« Coalition casualty map masks wider picture of Afghan insurgency | Main | Iran's fist still clenched »




Hekmatyar offers terms for 'peace' in Afghanistan



Gulbiddin-Hekmatyar.jpg

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the leader of a faction of the Hezb-i-Islami that is allied with the Taliban and al Qaeda, is toeing the Taliban line on conditions for "peace" in Afghanistan: a full US/NATO withdrawal and the "transfer of power to an Islamic government" (read: the Taliban). He even went one step further and is calling for the punishment of "deciding the fate of those people who supported the invaders." A partial translation of Hekmatyar's Eid speech is provided by MEMRI:

"Moscow and Washington want to repeat the same strategy which they followed after the withdrawal of Russian forces [at the end of the Cold War]. They jointly formed the Northern Alliance to continue fighting in the war-ravaged country "

"Our friends and enemies should know that the end to fighting in Afghanistan will be possible after the withdrawal of foreign forces and transfer of power to an Islamic government "

"We do not have personal enmity with any internal group or foreign county. We believe in peace and harmony. We want [a] just and peaceful solution to all issues. We accept realities. We stress that everybody should be given their due rights "

"[His proposals for stabilizing Afghanistan] Foreigners must pull out their troops from Afghanistan unconditionally; establishment of an interim government acceptable to all stakeholders; formation of a grand meeting of real representatives of the nation to make decisions about the county's constitution, army, police and the next government, besides deciding the fate of those people who supported the invaders and allowed them to interfere in the internal affairs of the country "



READER COMMENTS: "Hekmatyar offers terms for 'peace' in Afghanistan"

Posted by Tyler at December 1, 2009 10:30 AM ET:

One wonders if Hekmatyar sees what happens to Akbari and that gives him pause. One well-placed missile, JDAM, or three-round burst not only killing him, but causing an entire organization to collapse.

Hezb-e-Islami is obviously far more robust than Akbari's militia, and since it it Pashtun many fighters will continue to fight alongside. But without him at the top, his cult of personality will collapse. His army of mercenaries susceptible to being co-opted by the Afghan and Pakistani governments. Hekmatyar more than any other figure we're fighting in that country seems to be concerned with his personal legacy. Thats a vanity worth exploiting as we leverage our increased force in the coming months.

Posted by m3fd2002 at December 1, 2009 3:16 PM ET:

Gulbuddin Hekmatyar is a bad character. He is supported by the Iranian Pasdaran (revolutionary guard) and is vehemently anti-western. There have been some rumors indicating that Kabul had contacted him for negotiations. Bad move. He is still remembered for his barbaric tactics during the power struggle post Soviet withdrawal, where his forces indiscriminately bombarded Kabul with artillery causing thousands of casualties. He should be classified as "bad" Taliban.

Posted by t-bone at December 1, 2009 5:24 PM ET:

Why does he beat around the bush? He should just say, Afghanistan will have peace when the coalition surrenders and the Taliban goes back to the way they were pre 9-11.

We say, Afghanistan will have peace when the Taliban surrender which was the whole point to begin with.

He says we must surrender. We say he must surrender. I guess we need to keep fighting. Hello Long War.

And hey Gulbuddin. Say hello to those 35,000 extra troops coming to a village near you.

Posted by charley at December 2, 2009 9:52 AM ET:

I do not believe it possible to negotiate successfully with the senior leadership of HIG, HN or the QTS. They have too little to gain.

They have repeatedly demonstrated they are willing to endlessly protract a conflict: and why shouldn't they? They live there, and have the rest of their lives to achieve their endpoints. This technique has kept them alive to fight for a better endpoint again and again.

A better strategy will be to peel away those less ideologically less motivated within the rank and file. The senior leadership must be killed, captured or rendered ineffective.

Posted by steve at December 3, 2009 11:21 PM ET:

This thug is only interested in power and riches. I doubt the majority of Afgans want the Taliban back. They would vote them out but this thug will not listen to the people. He wants to rule by force as a typical tyrant.

Let him do some constructive actions like building an infrastructure rather then bombing them.

I say start planting IED's in his neighborhood