7/ So: Does Kabul hope for total policy reversal under Biden? Is Kabul a spoiler to the peace process?? No! But is the Afghan govt moving slowly through each step of a painful, dangerous process? Raising diff issues, at times making contradictory remarks on peace? Yes. Why?
-
Näytä tämä ketju
-
8/ Before even seeing a deal at intra-Afghan talks, Kabul knows it probably won't like the offer. US has sent plenty of signals: it will accept far more compromise than Kabul -and many Afghans!- believe they should. So, what is Kabul's best alternative?http://www.1tvnews.af/en/news/afghanistan/42898 …
1 vastaus 1 uudelleentwiittaus 11 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
9/ Many in Kabul & Washington describe ongoing efforts to lobby US national security circles: mid-level and senior figures in military, diplomacy, intel & policy, figures with strong ties & sympathies to Afghan partners. Kabul is buying time, but not to stall or ruin talks...
1 vastaus 1 uudelleentwiittaus 13 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
10/ ...but to strengthen its position. Afghan govt wants US to reject option of abandonment. It seeks reassurances of support. When its reps sit across table from Taliban, it wants them to speak with the strength that comes from being able to walk away.https://apnews.com/bd265a57d206edaf5c4fd7de775d7b6d …
1 vastaus 1 uudelleentwiittaus 17 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
11/ Kabul's desire to rally support from allies in DC, to be able to enter talks alongside its superpower ally, is perfectly logical. To those who warn patience is running out, Kabul might reply: if US is headed toward withdrawal, what is there to lose? Why not plead the case?
1 vastaus 2 uudelleentwiittausta 14 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
12/ Weak point of US-led peace efforts: it didn't win the war. Talks with undefeated opponent must include heavy compromise. *US never found a way to sell this to Kabul.* Up to today, Americans haven't offered Afgh govt much, except to threaten what peace talks already hint at.
1 vastaus 2 uudelleentwiittausta 15 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
13/ Due to intensity of US pressure, Kabul has little choice but to go along. But why not appeal, & go slow? Given risks to Afghans even if talks "succeed", very real potential for talks to fall apart, & dangers of too fast a transition... govt may see little alternative. /END
4 vastausta 2 uudelleentwiittausta 21 tykkäystäNäytä tämä ketju -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @and_huh_what
That all makes sense, from a certain angle...but do we think this is actually the best available strategy? I just keep thinking its v short-sighted. Their losing political capital just as they seek to gain it from other corners.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @a_a_jackson ja @and_huh_what
And they risk alienating Afghans. And pushing the Taliban to abandon talks. And it gives the Taliban MORE time to get more territory. I know they have any good options left. But this is just so high risk. Esp given the implausibility of recent claims, the tactics, etc
4 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 7 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @a_a_jackson
If the goal is to preserve current constitutional order & most of its governing structure, then 'slow-rolling and lobbying against drastic disengagement' may be the only feasible strategy. Can be argued: given US trajectory, it's too late to hold that goal. But many still do.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä
Sure, I'm admittedly one of many who believe it's far too late - for many reasons. But agree that there are many that believe it is still realistic. Ironically pursuing unrealistic hopes may sabotage any chance for a deal (however flawed). And that but guarantees civil war
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.