Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 1

Afghanistan Peace Enigma

Some analysts believe a US withdrawal without stabilising Afghanistan will plunge the country
into a civil war. However, other viewpoint holds that: the US presence itself is contributing to
instability; and the US is in no position to stabilize Afghanistan; whenever occupation forces
leave, Afghanistan will invariably go through another round of civil war; and, the longer the
foreign forces stay the greater would be the intensity such civil war. Hardly a month passes by
when someone important in Western capitals does not lower the bar on attainment of war aims in
Afghanistan.

Being a son of the soil, President Karzai is convinced that the Taliban cannot be defeated. He
wants a quick reconciliation with them. In his desperation, Karzai continues jockeying between
the two extremes of calling Pakistan a special friend and declaring it an adversary.

Afghan Army is so plagued with desertions that it has to replace a third of its entire force every
year. That implies that a third of the Afghan Army perpetually consists of first year recruits fresh
from a three months nominal military training formality. And tens of thousands of men with
military training are put at loose ends each year. They are inducted into an environment endemic
with militants who have ample of military equipment to rearm these deserters as their comrades
at arms. Afghan deserters complain of corruption among their officers, poor food and equipment,
indifferent medical care, Taliban intimidation of their families and, probably most troublingly, a
lack of faith in the armys ability to fight the insurgents after the American military withdraws.

Afghan army commanders complain of lack of adequate capability and capacity; they fear that
Taliban will eventually gain ground. Attacks on Afghan military have dwindled because the
army has refused to patrol far out of their bases, even though the Taliban presence in such areas
has increased. Devastating spate of recent green on blue incidents (or insider killings), has
been the last straw, to sap the ISAFs morale as well.

Pakistan has faced a set of overlapping crises in the past several decades due to its location at a
geopolitical crossroads. In addition to unrelenting hegemonic aspirations of India, Pakistan has
had to deal with the spill-over of major conflicts in Afghanistan. Moreover, Pakistan has been
the chief victim of terrorism. Pakistan has suffered more than 10,000 military casualties while
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 2

fighting terror. Even the ISI has suffered 350 deaths, a higher toll than the CIA has suffered in its
entire history.

Under these murky circumstances when there is lack of clarity about the Way Forward for
resolving the Afghan conflict, Pakistan needs to follow a cautious approach rather becoming
over enthusiast to jump into the North Waziristan fire.

Since the first Bonn conference was held in 2001, there has been little sign of progress in
increasing the strength of Afghan security forces, reconstruction and infrastructure
development in northern Afghanistan but no development had taken place in southern
Afghanistan where the Taliban are present, and hence these aspects were seen as essential
for detailed discussions.
In a conference, Future of Pakistan-Afghanistan Relations held in Islamabad by IPRI,
following points were noted:
o Inclusion of all ethnic groups in the consensus process is pertinent, while limited
Indian involvement in Afghanistan would be cardinal for Pakistan.
o Pakistan should learn from its mistakes and adopt a broad approach to seek
global and regional consensus on Afghan policy.
US cannot win Afghan war, neither Afghanistans armed opposition nor its neighbours:
Dr Ghulam Farouq Azam
A dialogue between Pakistan, Taliban, Afghanistan and US is proposed by many officials
to negotiate and discuss the future of Afghanistan.
It is widely believed that US is willing to dialogue with Talibans to come to a deal
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 3

SINO-US Relations
After 30 years of fast-paced economic growth, China, also known by its formal name, the
Peoples Republic of China (PRC), is now the worlds second largest economy, and the United
States-China relationship has expanded to encompass a broad range of global, regional, and
bilateral issues. Since January 2011, when Chinas President and Communist Party General
Secretary Hu Jintao made a state visit to the United States, a series of high-level visits and
dialogues between the two countries have helped the U.S.-China relationship weather frictions
over such issues as trade, the U.S. rebalancing toward the Asia-Pacific, Syria policy, and human
rights. A chronology of the most significant recent developments in the bilateral relationship
follows:

