Over 60 Taliban terrorists have been killed in operations undertaken by the Afghan Special Forces along with air strikes in the past 24 hours across Afghanistan.

Quoting sources, Khaama Press reported that 29 Taliban terrorists were killed during operations conducted in the districts of Baraki Barak and Charkh in Logar and the Sayyidabad district of Wardak province.

One Taliban commander was wounded, while one vehicle-borne Improvised Explosive Device was destroyed in the attacks in Logar district.

"The Afghan Special Forces also conducted a search operation of a suspected weapons cache in Ahmadabad district of Paktika province and discovered one magnetic mine and 16 mine controllers," the source added.

"The bomb-making material was removed from the site and destroyed to prevent it from being used in the surrounding village and wounding non-combatants,” they said.

Beyond this, the Afghan Special Forces also conducted a separate operation along the highway in Samangam which killed four Taliban terrorists along with injuring three others.

Similar strikes were carried out in Nowzad and Musa Qal’ah districts in Helmand, and Tarink city in Uruzgan province which killed 12 militants. A radio tower, belonging to the Taliban, and another IED were also destroyed during the assault.&nbsp;

Over 60 Taliban terrorists have been killed in operations undertaken by the Afghan Special Forces along with air strikes in the past 24 hours across Afghanistan.

Over 60 Taliban terrorists have been killed in operations undertaken by the Afghan Special Forces along with air strikes in the past 24 hours across Afghanistan. Quoting sources, Khaama Press reported that 29 Taliban terrorists were killed during operations conducted in the districts of Baraki Barak and Charkh in Logar and the Sayyidabad district of Wardak province. One Taliban commander was wounded, while one vehicle-borne Improvised Explosive Device was destroyed in the attacks in Logar district. "The Afghan Special Forces also conducted a search operation of a suspected weapons cache in Ahmadabad district of Paktika province and discovered one magnetic mine and 16 mine controllers," the source added. "The bomb-making material was removed from the site and destroyed to prevent it from being used in the surrounding village and wounding non-combatants,” they said. Beyond this, the Afghan Special Forces also conducted a separate operation along the highway in Samangam which killed four Taliban terrorists along with injuring three others. Similar strikes were carried out in Nowzad and Musa Qal’ah districts in Helmand, and Tarink city in Uruzgan province which killed 12 militants. A radio tower, belonging to the Taliban, and another IED were also destroyed during the assault.

Over 60 Taliban terrorists killed by Afghan Forces

The Taliban denied on Friday that they were discussing a ceasefire and dialogue with the Kabul government during ongoing talks with the US in Doha, contrary to statements from Washington.

"This phase is about fleshing out the details of the two issues... The withdrawal of all occupying forces from Afghanistan and not allowing" the country to be used as a base for international militancy, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said.

He described them as "external" aspects of the 17-year conflict. "Other issues that have an internal aspect and are not tied to the United States... Have not been held under discussion." On Tuesday, US State Department spokesman Robert Palladino had affirmed the opposite.

"What we're focusing on are the four interconnected issues that are going to compose any future agreement," Palladino said -- listing them as "terrorism", "troop withdrawal", "intra-Afghan dialogue" and "ceasefire". He said progress was being made.

The latest round of talks, believed to be among the longest held between Washington and the militants, began on February 25 in the Qatari capital. Both sides have remained tight-lipped, however, and it is not clear how many days have involved direct negotiations.

The talks have already been paused at least once for two days, and the Taliban said Friday that they were again being suspended for a day, due to resume Saturday. It is not clear how much longer they will go on for.

Expectations remain high. The previous round, in January, saw the US and the Taliban walk away with a "draft framework" that focused on the issues Mujahid said were being discussed this time: a potential US troop withdrawal and a pact to prevent Afghanistan from harbouring terrorists.

The Taliban have repeatedly refused to meet with the Afghan government, whom they dismiss as "puppets".

US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who is leading the diplomatic push, had earlier hinted that headway was being made on the issue, however.

He also met with the Taliban's top political leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar at the start of the current round in Doha, in what has been touted as the highest-level engagement between the two sides in the months-long diplomatic thrust. General Scott Miller, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has also attended at least some of the talks.

President Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced his eagerness to end America's involvement in Afghanistan, where 14,000 US troops are still deployed.

On Thursday, General Joseph Votel, head of US Central Command, said the military has received no directions yet to withdraw from Afghanistan.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has suggested he could visit Doha to help advance the negotiations "in a couple (of) weeks".

Afghanistan has been enmeshed in nearly constant conflict since the Soviet invasion in 1979, which was followed by civil war, the Taliban regime, and the post-9/11 US invasion in late 2001.

The Taliban denied on Friday that they were discussing a ceasefire and dialogue with the Kabul government during ongoing talks with the US in Doha, contrary to statements from Washington.

The Taliban denied on Friday that they were discussing a ceasefire and dialogue with the Kabul government during ongoing talks with the US in Doha, contrary to statements from Washington. "This phase is about fleshing out the details of the two issues... The withdrawal of all occupying forces from Afghanistan and not allowing" the country to be used as a base for international militancy, Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said. He described them as "external" aspects of the 17-year conflict. "Other issues that have an internal aspect and are not tied to the United States... Have not been held under discussion." On Tuesday, US State Department spokesman Robert Palladino had affirmed the opposite. "What we're focusing on are the four interconnected issues that are going to compose any future agreement," Palladino said -- listing them as "terrorism", "troop withdrawal", "intra-Afghan dialogue" and "ceasefire". He said progress was being made. The latest round of talks, believed to be among the longest held between Washington and the militants, began on February 25 in the Qatari capital. Both sides have remained tight-lipped, however, and it is not clear how many days have involved direct negotiations. The talks have already been paused at least once for two days, and the Taliban said Friday that they were again being suspended for a day, due to resume Saturday. It is not clear how much longer they will go on for. Expectations remain high. The previous round, in January, saw the US and the Taliban walk away with a "draft framework" that focused on the issues Mujahid said were being discussed this time: a potential US troop withdrawal and a pact to prevent Afghanistan from harbouring terrorists. The Taliban have repeatedly refused to meet with the Afghan government, whom they dismiss as "puppets". US envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who is leading the diplomatic push, had earlier hinted that headway was being made on the issue, however. He also met with the Taliban's top political leader Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar at the start of the current round in Doha, in what has been touted as the highest-level engagement between the two sides in the months-long diplomatic thrust. General Scott Miller, the top US and NATO commander in Afghanistan, has also attended at least some of the talks. President Donald Trump has repeatedly voiced his eagerness to end America's involvement in Afghanistan, where 14,000 US troops are still deployed. On Thursday, General Joseph Votel, head of US Central Command, said the military has received no directions yet to withdraw from Afghanistan. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has suggested he could visit Doha to help advance the negotiations "in a couple (of) weeks". Afghanistan has been enmeshed in nearly constant conflict since the Soviet invasion in 1979, which was followed by civil war, the Taliban regime, and the post-9/11 US invasion in late 2001.

