article by this author:
An aide to Taliban leader Mullah Omar explained the group’s position in November: “All of these reports of peace talks are nonsense,” Mullah Aminullah told NBC News. “This is just propaganda by the U.S. and its NATO allies to hide their defeat on the battlefield. We are winning, why should we negotiate?”
The Taliban believes that the administration tipped its hand to its “enemies” in the Global War on Terror when in 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton suggested that the preference of her bosses was to initiate negotiations with “moderate” members of the Taliban.
As reported in 2010 by ABCNews.com:
NATO and Afghan officials detailed a $500 million initiative for Afghanistan to negotiate with insurgents today and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton indicated she supports attempts to deal with the Taliban.
“The starting premise is you don’t make peace with your friends,” Clinton said at the London conference. “You have to be willing to engage with your enemies if you want to create a situation that ends the insurgency.”
And:
The program will be funded by a “Peace and Reintegration Trust Fund,” dubbed the “Taliban Trust Fund” by many, that will cost $500 million over five years.
Flush with stacks of cash extorted from American taxpayers, the Taliban can afford to continue playing their role as the heel in the scripted sparring match with the infidels in the West.
Besides, knowing the end from the beginning makes the middle just so much melodrama. A buffer during which former and future leaders of the Taliban can conduct live fire infantry drills with American soldiers as targets.
Americans would be wise to pay less attention to the messengers than to the message. There is legitimate evidence that the accusations made by these Afghani and Pakistani “enemies” of the United States are true and that there is more to the Global War on Terror than the securing of the homeland, as is consistently parroted by our own government.
Clock Tower in Peshawar known as “Ghanta Ghar” (translation in Urdu: “Clock Home”).