January 5, 2012: The United States released a new defense strategic guidance which
identified China and Iran as pursuing asymmetric means to counter our power projection
capabilities and vowed that the U.S. will invest as required in response.
February 4, 2012: China again joined Russia in vetoing a United Nations Security
Council Resolution on Syria, this time a resolution calling on Syrias President Bashar al-
Assad to step down. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton later characterized the vetoes
despicable.
February 6, 2012: Chongqing Vice Mayor Wang Lijun sought refuge in the U.S.
Consulate in Chengdu for 30 hours and implicated his boss, Chongqing Party Secretary
Bo Xilai, in wrongdoing before giving himself up to Chinese security personnel. The
incident set off a major political scandal in China. Bo was later removed from his
Chongqing post and suspended from the powerful 25-man Communist Party Politburo.
February 13-17, 2012: Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping visited the United States, with
stops in Washington, D.C., Iowa, and Los Angeles.
February 28, 2012: The Obama Administration established the Interagency Trade
Enforcement Center (ITEC) inside the office of the U.S. Trade Representative, to
counter unfair trade practices around the world, including by countries like China.
March 12, 2012: The United States filed a case against China at the WTO over
Chinese export restrictions on rare earths, tungsten and molybdenum.
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 4

April 27, 2012: In a letter to Senator John Cornyn, the White House said the U.S. would
give serious consideration to selling Taiwan F-16 C/D fighter jets, as well as upgrading
Taiwans F-16 A/B planes.
April 27-May 2, 2012: Chinese legal advocate Chen Guangcheng spent six days in the
U.S. Embassy in Beijing. Intense negotiations between the U.S. and Chinese
governments led to his leaving the Embassy for a Beijing hospital and then, on May 19,
2012, for the United States.
May 2-4, 2012: U.S. and Chinese officials met in Beijing for the fourth annual Strategic
and Economic Dialogue, including the second Strategic Security Dialogue.
May 25, 2012: China filed a case against the United States at the WTO over U.S.
countervailing duty measures on certain products from China.
July 5, 2012: The United States filed a case against China at the WTO over Chinas
imposition of anti-dumping and countervailing duties on automobiles from the United
States.
July 19, 2012: Russia and China vetoed a third U.N. Security Council resolution targeting
the regime of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.
July 31, 2012: The Obama Administration sanctioned the Xinjiang-based Bank of
Kunlun, which is affiliated with the China National Petroleum Corporation, for
knowingly facilitating significant transactions and providing significant financial services
for designated Iranian banks.

Source: US-China Relations (2012), available at:

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R41108.pdf
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 5

INDO-US Relations
The U.S.-India partnership is based on shared values such as democracy, pluralism, and
rule of law. Numerous economic, security, and global initiatives, including
unprecedented plans for civilian nuclear cooperation, is underway.
The two countries inked a ten-year defense framework agreement in 2005 to facilitate
expanded bilateral security cooperation. In the new century, large-scale combined
military exercises have become commonplace, and bilateral cooperation on intelligence
and counterterrorism is increasing. Unprecedented major U.S. arms sales to India are
underway; more are anticipated. The United States and India formally reengaged the
U.S.-India Strategic Dialogue initiated under President G.W. Bush when a large
delegation of high-ranking Indian officials led by External Affairs Minister Krishna
visited Washington, DC, in June 2010. As leader of the U.S. delegation, Secretary
Clinton lauded India as an indispensable partner and a trusted friend.
Upon arriving in the Indian financial hub of Mumbai on November 7, 2010, President
Obama laid a white rose at a memorial to the victims of the November 2008 terrorist
attack and spoke at the Taj Mahal Palace hotel, a main target of that attack. While in that
city, the President announced $10 billion in new trade deals, among them a $7.7 billion
contract for Boeing to supply 30 737 commercial aircraft to Indias Spice Jet airline. The
new deals were projected to create some 50,000 U.S. jobs. Many Indian observers were
irked by the Presidents failure to mention Pakistan in his initial remarks, fueling for
some a persistent Indian belief that the United States remains too devoted to its alliance
with Islamabad.
Another Strategic Dialogue was held in New Delhi in July 2011. Given the persistence of
doubts about the robustness of the U.S.-India relationship, there were hopes that
Secretary Clintons attendance could reinvigorate a relationship. Upon her arrival,
Secretary Clinton highlighted three issue areas: (1) trade and investment, (2) security
cooperation (especially on counterterrorism and maritime security); and (3) the civil
nuclear agreement. Source: Congressional Research Service. Available at:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33529.pdf
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 6

Iran-US Relations
The United States was an ally of the late Shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (the Shah),
who ruled from 1941 until his ouster in February 1979. The Shah was anti-Communist, and
Israel maintained a representative office in Iran during the Shahs time and the Shah supported a
peaceful resolution of the Arab-Israeli dispute.

Relations between the U.S. and Iran, always bad, worsened in January 2012 as Iran sentenced a
captive American citizen to death and verified it was enriching uranium. Iran claimed that
Hekmati was a C.I.A. agent that the United States sent to spy on Iran. The U.S. denies the
charge. Meanwhile, Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited American antagonists
Venezuela and Cuba.