Taliban deny discussing ceasefire, Afghan dialogue with US

The number of people killed in a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistan-blast-near-major-political-gathering-in-kabul-kills-at-least-one-several-wounded-201748">militant attack on a Shi`ite Muslim gathering</a> in the Afghan capital, Kabul, has risen to 11, up from an earlier estimate of three, the interior ministry said on Friday.

Militants fired mortar bombs at the gathering on Thursday, a commemoration on the anniversary of the death of a leader of the Hazara ethnic minority.

Hundreds of people including top government officials such as Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah and at least three candidates for a July presidential election were at the event.&nbsp;

Nasrat Rahimi, spokesman for the ministry, said in a statement 95 people were wounded in what officials initially described as a rocket attack.

Rahimi said the Taliban planned the attack. On Thursday, the Islamic State militant group said it was responsible.

Sunni Muslim militants, including the Taliban and Islamic State, have repeatedly attacked Hazara people in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan over the years.&nbsp;

The number of people killed in a militant attack on a Shi`ite Muslim gathering in the Afghan capital, Kabul, has risen to 11, up from an earlier estimate of three, the interior ministry said on Friday.

The number of people killed in a militant attack on a Shi`ite Muslim gathering in the Afghan capital, Kabul, has risen to 11, up from an earlier estimate of three, the interior ministry said on Friday. Militants fired mortar bombs at the gathering on Thursday, a commemoration on the anniversary of the death of a leader of the Hazara ethnic minority. Hundreds of people including top government officials such as Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah and at least three candidates for a July presidential election were at the event. Nasrat Rahimi, spokesman for the ministry, said in a statement 95 people were wounded in what officials initially described as a rocket attack. Rahimi said the Taliban planned the attack. On Thursday, the Islamic State militant group said it was responsible. Sunni Muslim militants, including the Taliban and Islamic State, have repeatedly attacked Hazara people in Afghanistan and neighbouring Pakistan over the years.

Death toll from attack on Shi'ite gathering in Afghan capital rises to 11

A top US commander on Thursday said though the ongoing talks between the US and the Taliban have made considerable progress, much left to be done in war-torn Afghanistan.&nbsp;

President Donald Trump's South Asia Strategy is working in Afghanistan, <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/fight-against-islamic-state-far-from-over-us-commander-201855">General Joseph Votel</a>, Commander of the US Central Command, told members of the House Armed Services Committee during a Congressional hearing.

"The efforts of our Special Representative for Afghan Reconciliation, Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, are demonstrating that there is a path to progress...But there is much left to do to move towards our end state of reconciliation between the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Taliban," he said.

Khalilzad is currently leading a US delegation for talks with the Taliban in Doha. US officials have indicated that progress is being made in the dialogue.

"Our military efforts are focused on supporting the Afghan National Security Forces (ANDSF) and providing Ambassador Khalilzad with the maximum military pressure and leverage to support his diplomatic efforts to establish a framework that will lead to an Afghan dialogue, a reduction in violence and ultimately a negotiated settlement," Votel said.

He also noted that Afghanistan was used as a platform to attack America in 2001, and as such, the US has an enduring vital national interest to ensure that such an incident doesn't happen again.

"Safeguarding this national interest and preventing violent extremist organisations like al-Qaeda and ISIS-Khorasan from plotting attacks against our country is also a continuing effort for our forces --- one that we will need to be prepared to address as long as violent extremists can operate from this region," the commander said.&nbsp;

A top US commander on Thursday said though the ongoing talks between the US and the Taliban have made considerable progress, much left to be done in war-torn Afghanistan.

A top US commander on Thursday said though the ongoing talks between the US and the Taliban have made considerable progress, much left to be done in war-torn Afghanistan. President Donald Trump's South Asia Strategy is working in Afghanistan, General Joseph Votel, Commander of the US Central Command, told members of the House Armed Services Committee during a Congressional hearing. "The efforts of our Special Representative for Afghan Reconciliation, Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad, are demonstrating that there is a path to progress...But there is much left to do to move towards our end state of reconciliation between the Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Taliban," he said. Khalilzad is currently leading a US delegation for talks with the Taliban in Doha. US officials have indicated that progress is being made in the dialogue. "Our military efforts are focused on supporting the Afghan National Security Forces (ANDSF) and providing Ambassador Khalilzad with the maximum military pressure and leverage to support his diplomatic efforts to establish a framework that will lead to an Afghan dialogue, a reduction in violence and ultimately a negotiated settlement," Votel said. He also noted that Afghanistan was used as a platform to attack America in 2001, and as such, the US has an enduring vital national interest to ensure that such an incident doesn't happen again. "Safeguarding this national interest and preventing violent extremist organisations like al-Qaeda and ISIS-Khorasan from plotting attacks against our country is also a continuing effort for our forces --- one that we will need to be prepared to address as long as violent extremists can operate from this region," the commander said.

Much left to be done in Afghanistan: US commander

Several rockets were fired on Thursday at a gathering of members of the Shi'ite Muslim Hazara minority in the Afghan capital, Kabul, killing three people&nbsp;and wounding several.

There was no immediate claim of responsibility but over the years Hazaras have been repeatedly attacked by Sunni Muslim militant groups such as the Taliban, al Qaeda and Islamic State.

TOLO News, which had a camera crew reporting live from the commemoration, said that at least 10 explosions were heard at the commemoration on the anniversary of a Hazara leader's death.

"Our gathering is under attack. Rockets are being dropped on us from every direction," said Muhammad Mohaqiq, a lawmaker and leader of the main Hazara political party from the stage in comments aired on television.

Hundreds of people including top government officials such as Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah and at least three candidates in a July presidential election were at the commemoration.

People could be seen scattered in all directions as the rockets fell.

At least three people was killed and 16 wounded, said Wahidullah Mayar, a spokesman for the public health ministry

A spokesman for the interior ministry, Nasrat Rahimi, said one suspect had been arrested, while several others had been surrounded by the security forces.

Presidential candidate Mohammad Hanif Atmar was unhurt, but eight of his security guards were wounded. They were in stable condition, said Atmar's spokesman, Qader Shah.

