Thread by @KamranBokhari

The head of the Haqqani Network - a terrorist group with close ties to al-Qaeda - gets an op-ed in the NYT to speak on behalf of the Taliban (as opposed to its central leader Mullah Haibatullah) - ahead of the signing of a peace agreement with the US. nytimes.com/2020/02/20/opi…

Sirajuddin Haqqani does not mention his longtime ally al-Qaeda by name. Instead uses vague language (“disruptive” and “foreign” groups) to refer to the transnational jihadist entity. He even terms its presence in Afghanistan as exaggerated. See this bit👇

Of course, the vague language about not allowing Afghan soil to be used by transnational jihadists as a launchpad for int’l attacks is designed to satisfy a long-standing US demand. It comes from a man whose faction within the Taliban is the closest to al-Qaeda.

This op-ed from a man who is virtually a ghost could not have been published without some facilitation from within USG and the Pakistani state [particularly the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) directorate, which has decade old ties with the Haqqani Network. #negotiations

Reminds me of something a Pakistani 2-star once told me about the Haqqani-Pakistan relationship many years ago on one of my research trips. This was around the time then US CJCS Admiral Mike Mullen had called the Haqqanis “a veritable arm of the ISI”

This Pak general was upset at the US criticism of his country’s ties with Haqqanis and the broader Afghan Taliban movement. He said something along the lines that....would the US prefer we not have ties with these guys? One day the Americans will need our ties to negotiate.

That day seems to have come and it is a sad one when the likes of Haqqani get to BS - in of all places - the NYT. A total PR stunt. Sirajuddin Haqqani - tho formally #2 in the Taliban - is the real leader of the group as opposed to Mullah Haibutullah.

Normally, Sirajuddin Haqqani would be on a list of jihadist HVTs to be droned. In fact, 24 members of his clan were killed in one such strike during the Obama admin. The man has maneuvered his way from a terrorist on the run to being (& I hate to say it) a statesman-type figure

I have been critical of way the @realDonaldTrump administration has been negotiating with the Taliban: bloombergquint.com/opinion/why-ta… But the fact is that this has been a long time in the making and dates back to when @HillaryClinton was Secy of State: bbc.com/news/world-sou…

Here is an NYT story from ten years ago on the Haqqanis with thoughts from myself: nytimes.com/2009/12/15/wor… Gives a sense of how much difference a decade can make.

So, Haqqani Network gets an op-ed in the NYT while @ashrafghani & @DrabdullahCE fighting over election results for the second consecutive election. And we are about to a sign a deal with the Talibs. What a shit show!

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE Don't get my wrong. I get it that peace talks take place b/w enemies; not friends. Wrote on this here: geopoliticalfutures.com/understanding-… But we are not likely to lead to peace. The Afghan jihadist mvmnt just wants the U.S. to leave & on its way out accord legitimacy to it.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE "We stuck with the talks despite recurring disquiet and upset within our ranks"

For Haqqani to acknowledge this👆means the internal dissent w/in the Taliban is much worse than he is letting on. Happens when you try to alter course after injecting the "jihad" koolaid for decades

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE "We will remain committed to all international conventions as long as they are compatible with Islamic principles."

This is pretty much the same argument for continuing to provide sanctuary to al-Qaeda after 9/11 and what led to the war in the first place.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE While reading this op-ed, esp this👇bit, remember the author is the man who was highly instrumental in the Taliban adopting the suicide bombing m.o. in the early 2000s, which has led to the deaths of countless innocent Afghans.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE All throughout the talks there was no mention of Haqqani. The negotiations have been led by the Talibs in Doha & more recently Mullah Baradar who represents the leadership council led by central leader Mullah Haibatullah. And now he pops up w/ a byline on this ghost-written arti.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE Knowing his orientation, Haqqani was likely unhappy with the talks for the longest time because of his ideology but also from the POV of his material interests. He feared that any US-Taliban deal would sideline him because of his ties to aQ, ISI.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE He was probably engaged in an internal bargain that his faction would only put its stamp of approval on the deal if his position was not just secure but his position as a top leader was secure. This op-ed is likely the result of that process.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE Put differently the byline is a signal to the US that the Haqqani faction is on board with the deal and cements his position as "deputy leader", which really means he will be the one calling the shots moving forward and Haibatullah is just an old mullah and a figurehead.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE My tweet from quoting the Pak general's remark is getting a lot of likes/retweets from folks in Pakistan but for the wrong reason. I shared that remark not to suggest that the Paks were right in their analysis/forecast back then but that they are now likely gloating.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE To them I say gloat at your own peril. The Haqqani and the Taliban maybe India's enemies but they are not going to produce the "friendly government" in Kabul that Islamabad has long sought. On the contrary, they are a threat to Pakistan's national security.

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE With the way these talks are going it will result in the US moving on. The Taliban will operate as a legal entity. Ghani & Abdullah can't get along. What are the chances for this intra-Afghan dialogue we keep hearing about?

@ashrafghani @DrabdullahCE Paks will have a hard time safeguarding their Islamic republic with a re-energized Taliban emirate to their west and a Hindutvized India on their west. Btw, by emirate I don't mean a regime; rather a large swath of ungoverned space.