In January 2012 US put further sanctions on Iran. In the two days after President Barack Obama
approved sanctions targeting Irans central bank and oil sectors, the value of currency plunged 13
per cent.

US President Barack Obama said on Tuesday, 6th March 2012 that there was no need to
decide now on military action against Iran and said new talks would show quickly how
serious Tehran is about resolving the nuclear standoff. Iran is feeling the bite of these
sanctions in a substantial way. The world is unified, Iran is politically isolated. And what I have
said is that we will not countenance Iran getting a nuclear weapon, Obama told reporters at a
White House press conference.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said on Sunday, 11th March 2012 that the West
should drop its bullying stance against his country and insisted that sanctions imposed
over its nuclear programme were having no more than a psychological effect.

Source: http://dawn.com/2012/03/11/iran-tells-west-to-drop-bullying-tone/

http://dawn.com/2012/03/06/iran-feeling-bite-of-sanctions-obama/

http://dawn.com/2012/01/06/as-sanctions-bite-iran-feels-the-pain/
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 7

Counter-terrorism Agreement with India

On June 27,2011, External Minister of India and Foreign minister of Pakistan agreed on the need
to strengthen cooperation on counter-terrorism including among relevant departments as well as
agencies to bring those responsible for terror crimes to justice.
(http://www.mofa.gov.pk/mfa/pages/article.aspx?id=778&type=1)
Pakistan offered India counter-terrorism cooperation in the backdrop of the arrest of Abu Jundal,
a LeT terrorist and key handler of attackers who struck Mumbai in 2008.
October 21, 2012: India is unlikely to permit a Pakistani judicial commission to visit here again to
cross examine the Mumbai terror attack witnesses unless an NIA team is allowed to go to that
country first and determines the necessity of such an exercise. India wants to send a team of
National Investigation Agency (NIA) to Pakistan to examine the material evidence collected
against arrested 26/11 terror attack prime accused including LeT commander Zakiur Rehman
Lakhvi and six others against whom the trial is going on in a court in Rawalipindi.
Pak agrees to allow visit of NIA team
Nov 6, 2012: Home Minister Sushilkumar Shinde met his Pakistani counterpart Rehman
Malik here and pressed for speedy punishment to the perpetrators of Mumbai terror attacks.
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 8

Composite Dialogue with India and

Confidence Building
A bilateral Composite Dialogue between New Delhi and Islamabad, initiated in the
1990s and officially resumed in 2004, has realized some modest but still meaningful
successes, including a formal cease-fire along the entire shared frontier, and some
unprecedented trade and people-to people contacts across the Kashmiri Line of Control
(LOC).
Yet 2008 saw significant deterioration in India-Pakistan relations, especially following
the large-scale November terrorist attack on Mumbai, India, that left some 165 civilians
dead (22 of those killed were foreigners, including 6 Americans). More broadly,
militarized territorial disputes over Kashmir, the Siachen Glacier, and the Sir Creek
remain unresolved, and Pakistani officials regularly express unhappiness that more
substantive progress, especially on the core issue of Kashmir, is not occurring.
Officials in New Delhi continue to declare unacceptable the terrorist-infrastructure they
say remains intact in Pakistani Kashmir.
Despite its formal suspension of the peace process, New Delhi did continue engaging in
high level talks with Islamabad in 2010. A series of high-level interactions ensued, but
none produced any new agreements or major initiatives. Pakistani Foreign Secretary
Salman Bashir visited New Delhi in February 2010. Following that meeting, Indias then-
Foreign Secretary Rao said the time was not yet right for a resumption of the Composite
Dialogue as requested by Islamabad.
In July 2011, new Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar was in New Delhi for
talks with External Affairs Minister Krishna, who reaffirmed Indias intention to reduce
the bilateral trust deficit and conveyed New Delhis desire for a stable, prosperous
Pakistan acting as a bulwark against terrorism, and at peace with itself and with its
neighbors. Khar had raised some hackles in New Delhiand an explicit expression of
displeasure from Krishnaby meeting with Kashmiri separatists before seeing Indian
government officials. Yet the resulting Joint Statement further loosened trade and travel
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 9

restrictions across the LOC, and was widely taken as a successful representation of a
peace process back on track after a more than two-year hiatus.