The gathering was for the anniversary of the death of Abdul Ali Mazari, a Hazara leader who died in 1995 after being taken prisoner by the Taliban.

A reporter who was present at the gathering site said ambulances had rushed to the area to help.

"Many people were injured," the reporter told TOLO News.

The attack came a day after a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/at-least-16-killed-in-attack-in-eastern-afghanistan-provincial-spokesman-201513">suicide bomb and gun attack on a construction company</a> in the eastern city of Jalalabad that killed at least 16 people.

Islamic State claimed responsibility for that attack.

Several rockets were fired on Thursday at a gathering of members of the Shi'ite Muslim Hazara minority in the Afghan capital, Kabul, killing three people and wounding several.

Several rockets were fired on Thursday at a gathering of members of the Shi'ite Muslim Hazara minority in the Afghan capital, Kabul, killing three people and wounding several. There was no immediate claim of responsibility but over the years Hazaras have been repeatedly attacked by Sunni Muslim militant groups such as the Taliban, al Qaeda and Islamic State. TOLO News, which had a camera crew reporting live from the commemoration, said that at least 10 explosions were heard at the commemoration on the anniversary of a Hazara leader's death. "Our gathering is under attack. Rockets are being dropped on us from every direction," said Muhammad Mohaqiq, a lawmaker and leader of the main Hazara political party from the stage in comments aired on television. Hundreds of people including top government officials such as Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah and at least three candidates in a July presidential election were at the commemoration. People could be seen scattered in all directions as the rockets fell. At least three people was killed and 16 wounded, said Wahidullah Mayar, a spokesman for the public health ministry A spokesman for the interior ministry, Nasrat Rahimi, said one suspect had been arrested, while several others had been surrounded by the security forces. Presidential candidate Mohammad Hanif Atmar was unhurt, but eight of his security guards were wounded. They were in stable condition, said Atmar's spokesman, Qader Shah. The gathering was for the anniversary of the death of Abdul Ali Mazari, a Hazara leader who died in 1995 after being taken prisoner by the Taliban. A reporter who was present at the gathering site said ambulances had rushed to the area to help. "Many people were injured," the reporter told TOLO News. The attack came a day after a suicide bomb and gun attack on a construction company in the eastern city of Jalalabad that killed at least 16 people. Islamic State claimed responsibility for that attack.

Afghanistan: Blast near major political gathering in Kabul kills three, several wounded

Afghanistan: Suicide bomb attack in Jalalabad, casualties feared

Afghanistan: Suicide bomber strikes near airport in Jalalabad

By Abdulkader Sinno

The United States and the Taliban may be nearing an agreement to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan after more than 17 years of conflict.

In return, the Taliban would commit to refusing access to anti-American organisations such as Al-Qaida on its territory.

How did we get to this point – and what will be the consequences of such an agreement?

How did we get here?

As a longtime scholar of Afghanistan’s wars and conflict dynamics, I suggest beginning with a bit of history.

The current conflict began when the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan a few weeks after 9/11.

It was on Afghan soil that Osama bin Laden hatched the plot to attack the US. The Taliban, the de facto rulers of much of Afghanistan in the wake of a bloody civil war, had given bin Laden and his supporters'&nbsp;shelter.

Two months into the US invasion, Taliban state institutions and defensive positions crumbled and the United States formed new state institutions led by Afghans who had fought the Taliban. The US maintained a limited force to fight and capture Al-Qaida and Taliban leaders but otherwise invested little in the Afghan economy or society.

It took the Taliban four years to reconstitute itself as an effective force of insurgents to fight the US and the Afghan government, and they became stronger every year after 2004. As I explain in my research, the United States and the coalition of 42 countries it formed to defeat the resurgent Taliban was poorly organised, abusive and mismanaged.

Since 2001, the US-led coalition has spent $1 trillion dollars and committed a peak of 140,000 troops and 100,000 contractors to an unsuccessful attempt to defeat the Taliban. More than 5,000 American soldiers and contractors were killed.

Today, a US force of 14,000 troops and massive US Airforce assets are helping maintain the defensive positions of an Afghan government that is widely considered as one of the most corrupt in the world.

The Taliban are making territorial gains and killing hundreds of regime troops each month, and feel that they are on the cusp of victory.

Militias that recruit from the Hazara, Tajik and Uzbek minorities have rearmed in anticipation of the collapse of the regime in Kabul and fear of a coming civil war with the mostly Pushtun Taliban. Afghanistan is nearing an endgame.

What it means for the Taliban

An agreement between the Taliban and the US would be an impressive accomplishment for the Taliban. From their perspective, it would be their reward for fighting the world’s strongest military power to a stalemate.

They already were rewarded by getting to negotiate directly with the United States, as they have always requested, instead of the Afghan regime which they despise. If the negotiations are successful, they would also be getting precisely what they asked for: an American withdrawal.

In return, they are making a commitment to do something they would likely have done anyway. Al-Qaida’s attack on the US caused the Taliban to lose control of Afghanistan for years. They are not likely to risk having to pay that cost again once they regain control of Kabul, even if they don’t sign an agreement.

What it means for the US 
 
There is little hope for an outright US victory over the Taliban at this point.

The remaining force of 14,000 US troops is mostly meant to shore up Afghan state defences. It is too small to reverse momentum on the battlefield. An agreement and withdrawal would, therefore, be attractive for those who value less military spending and stress on the military, including General John Nicholson, the previous commander of the American and NATO forces in Afghanistan.

The agreement, however, could undermine US reputation in ways big and small. The Obama and Trump administrations never reversed a 2002 Bush executive order that added the Taliban to the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists, but they have simultaneously pleaded with them to negotiate in spite of claims that Washington does not negotiate with terrorists.

It also signals US weakness and inability to fight a dedicated force of insurgents. Militants elsewhere, including Islamic State leaders, could find this lesson instructive. I believe such an agreement may well be remembered as a turning point in America’s ability to successfully project its military power around the Muslim world.

An agreement could also signal that the US is an unreliable ally that abandons those who side with it. The United States is involved in numerous conflicts worldwide in places as diverse as Syria and Somalia, and many of its local allies would logically recalculate their own commitments after witnessing a US disengagement from Afghanistan.

What happens to the state

As I describe in my book “Organisations at War in Afghanistan,” governments tend to unravel quickly in Afghanistan when foreign support, both military and financial, ceases.

This is precisely what happened after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan and stopped their support to the Najib regime in the early 1990s. As I report in greater detail in my book, different regime militias and military units either disintegrated, joined their erstwhile Mujahideen opponents or became independent militias.

