This piece by @MadihaAfzal needs to be read carefully in order to understand the deleterious effects of being openly biased and deluded. brookings.edu/blog/order-fro…
"Perhaps a deal would have been signed anyway. The Taliban got everything it wanted, securing — in its eyes — a U.S. surrender for an absolute minimum in promises."
Really? Undermining Pakistan's role despite knowing full well that the US had practically implored us to do more.
"The Pakistani army, meanwhile, recognized that an ascendant Tb meant that any power-sharing arrangement accompanying a peace deal would likely align with Pakistan’s vision of “strategic depth”..."
When did the Pakistan Army say this? How can this be written so nonchalantly?
" Will Pakistan’s approach to militant groups, the Haqqanis in particular — substantively change? The suspicions post-9/11 on Pak's notorious double-game —"
Should have called out the US for hugging the Haqqanis and TB. Too difficult a task for you, for obvious reasons.
How about shedding light on wholesale redefinition of US' policy. The "Beard Trap" should be republished with a new preface....
"As long as the military, the prime architect of Pakistan’s jihadist foreign policy to date, remains the most powerful institution in Pakistan, it is hard to argue that anything will change."
Once again, shooting from the hip, and pandering to the Blob sans a shred of evidence.
This passage takes the cake . The Haqqanis were practically part of the talks in Doha. This is risible. The FATF stick is all but ugly.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The joint statement released after @ImranKhanPTI 's visit to China is long, well-worded, and meaningful, to say the least.
As per the statement, PM Khan was invited by the Chinese leadership. This, in and of itself, refutes the impression created by certain people.
"The Prime Minister appreciated the Chinese Government for excellent and meticulous arrangements and congratulated China for hosting the games in a streamlined, safe and splendid manner. " The lines about the Olympics that follow this are very interesting.
This @Rabs_AA piece is not a digital warriors' delight because it neither bashes certain factions nor extols the others. It asks some tough questions of the Taliban and the U.S., a country that has let them run scot-free. pakistanpolitico.com/afghanpeace/
The Taliban, according to the author, must be pushed to share their vision ,their framework for Afghanistan. No free passes for them, please. The Taliban, as the author says, must show the world that they have changed.
That Afghanistan does want to be ruled by TB is reason enough to ask of them as to what their strategy is to win hearts and minds of 34 million Afghans, rightly says @Rabs_AA .
@Rabs_AA hosted @seb_bw and @WheelerICCS, to discuss their co-authored report entitled 'Nuclear Responsibilities: A New Approach to Thinking and Talking about Nuclear Weapons'.
Introducing the report, @seb_bw said that the idea was to explore ways to foster a culture of responsibility in the heart of nuclear politics, adding that a strong culture of talking and thinking about nuclear responsibilities will reduce mistrust, misperception, instability,etc.
Thinking and talking about nuclear responsibilities, said Sebastian, helps in better policymaking which, among other things, is critical to mitigating misperceptions and creating a better understanding at multiple levels when it comes to nuclear policy.
In this session of the CSSPR Conversation Series, @Rabs_AA discussed with @PravinSawhney the Sino-Indo disengagement and its implications on the threats India faces, the ceasefire on the LoC, India's position within the QUAD, and a lot more.
Disengagement happened within the 1959 Chinese claim line, and in areas which only had tactical value, said Pravin Sawhney while arguing that it showed how the PLA was unwilling to even give tactical concessions to India.
The PLA, he said, was insistent on India needing to vacate places within the Chinese claim line, if further progress is to be made.