Afghan-US-Pak relations (Past, Present,

Future)
Pakistan-Afghanistan relationship has been a victim of conflicting interests. The two have never
been at ease with each other and deep suspicions are observed in the bilateral policies pursued by
their governments. Pakistan always wished for a friendly government in Afghanistan so that the
western border could be considered secure, a wish that never materialized. Yet, despite their
cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious proximities, the relationship between the two cannot be
termed friendly. At times it reached deteriorating levels because of certain contentious issues
historical legacies magnified by inner divisions and external influences. After independence,
Pakistan found itself confronted with a neighbor that was the only country that voted against
Pakistans admission to the United Nations because of its claims over the Durand Line,
Pakistans border with Afghanistan on the western side.

During the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the US knowing about the loose nature of tribal
areas in Pakistan-Afghanistan borderlands used the region for defeating communism. Pakistan
played an influential role alongside the US and Saudi Arabia by becoming a frontline state and
providing bases for Afghan resistance forces after the Saur revolution. The continuous Pakistani
policy of sheltering and supporting mujahedeen-turned-Taliban backfired in the post-9/11
situation where once again Pakistan, a frontline state for the US, is caught in a security dilemma.

The relationship got worse during President Hamid Karzais first term in office. Pakistan was not
only cut off from the regions mainstream politics but also blamed for the chaos engulfing
Afghanistan. Though the situation has changed now and Pakistan is being seen again as the
frontline state for resolving the Afghan mess and providing support for Karzais government
after the foreign forces withdraw. Both countries are looking forward to a healthy beginning
where their interests converge for a peaceful and stable region.
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 10

Before the recent Pak-US strategic dialogue, Pakistan, a non-NATO ally, was never given due
recognition and respect for the enormous contribution and the thousands of lives it sacrificed in
the war against terror. In fact, historically Pak-US relationship had always been marked by
convergence and divergence of national interests that kept on switching from friendship to
friction.

With the worsening situation in Afghanistan and setbacks at home for the US administration,
Pakistans geo-strategic position in the region has once again presented hope for players
engaged in Afghanistan. Pakistan and the US have subsequently conducted more rounds of
strategic dialogue, one in July and the other in October 2010. The US pledged to complete two
hydroelectric dam projects to supply electricity for more than 300,000 people in areas near the
Afghan border. It also made a commitment for renovation or building of three medical facilities
in central and southern Pakistan. The projects are part of a $7.5 billion aid effort that mainly
aims at lowering down of growing anti-American sentiment in the country. It is also intended to
ease Pakistans suspicions so it cooperates in a greater way in the US efforts for turning the
Afghan war in its favor. In moving ahead towards building a closer partnership, a third round of
Pakistan-US strategic dialogue was held from 20-22 October. The US administration clearly
conveyed their expectations from Pakistan to do more in the Afghan war and particular stress
was put on taking action against the Haqqani network. However, the Pakistani delegation
remained firm that the timeline of operation in the tribal areas would be decided by their
government. The Obama administration is already having tough time in their relations with the
Karzai government.

Source: Humera Iqbal (2011). Pak-Afghan Ties In the Light of Pak-US Strategic Dialogue,
available at: http://www.irs.org.pk/afghanistan/spn10.pdf
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 11

General Elections 2013

The Federal Parliament and the Provincial Assemblies have now passed the middle of their
terms. Initial enthusiasm about the return of an elected civilian government in 2008 has subsided
and there appears to be much skepticism about the accomplishments of the civilian institutions.
Indeed, the different branches of power are locked in a struggle over their respective
competencies and most national media and opposition parties are highly critical about the
performance of the current government.

As such, conditions may not appear conducive for further democratisation, particularly in view
of other pressing policy priorities from post-flood reconstruction and an economic crisis to
fighting terrorism. The next elections will likely be hard fought in a context of increasing
polarization and political violence, with a greater degree of controversy and more challenges
than in 2008.

At the same time, a number of democratic achievements should not be overlooked, including the
18th Amendment to the Constitution and the National Finance Award. Moreover, the conditions
that enabled the 2008 transition from military to civilian rule still remain in place, namely a
vibrant media, a proactive judiciary and pro-democracy political coalitions. Some two years
ahead of the next scheduled national and provincial assembly elections, the international
community must continue its support for developing democratic institutions and practices, as
well as for electoral reform. Focus should now be on reforming and strengthening the electoral
framework in line with the numerous recommendations by Pakistani and international observers
of the 2008 elections.

A stronger electoral framework would not only make future elections more democratic. It would
also contribute to conflict prevention and political stability because a more legitimate process is
less inviting for violent contestation.
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 12

Key Reforms for General Elections 2013:

According to a recent Joint report of Aurat Foundation, HRCP, FAFEEN and DRI following
recommendations and reforms are made for upcoming elections.