Similarly, today’s Afghan state officials at all levels have long hedged their bets by maintaining ties with the Taliban, their nominal opponents and minority militias. If history is any indication, we can expect that entire agencies and units will either fragment or collectively join any of several strongman-led ethnic militias when the rewards of working for the regime stop outweighing the risks of facing the Taliban. Some may even defect to the Taliban. This is expected behaviour in dangerous environments such as Afghanistan, where everyone is expected to have a hedging strategy for survival.

Once the state gets pulled in all directions, Afghanistan will likely degenerate into a civil war very similar to the one that the United States interrupted when it invaded in late 2001. Other countries, including Russia, Iran and India will choose sides to back. I estimate that the Taliban, with their dedicated Pakistani and Arab Gulf backers, will win that conflict, just like they almost did in 2001. We may very well reach a point where we see the 17-year American occupation as merely a futile, bloody and costly interruption of the Afghan civil war.

I consider a US-Taliban agreement to be no more than a face-saving measure to conclude a failed and costly American military intervention. If there is a useful lesson to be learned from this misadventure, it is that leaders of even the world’s mightiest military power need to reconsider the merits of a militarised foreign policy in the Muslim world. US military interventions are stoking resentment and inflaming a perpetual transnational insurgency across Muslim countries. If it doesn’t change its course, the US may very well suffer more defeats such as the one in Afghanistan and will cause even more hurt and damage in other countries along the way.

(Abdulkader Sinno is Associate Professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Studies, Indiana University)

(This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-will-come-after-a-us-withdrawal-from-afghanistan-111036">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

By Abdulkader Sinno The United States and the Taliban may be nearing an agreement to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan after more than 17 years of conflict. In return, the Taliban would commit to refusing access to anti-American organisations such as Al-Qaida on its territory.

By Abdulkader Sinno The United States and the Taliban may be nearing an agreement to withdraw US troops from Afghanistan after more than 17 years of conflict. In return, the Taliban would commit to refusing access to anti-American organisations such as Al-Qaida on its territory. How did we get to this point – and what will be the consequences of such an agreement? How did we get here? As a longtime scholar of Afghanistan’s wars and conflict dynamics, I suggest beginning with a bit of history. The current conflict began when the Bush administration invaded Afghanistan a few weeks after 9/11. It was on Afghan soil that Osama bin Laden hatched the plot to attack the US. The Taliban, the de facto rulers of much of Afghanistan in the wake of a bloody civil war, had given bin Laden and his supporters' shelter. Two months into the US invasion, Taliban state institutions and defensive positions crumbled and the United States formed new state institutions led by Afghans who had fought the Taliban. The US maintained a limited force to fight and capture Al-Qaida and Taliban leaders but otherwise invested little in the Afghan economy or society. It took the Taliban four years to reconstitute itself as an effective force of insurgents to fight the US and the Afghan government, and they became stronger every year after 2004. As I explain in my research, the United States and the coalition of 42 countries it formed to defeat the resurgent Taliban was poorly organised, abusive and mismanaged. Since 2001, the US-led coalition has spent $1 trillion dollars and committed a peak of 140,000 troops and 100,000 contractors to an unsuccessful attempt to defeat the Taliban. More than 5,000 American soldiers and contractors were killed. Today, a US force of 14,000 troops and massive US Airforce assets are helping maintain the defensive positions of an Afghan government that is widely considered as one of the most corrupt in the world. The Taliban are making territorial gains and killing hundreds of regime troops each month, and feel that they are on the cusp of victory. Militias that recruit from the Hazara, Tajik and Uzbek minorities have rearmed in anticipation of the collapse of the regime in Kabul and fear of a coming civil war with the mostly Pushtun Taliban. Afghanistan is nearing an endgame. What it means for the Taliban An agreement between the Taliban and the US would be an impressive accomplishment for the Taliban. From their perspective, it would be their reward for fighting the world’s strongest military power to a stalemate. They already were rewarded by getting to negotiate directly with the United States, as they have always requested, instead of the Afghan regime which they despise. If the negotiations are successful, they would also be getting precisely what they asked for: an American withdrawal. In return, they are making a commitment to do something they would likely have done anyway. Al-Qaida’s attack on the US caused the Taliban to lose control of Afghanistan for years. They are not likely to risk having to pay that cost again once they regain control of Kabul, even if they don’t sign an agreement. What it means for the US There is little hope for an outright US victory over the Taliban at this point. The remaining force of 14,000 US troops is mostly meant to shore up Afghan state defences. It is too small to reverse momentum on the battlefield. An agreement and withdrawal would, therefore, be attractive for those who value less military spending and stress on the military, including General John Nicholson, the previous commander of the American and NATO forces in Afghanistan. The agreement, however, could undermine US reputation in ways big and small. The Obama and Trump administrations never reversed a 2002 Bush executive order that added the Taliban to the list of Specially Designated Global Terrorists, but they have simultaneously pleaded with them to negotiate in spite of claims that Washington does not negotiate with terrorists. It also signals US weakness and inability to fight a dedicated force of insurgents. Militants elsewhere, including Islamic State leaders, could find this lesson instructive. I believe such an agreement may well be remembered as a turning point in America’s ability to successfully project its military power around the Muslim world. An agreement could also signal that the US is an unreliable ally that abandons those who side with it. The United States is involved in numerous conflicts worldwide in places as diverse as Syria and Somalia, and many of its local allies would logically recalculate their own commitments after witnessing a US disengagement from Afghanistan. What happens to the state As I describe in my book “Organisations at War in Afghanistan,” governments tend to unravel quickly in Afghanistan when foreign support, both military and financial, ceases. This is precisely what happened after the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan and stopped their support to the Najib regime in the early 1990s. As I report in greater detail in my book, different regime militias and military units either disintegrated, joined their erstwhile Mujahideen opponents or became independent militias. Similarly, today’s Afghan state officials at all levels have long hedged their bets by maintaining ties with the Taliban, their nominal opponents and minority militias. If history is any indication, we can expect that entire agencies and units will either fragment or collectively join any of several strongman-led ethnic militias when the rewards of working for the regime stop outweighing the risks of facing the Taliban. Some may even defect to the Taliban. This is expected behaviour in dangerous environments such as Afghanistan, where everyone is expected to have a hedging strategy for survival. Once the state gets pulled in all directions, Afghanistan will likely degenerate into a civil war very similar to the one that the United States interrupted when it invaded in late 2001. Other countries, including Russia, Iran and India will choose sides to back. I estimate that the Taliban, with their dedicated Pakistani and Arab Gulf backers, will win that conflict, just like they almost did in 2001. We may very well reach a point where we see the 17-year American occupation as merely a futile, bloody and costly interruption of the Afghan civil war. I consider a US-Taliban agreement to be no more than a face-saving measure to conclude a failed and costly American military intervention. If there is a useful lesson to be learned from this misadventure, it is that leaders of even the world’s mightiest military power need to reconsider the merits of a militarised foreign policy in the Muslim world. US military interventions are stoking resentment and inflaming a perpetual transnational insurgency across Muslim countries. If it doesn’t change its course, the US may very well suffer more defeats such as the one in Afghanistan and will cause even more hurt and damage in other countries along the way. (Abdulkader Sinno is Associate Professor of Political Science and Middle Eastern Studies, Indiana University) (This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

