German original: Click here
Author: Emran Feroz
US and Taliban
Peace treaty after
two decades of war
![]()
The US negotiator
Zalmay Khalizad, and Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar from the Taliban signed the
historic peace treaty in Doha.
(c) APA/AFP/GIUSEPPE CACACE (GIUSEPPE
CACACE)
Feb 29, 2020
Report by Emran Feroz,
Kabul
On Saturday, the
United States and the radical Islamic Taliban signed an agreement in Qatar to
pave the way for a permanent fresh start in Afghanistan. But there are great
doubts as to whether the matter will hold up.
‘We are finally
bringing our soldiers home’, US President Donald Trump announced on Saturday
after US and Taliban negotiators signed a historic peace agreement in Qatar’s
capital Doha, after 19 years of war.
As a result, to put
it simply, all US and allied forces (including Austria) should withdraw
within 14 months. In return, the Taliban promise not to tolerate violence
against the United States from Afghan territory and to come to terms with the
government in Kabul.
However, the latter
is in a weak phase due to internal rivalries after the presidential election.
Mohammed Hanif, a doctor from Kabul, is concerned about the situation in the
capital: ‘Some are not satisfied with the election results. I understand
that, but many are just looking for personal benefits. The government has to
represent us together as a people. Otherwise the enemy will benefit from this
crisis. ‘
A debilitated
government. Two weeks ago - after a waiting period of five months - the
results of the election were announced, and incumbent Ashraf Ghani was
declared the winner. His main opponent, Abdullah Abdullah, the head of
government, protested against this “electoral fraud” and announced that he is
willing to run his own government. By now, he has appointed several
officials, including governors for two provinces in the north of the country.
The agreement with
the Taliban doesn’t really make things easier for the Kabul government – it was not even properly involved in the
negotiations. Thus the Doha Treaty came about on Saturday, where talks
between US diplomats and Taliban had taken place in the past 18 months. Among
others, the ceremony was accompanied by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, US
Special Envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who also signed the pact, and Mullah Abdul
Ghani Baradar, leader of the Taliban delegation.
The deal also
includes the release of up to 5,000 Taliban prisoners. In the first 135 days
after signing, the number of US soldiers will be reduced to 8,600; currently,
(the data is being kept secret ) there are said to be more than 13,000 troops
in the country, plus thousands of mercenaries. In return, the Taliban pledge
to stop any operations against the United States and to bury its ties to
al-Qaeda. No shelter may be granted to persons perceived by the United States
as a security threat. In addition, they’ll participate in an intra-Afghan
dialogue.
In the 2001 conflict
that began in after the September 11, 2001 attack New York, more than 1,900
US soldiers were killed and more than 20,000 injured. Other countries also
had losses: the German Bundeswehr suffered about 59 deaths. The number of
Afghan soldiers killed is unknown. Between 32,000 and 60,000 civilians died,
according to the UN.
As a precondition
for the peace agreement, a “reduction in violence” took place last week,
which was largely adhered to by all sides. A long-term ceasefire is one of
the goals of the agreement. When it will be initiated is unclear. Until
recently, most of the fighting took place between Afghan soldiers and Taliban
fighters.
Many Afghans see the
treaty as a first step towards peace. However, there are numerous questions. Additionally,
there is a concern that the Taliban will use this opportunity at the latest
after the foreigners have withdrawn to bring themselves back to power. ‘Any
efforts for peace should be welcomed. If the Taliban indeed don’t reach for
your beards again, you shall be allowed to spit on my beard’, Tabish Forugh,
an Afghan commentator, commented on the event.
That the Kabul government
was excluded from all talks between the Americans and the Taliban which is
another reason why it’s being criticised. US negotiator Khalilzad, who is of
Afghan origin, often made it clear that the government would be involved as
soon as the deal was signed. However, with the Kabul government’s exclusion,
Washington responded to a demand of the Taliban who consider Kabul to be a ‘puppet
regime’.
Taliban, the a
secret winners. The Taliban will benefit from the government crisis. “Ghani
and Abdullah must not fight each other but must find a solution. The internal
problems paint a bad picture of all Afghans”, says Muneer Ahmad Niazi, university
lecturer in Kabul.
Meanwhile, another
ceremony took place in Kabul on Saturday, during which a ‘joint declaration’
between Washington and Kabul was signed. In it, the US continues to assure
its help to the government of Afghanistan.
|
von Sevan Nişanyan Ein in Linz zu iranischen Sprachen arbeitender Freund namens Umut Akkoç hat mir die folgende Liste zugeschickt, um meine Meinung einzuholen. Ich dachte, ich teile sie gleich samt ein paar Anmerkungen. 1. In der proto-indoeuropäischen Sprache (PIE) wird das Ursprungswort als b h réh 2 tēr rekonstruiert und so kam man darauf: A. Die aspirierten stimmhaften Konsonanten b h d h g h sind Laute, die nur in den modernen indischen Sprachen fortbestehen. Wir können davon ausgehen, dass es sie im Indoeuropäischen gab und sie ANDERE Laute darstellen als die unaspirierten Laute b g d . Denn ansonsten kann man nicht erklären, warum die im Altirischen immer als b d g, im Lettischen als b d j, im Altpersischen immer als b d d, im Altslawischen immer als b d z und im Hethitischen immer als p t k dargestellten Laute z. B. im Lateinischen in MANCHEN WÖRTERN als b d g in ANDEREN wiederum als f f h realisiert werden. Außerdem ...

Kommentare
Kommentar veröffentlichen