1. Reliable inclusive electoral roll

The Election Commission of Pakistan (ECP) immediately establishes an accessible and reliable
mechanism for updating and maintaining the electoral roll, in order to provide for universal
suffrage.

2. Transparency in the process

The ECP establish working transparency mechanisms, including full access of observers to
results aggregations and immediate publication of all polling station results (at the polling station
and on the ECP website).

3. Effective system for election dispute resolution

The law be amended to broaden the category of those permitted to file election petitions, to
establish the independence of the work of the tribunals, and to set meaningful time limits for the
completion of cases. The ECP and judiciary take all possible measures to establish a clear and
efficient system for complaints and appeals, with due preparation time and allocation of
resources.

4. Participation of women voters

The ECP immediately provide full genderdisaggregated data, recruit and train female polling
staff, and respond to instances of womens nonparticipation including by declaring results void.
An inclusive process takes place to reach agreement on a suitable minimum level of female voter
participation at polling stations and in constituencies.

5. Neutral state administration

The current government, as well as the care-taker government that will oversee transition during
the upcoming election period, make a clear public commitment that all state officials will be
proactive and responsive to complaints, and will work impartially including in the application of
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 13

penalties. Information on the measures being taken is regularly made available to the public.
Similar neutrality measures are also be taken by state security services.

6. Out-of-country voting

The ECP undertakes feasibility studies assessing benefits, risks and costs of out-of-country
voting procedures. This is followed by a full public discussion with decisions being established
in law by the parliament. Given the serious risks involved, the large out-of-country electorate,
and the short time available, any decisions may be best postponed until after the next general
elections in order not to overburden an already challenging electoral context.

7. Reduced political violence, intimidation and compulsion

Based on consultation with parties, a binding code of conduct is established in law or under ECP
regulations. The ECP and other responsible state authorities respond swiftly to complaints, and
proactively and publicly enforce the code of conduct. All contesting parties be required to
publicly denounce violence, intimidation, and coercion, and demonstrate what measures they are
taking in this regard. A system of coordination and mediation for partisan conflicts be
established on lowest possible level.

8. Clear legal framework

Parliament immediately begins an inclusive process of legal reform basing legislative proposals
on stakeholder consultation, constitutional requirements and international law commitments.

(Source: http://www.democracy-reporting.org/files/dri-pk_key_reforms_general_elections__bp-30_.pdf )
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 14

TAPI (Turkmenistan, Afghanistan,

Pakistan and India)
Gas project

The TurkmenistanAfghanistanPakistanIndia Natural Gas Pipeline (TAPI) Project of the

Asian Development Bank (ADB) aims to export up to 33 billion cubic meters of natural gas per
year through a proposed pipeline, approximately 1,800-kilometer long, from Turkmenistan to
Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. Project cost was estimated at $7.6 billion in 2008. TAPI will be
operated by a special purpose consortium company (SPCC) and led by a commercial entity
(consortium lead). Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India (the parties) have the option
to invest in the SPCC. Design and construction will take about 4 years, after the pipeline
consortium lead is selected and consortium agreements are signed. TAPI presents an opportunity
for regional cooperation on an unprecedented scale, linking the economies of the four countries.
It is a high-priority flagship project in the energy sector under CAREC 2020.

Challenges:

a) Many analysts point to TAPIs 735km leg that would run through the Afghan provinces
of Herat and Kandahar, adding that the project would face significant security problems
after a planned pullout of the US-led NATO troops from Afghanistan in 2014.
b) Another challenge is of financing the multi-billion dollar project. The TAPI project is yet
to establish a consortium. From 11-20 September 2012, a series of meetings were held at
Singapore, New York and London with potential investors. Representatives from ADB,
Turkmenistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India participated in the meetings. If the project
fails to form a consortium immediately, the pipeline will be further delayed, raising
doubts about its implementation.
c) In addition to the above mentioned challenges, building a cross country pipeline in
mountainous topography will be a daunting task. Because of the topography, the pipeline
will face considerable engineering challenges. However, the engineering challenges
could be managed if the security condition is stable and there are sponsors for the
pipeline
 Prepared by Fahad Khuwaja 15

Source:

a) Raghav Sharma, Will TAPI Remain a Pipedream? 27 August 2008, Institute of Peace
and Conflict, http://www.ipcs.org/article/terrorism/will-tapi-remain-a-pipedream-
2661.html
b) Technical Assistance Report. Available at:
http://www2.adb.org/Documents/TARs/REG/44463-013-reg-tar.pdf