US-Taliban deal is a face-saving measure to conclude a failed American military intervention

On February 20, WION Global Summit - Unleashing the Power of South Asia, was held in Dubai, UAE. WION is a Global English News Channel, which was launched by Indian News Media Company Zee Media Corporation Limited (ZMCL), bringing world news with a South Asian view dedicated to an audience with values and beliefs that are as global, social, visual, and tech-savvy by nature.&nbsp;

I was honoured to be part of a panel discussion - “Future of South Asia: Strategic Balances &amp; Alliances”, alongside distinguished members Shaurya Doval, Director of India Foundation, Namal Rajapaksa, Member of Parliament from Sri Lanka, Michael Kugelman, Deputy Director and Senior Associate for South Asia at the US-based Woodrow Wilson Center, and Hasanul Haq Inu, Bangladesh's former Minister of Information. The panel was moderated by international journalist, TV show host, and author, Riz Khan. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The diversity of voices on the panel was reflective of the rich diversity South Asia is known for. Sadly, due to a history of political tensions in the region, we have never seen the realisation of the true potential of this diversity in bringing stability and prosperity to South Asia. The protracted conflict of nearly 40 years in Afghanistan is one of the major deterrents to the region’s development. I believe that 2019 has thus far been and will continue to be a pivotal year for Afghanistan but also the region, as a whole, from a standpoint of security, economic, and political issues.

The level of true regional cooperation, as well as the support of the international community on the most pressing issues facing South Asia, will determine the fate of the region. Representing the Afghan perspective on the panel at the WION Global Summit, I will, here, highlight the three main issues I spoke about. &nbsp; &nbsp;

First, free and fair elections have been considered a cornerstone of development and progress in Afghanistan. When held properly, the psychosocial impacts of elections are incredibly positive for citizens who see them as a sign that their nation is moving forward, that the transition of power is accountable, and that they can exercise their constitutional right of choosing their leaders.

The most recent elections were held for the Wolesi Jirga (Lower House of Parliament) on October 20, 2018, the final results of which are yet to be announced due to a host of issues ranging from security to allegations of widespread electoral fraud. Commissioners of the Independent Election Commission and the Independent Electoral Complaints Commission were removed by President Ashraf Ghani following the accusation that they were engaged in electoral fraud. He just appointed 12 new commissioners in a consultative process that involved several political leaders, including candidates for the upcoming Presidential elections. &nbsp;

Security challenges continue to hinder the democratic process in Afghanistan. Several candidates were assassinated and some were even injured in the voting process, yet it did not stop Afghans from casting their vote.&nbsp;

Lack of transparency, mismanagement of the process,&nbsp;fraud and bribery are a norm and have been woven into our social fabric. Criminal activities such as fraud and bribery are often also interlinked with the insurgency in Afghanistan. If these activities continue to be a norm, they will have a spillover effect into the region. During the panel discussion, I argued that South Asian nations must do their part in holding Afghanistan accountable for transparency because bad practice spreads very fast and the negative implications can easily transfer to the region. &nbsp;

Second, I focused on an issue that has taken the international community and the media by a storm, the peace process in Afghanistan. However, when the two negotiating sides are the United States and the Taliban, Afghans are left to wonder how they will benefit from the peace process but more importantly what it means for Afghans.

It is not viable to have peace negotiations without the consensus of the Afghan people and the inclusion of the Afghan government. If Taliban wants to negotiate a peace deal, they must speak with those who are vigilant and concerned about their reintegration into society - the shop keepers, businessmen, athletes, journalists, artists, musicians, government officials and the Afghan women.&nbsp;

My recommendation to the international community is to keep in mind that this must be an ‘Afghan-owned’ peace process which must embrace all Afghans and – only Afghans. This will not just benefit Afghanistan, but will also have a positive impact on the region and global community. &nbsp;

Lastly, I spoke about the economic stability of Afghanistan. Due to the political, security, and economic transitions in 2014, Afghanistan’s economy took a major hit and unemployment increased to an alarming rate of around 40 per cent. Since then, intensive government reforms, as well as private sector growth, have led to an improved business climate. However, there are major hindrances to economic growth in the country, such as political uncertainty, corruption and security challenges.&nbsp;

Afghanistan has been actively engaged in regional economic cooperation so as to improve its economy but also assist in bringing stability to the region. However, the marked positive economic impact of these projects, such as Chahbahar Port, Lapis Lazuli Corridor and the Air Corridor programme, will not come immediately. In order for Afghanistan to become a donor-free economy, it will need the support of South Asian countries, particularly in terms of investment in the private sector as well as more active engagement in trade. Bringing economic stability to Afghanistan in indubitably one of the most effective methods for countering the insurgency, particularly in impoverished communities that turn to negative coping mechanisms such as joining insurgent movements to support their families.&nbsp;

They say a rising tide lifts all boats and this could ring more true for South Asia. The countries in the region must understand that their fate is intertwined with Afghanistan’s. A strategic alliance and cooperation between Afghanistan and South Asian countries in areas of mutual interest, be it economic, security, education, or sociocultural, will help the region realise&nbsp;its truest potentials. &nbsp;&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

On February 20, WION Global Summit - Unleashing the Power of South Asia, was held in Dubai, UAE. WION is a Global English News Channel, which was launched by Indian News Media Company Zee Media Corporation Limited (ZMCL), bringing world news with a South Asian view dedicated to an audience with values and beliefs that are as global, social, visual, and tech-savvy by nature.

On February 20, WION Global Summit - Unleashing the Power of South Asia, was held in Dubai, UAE. WION is a Global English News Channel, which was launched by Indian News Media Company Zee Media Corporation Limited (ZMCL), bringing world news with a South Asian view dedicated to an audience with values and beliefs that are as global, social, visual, and tech-savvy by nature. I was honoured to be part of a panel discussion - “Future of South Asia: Strategic Balances & Alliances”, alongside distinguished members Shaurya Doval, Director of India Foundation, Namal Rajapaksa, Member of Parliament from Sri Lanka, Michael Kugelman, Deputy Director and Senior Associate for South Asia at the US-based Woodrow Wilson Center, and Hasanul Haq Inu, Bangladesh's former Minister of Information. The panel was moderated by international journalist, TV show host, and author, Riz Khan. The diversity of voices on the panel was reflective of the rich diversity South Asia is known for. Sadly, due to a history of political tensions in the region, we have never seen the realisation of the true potential of this diversity in bringing stability and prosperity to South Asia. The protracted conflict of nearly 40 years in Afghanistan is one of the major deterrents to the region’s development. I believe that 2019 has thus far been and will continue to be a pivotal year for Afghanistan but also the region, as a whole, from a standpoint of security, economic, and political issues. The level of true regional cooperation, as well as the support of the international community on the most pressing issues facing South Asia, will determine the fate of the region. Representing the Afghan perspective on the panel at the WION Global Summit, I will, here, highlight the three main issues I spoke about. First, free and fair elections have been considered a cornerstone of development and progress in Afghanistan. When held properly, the psychosocial impacts of elections are incredibly positive for citizens who see them as a sign that their nation is moving forward, that the transition of power is accountable, and that they can exercise their constitutional right of choosing their leaders. The most recent elections were held for the Wolesi Jirga (Lower House of Parliament) on October 20, 2018, the final results of which are yet to be announced due to a host of issues ranging from security to allegations of widespread electoral fraud. Commissioners of the Independent Election Commission and the Independent Electoral Complaints Commission were removed by President Ashraf Ghani following the accusation that they were engaged in electoral fraud. He just appointed 12 new commissioners in a consultative process that involved several political leaders, including candidates for the upcoming Presidential elections. Security challenges continue to hinder the democratic process in Afghanistan. Several candidates were assassinated and some were even injured in the voting process, yet it did not stop Afghans from casting their vote. Lack of transparency, mismanagement of the process, fraud and bribery are a norm and have been woven into our social fabric. Criminal activities such as fraud and bribery are often also interlinked with the insurgency in Afghanistan. If these activities continue to be a norm, they will have a spillover effect into the region. During the panel discussion, I argued that South Asian nations must do their part in holding Afghanistan accountable for transparency because bad practice spreads very fast and the negative implications can easily transfer to the region. Second, I focused on an issue that has taken the international community and the media by a storm, the peace process in Afghanistan. However, when the two negotiating sides are the United States and the Taliban, Afghans are left to wonder how they will benefit from the peace process but more importantly what it means for Afghans. It is not viable to have peace negotiations without the consensus of the Afghan people and the inclusion of the Afghan government. If Taliban wants to negotiate a peace deal, they must speak with those who are vigilant and concerned about their reintegration into society - the shop keepers, businessmen, athletes, journalists, artists, musicians, government officials and the Afghan women. My recommendation to the international community is to keep in mind that this must be an ‘Afghan-owned’ peace process which must embrace all Afghans and – only Afghans. This will not just benefit Afghanistan, but will also have a positive impact on the region and global community. Lastly, I spoke about the economic stability of Afghanistan. Due to the political, security, and economic transitions in 2014, Afghanistan’s economy took a major hit and unemployment increased to an alarming rate of around 40 per cent. Since then, intensive government reforms, as well as private sector growth, have led to an improved business climate. However, there are major hindrances to economic growth in the country, such as political uncertainty, corruption and security challenges. Afghanistan has been actively engaged in regional economic cooperation so as to improve its economy but also assist in bringing stability to the region. However, the marked positive economic impact of these projects, such as Chahbahar Port, Lapis Lazuli Corridor and the Air Corridor programme, will not come immediately. In order for Afghanistan to become a donor-free economy, it will need the support of South Asian countries, particularly in terms of investment in the private sector as well as more active engagement in trade. Bringing economic stability to Afghanistan in indubitably one of the most effective methods for countering the insurgency, particularly in impoverished communities that turn to negative coping mechanisms such as joining insurgent movements to support their families. They say a rising tide lifts all boats and this could ring more true for South Asia. The countries in the region must understand that their fate is intertwined with Afghanistan’s. A strategic alliance and cooperation between Afghanistan and South Asian countries in areas of mutual interest, be it economic, security, education, or sociocultural, will help the region realise its truest potentials. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Fates intertwined: Afghanistan can help South Asia rise

The United States is trying to prevent simmering tensions between India and Pakistan from impacting a third country: Afghanistan, where a fragile peace push is underway to try to end more than 17 years of war with Taliban insurgents.

US President Donald Trump's administration has been publicly focused on lowering tensions between the nuclear-armed rivals since a February 14 suicide car bomb in an Indian-controlled area of Kashmir triggered the first Indian air strikes inside of Pakistan since a 1971 war.

Senior US officials told Reuters that as the United States spoke with senior Pakistani officials, emphasizing the need to lower the risk of conflict with India, Islamabad privately offered warnings on Afghanistan.

Pakistani officials said their ability to support Afghan peace talks could be in jeopardy in the event of a full-blown crisis, US officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"They'll stop being a facilitator, they will stop the pressure they are applying" on the Taliban, one US official said, recounting Pakistani warnings conveyed to Washington.

Pakistan has publicly denied any role in the suicide bombing. But the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) militant group claimed responsibility for it, and India has long accused Islamabad of supporting them.

The United States has likewise accused Pakistan of ties to Taliban militants who are fighting in neighbouring Afghanistan against American and US-backed Afghan government forces.

Reuters has previously reported, however, that US officials have recently seen a positive shift in Pakistan's behaviour.

Pakistan, long at odds with the United States over the war in Afghanistan, has played a behind-the-scenes role in supporting US peace talks with the Afghan Taliban, including by facilitating travel to negotiations.

Current and former US officials caution that Islamabad could again choose to act as a spoiler.

"I don't believe that Pakistan has the capability to straight out make peace happen in Afghanistan, but they definitely have the capability to make peace not (happen)," said Laurel Miller, a former senior State Department official.

MOVEMENT OF TROOPS

In the past several days, India and Pakistan have appeared to dial down hostilities that brought the arch enemies to the brink of another war. But it's unclear whether the calm will hold.

A Pakistani official in Washington, speaking on the condition of anonymity, cautioned that unless the tensions were reduced, there was a "very strong likelihood" that Pakistani troops would be moved from the border with Afghanistan to reinforce positions near India.

Pakistan’s UN Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi told Reuters that Islamabad's focus could completely shift to its eastern border with India.

"If the crisis with India continues, Pakistan will be obliged to keep our entire focus on our Eastern border. That may affect our efforts on our Western front," Lodhi said.

The Pakistani official in Washington said Pakistan had not been focused on Afghanistan since tensions with India increased last month, and it would have implications for peace talks.

Some current and former US officials say Islamabad may be over-stating the risks of fallout on Afghan peace talks, which resumed over the weekend in Doha. Speaking on condition of anonymity, they noted that Islamabad has its own self-interests in mind as it seeks to influence the peace process in neighbouring Afghanistan.

But other US officials acknowledge a major crisis involving India would be all-consuming for Islamabad and say it's another reason why lowering tensions is so important.

In Afghanistan, which fears its country is being used as a proxy for tension between India and Pakistan, the foreign ministry summoned Pakistan's envoy to Kabul after he made similar warnings.

Veteran diplomats say that if the United States pushes Pakistan too hard on combating militants, Islamabad could diminish its support for the peace process.

Dan Feldman, a former US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, said many of the Pakistani officials who dealt with India were also responsible for Afghanistan, and that tensions could impact peace talks.

He said a lack of US focus on South Asia was problematic.

"We need much more focus and strategic thinking from the Trump Administration on this region, and an effective way of implementing that strategy," Feldman said.

The United States is trying to prevent simmering tensions between India and Pakistan from impacting a third country: Afghanistan, where a fragile peace push is underway to try to end more than 17 years of war with Taliban insurgents.

The United States is trying to prevent simmering tensions between India and Pakistan from impacting a third country: Afghanistan, where a fragile peace push is underway to try to end more than 17 years of war with Taliban insurgents. US President Donald Trump's administration has been publicly focused on lowering tensions between the nuclear-armed rivals since a February 14 suicide car bomb in an Indian-controlled area of Kashmir triggered the first Indian air strikes inside of Pakistan since a 1971 war. Senior US officials told Reuters that as the United States spoke with senior Pakistani officials, emphasizing the need to lower the risk of conflict with India, Islamabad privately offered warnings on Afghanistan. Pakistani officials said their ability to support Afghan peace talks could be in jeopardy in the event of a full-blown crisis, US officials said, speaking on condition of anonymity. "They'll stop being a facilitator, they will stop the pressure they are applying" on the Taliban, one US official said, recounting Pakistani warnings conveyed to Washington. Pakistan has publicly denied any role in the suicide bombing. But the Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammad (JeM) militant group claimed responsibility for it, and India has long accused Islamabad of supporting them. The United States has likewise accused Pakistan of ties to Taliban militants who are fighting in neighbouring Afghanistan against American and US-backed Afghan government forces. Reuters has previously reported, however, that US officials have recently seen a positive shift in Pakistan's behaviour. Pakistan, long at odds with the United States over the war in Afghanistan, has played a behind-the-scenes role in supporting US peace talks with the Afghan Taliban, including by facilitating travel to negotiations. Current and former US officials caution that Islamabad could again choose to act as a spoiler. "I don't believe that Pakistan has the capability to straight out make peace happen in Afghanistan, but they definitely have the capability to make peace not (happen)," said Laurel Miller, a former senior State Department official. MOVEMENT OF TROOPS In the past several days, India and Pakistan have appeared to dial down hostilities that brought the arch enemies to the brink of another war. But it's unclear whether the calm will hold. A Pakistani official in Washington, speaking on the condition of anonymity, cautioned that unless the tensions were reduced, there was a "very strong likelihood" that Pakistani troops would be moved from the border with Afghanistan to reinforce positions near India. Pakistan’s UN Ambassador Maleeha Lodhi told Reuters that Islamabad's focus could completely shift to its eastern border with India. "If the crisis with India continues, Pakistan will be obliged to keep our entire focus on our Eastern border. That may affect our efforts on our Western front," Lodhi said. The Pakistani official in Washington said Pakistan had not been focused on Afghanistan since tensions with India increased last month, and it would have implications for peace talks. Some current and former US officials say Islamabad may be over-stating the risks of fallout on Afghan peace talks, which resumed over the weekend in Doha. Speaking on condition of anonymity, they noted that Islamabad has its own self-interests in mind as it seeks to influence the peace process in neighbouring Afghanistan. But other US officials acknowledge a major crisis involving India would be all-consuming for Islamabad and say it's another reason why lowering tensions is so important. In Afghanistan, which fears its country is being used as a proxy for tension between India and Pakistan, the foreign ministry summoned Pakistan's envoy to Kabul after he made similar warnings. Veteran diplomats say that if the United States pushes Pakistan too hard on combating militants, Islamabad could diminish its support for the peace process. Dan Feldman, a former US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, said many of the Pakistani officials who dealt with India were also responsible for Afghanistan, and that tensions could impact peace talks. He said a lack of US focus on South Asia was problematic. "We need much more focus and strategic thinking from the Trump Administration on this region, and an effective way of implementing that strategy," Feldman said.

US tries to safeguard Afghan peace push from India-Pakistan crisis

At least 20 people including children were killed in southern Afghanistan by flash floods that engulfed up to 2,000 homes and swept away cars, the UN agency coordinating relief efforts said on Saturday.

Heavy rains struck Kandahar city and six districts on Friday, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said in a statement.

Afghan government officials said hundreds of houses in Herat province were destroyed in flash floods.

Flood-affected families have been evacuated to secure areas in the districts and Kandahar city, including schools, mosques and government buildings.

At least 10 people, including children, were missing in Arghandab, Daman, Spin Boldak and Dand districts.

The OCHA statement said a large number of Kochi (nomadic) families, about 500 people, were stranded on the river bank and there was an urgent need for air support to rescue them.

The rugged mountainous terrain, heavy snowfall and lack of roads were retarding the pace of immediate relief and rescue operations, said a senior official working for the Afghanistan Natural Disaster Management Authority in Kabul.

At least 20 people including children were killed in southern Afghanistan by flash floods that engulfed up to 2,000 homes and swept away cars, the UN agency coordinating relief efforts said on Saturday.

At least 20 people including children were killed in southern Afghanistan by flash floods that engulfed up to 2,000 homes and swept away cars, the UN agency coordinating relief efforts said on Saturday. Heavy rains struck Kandahar city and six districts on Friday, the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) said in a statement. Afghan government officials said hundreds of houses in Herat province were destroyed in flash floods. Flood-affected families have been evacuated to secure areas in the districts and Kandahar city, including schools, mosques and government buildings. At least 10 people, including children, were missing in Arghandab, Daman, Spin Boldak and Dand districts. The OCHA statement said a large number of Kochi (nomadic) families, about 500 people, were stranded on the river bank and there was an urgent need for air support to rescue them. The rugged mountainous terrain, heavy snowfall and lack of roads were retarding the pace of immediate relief and rescue operations, said a senior official working for the Afghanistan Natural Disaster Management Authority in Kabul.

Flash floods in Afghanistan kill at least 20

The first trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, India and China took place in Kabul on Saturday.&nbsp;

The meeting was headed by Afghan Deputy Foreign Minister for political affairs Idrees Zaman. Indian Ambassador to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar and Chinese Ambassador to Afghanistan Liu Jinsong also participated.

Calling China and India as, "old friends and good neighbours" of Afghanistan, Idrees Zaman said his country counts on both.&nbsp;

Zaman said, "that the three countries should further focus on training civil and military personnel, mining, increased energy production, agriculture and transportation development, regional connectivity, establishing a joint chamber of commerce between the three countries, and areas of mutual economic interest."

According to a statement from Afghan foreign ministry, Indian and Chinese ambassadors appreciated their contribution in holding the meeting and added both New Delhi and Bejing "are ready for necessary cooperation in the mentioned areas."

The meet is significant since India, China are increasing there cooperation for Afghanistan's development.&nbsp;

After the informal Wuhan Summit, last year in April between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping, both New Delhi and Beijing jointly agreed to train Afghan diplomats.

The first trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, India and China took place in Kabul on Saturday. The meeting was headed by Afghan Deputy Foreign Minister for political affairs Idrees Zaman.

The first trilateral meeting between Afghanistan, India and China took place in Kabul on Saturday. The meeting was headed by Afghan Deputy Foreign Minister for political affairs Idrees Zaman. Indian Ambassador to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar and Chinese Ambassador to Afghanistan Liu Jinsong also participated. Calling China and India as, "old friends and good neighbours" of Afghanistan, Idrees Zaman said his country counts on both. Zaman said, "that the three countries should further focus on training civil and military personnel, mining, increased energy production, agriculture and transportation development, regional connectivity, establishing a joint chamber of commerce between the three countries, and areas of mutual economic interest." According to a statement from Afghan foreign ministry, Indian and Chinese ambassadors appreciated their contribution in holding the meeting and added both New Delhi and Bejing "are ready for necessary cooperation in the mentioned areas." The meet is significant since India, China are increasing there cooperation for Afghanistan's development. After the informal Wuhan Summit, last year in April between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping, both New Delhi and Beijing jointly agreed to train Afghan diplomats.

Afghanistan refers to India, China as 'old friends & good neighbours' at first trilateral meeting

At least 25 Afghan soldiers were killed as they repelled an attack on Friday by the Taliban on a military base in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, officials said.

Afghan forces killed at least nine Taliban insurgents, including three suicide bombers, during the attack by the hardline Islamist group, the provincial governor said in a statement. Afghan commando forces were clearing the area, he said.

The 215 Maiwand Army Corps came under attack in the early hours of Friday, said a senior security official in Kabul, adding the attack was the Taliban's third attempt to overrun Camp Shorab, a strategic military installation, in the past 48 hours.

An Afghan security forces officer in Helmand said one of the suicide bombers had blown himself up in a dining room inside the military corps compound, and clashes continued.

The U.S. advise and assist mission, which works alongside Afghan troops, operates from the base. Foreign forces present at the base were safe as the Taliban could not breach the walls of their compound, two other security officials said.

Security officials in Kabul say clashes between the Taliban and government forces backed by foreign forces have not subsided even as U.S. and Taliban officials are holding talks in Qatar to seek a negotiated solution to end Afghanistan's long war.

Repeated raids on Camp Shorab, a sprawling base situated on what used to be Camp Bastion, the former British airbase, and Camp Leatherneck, the old U.S. Marine Corps base in Helmand, have underlined the Taliban's ability to target critical security installations.

The Taliban said their fighters were engaged in clashes with US and Afghan forces at Shorab base.

"Heavy clashes continue as tens of members of the enemy forces had been killed or were wounded," Qari Yousuf Ahmadi, a Taliban spokesman, said in a statement.

PRE-ATTACK RECONNAISSANCE

Taliban commanders based in Helmand said their suicide bombers who stormed the Shorab base had worked in the same camp previously.

“It is the same military base which we attacked in 2012 with a plan to kill Prince Harry. In recent months we provided special training to these attackers and arranged a visit to the base several times," said a commander.

A second Taliban commander said some members of the Afghan national army had helped the suicide bombers conduct a reconnaissance of the camp.

Prince Harry, Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, was in Afghanistan in 2012 on a four-month tour as a British Army officer. He was based in Camp Bastion on the front line in the NATO-led war against Taliban insurgents who said at the time that they were doing everything in their power to kidnap or kill him.

The United States has about 14,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of a NATO-led mission, known as Resolute Support, and a separate U.S. counter-terrorism mission largely directed against militant groups like Islamic State and al Qaeda.

US President Donald Trump has said he plans to reduce US forces as talks with the Taliban progress.

In addition, some 8,000 troops from 38 other countries in Resolute Support provide training and support for Afghan forces.

Helmand is seen as a strategic target for the militants as large stretches of the province provide a source of much of the world’s illegal opium supply. During more than a decade of international intervention, it was the deadliest province for foreign troops, claiming nearly 1,000 lives.

In the past week, Afghan soldiers also thwarted a Taliban attack in Zabul province, killing 28 Taliban fighters and at least 15 members of the insurgent groups were killed in air strikes conducted by the Afghan air force in Kandahar province, a senior security official said.

At least 25 Afghan soldiers were killed as they repelled an attack on Friday by the Taliban on a military base in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, officials said.

At least 25 Afghan soldiers were killed as they repelled an attack on Friday by the Taliban on a military base in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan, officials said. Afghan forces killed at least nine Taliban insurgents, including three suicide bombers, during the attack by the hardline Islamist group, the provincial governor said in a statement. Afghan commando forces were clearing the area, he said. The 215 Maiwand Army Corps came under attack in the early hours of Friday, said a senior security official in Kabul, adding the attack was the Taliban's third attempt to overrun Camp Shorab, a strategic military installation, in the past 48 hours. An Afghan security forces officer in Helmand said one of the suicide bombers had blown himself up in a dining room inside the military corps compound, and clashes continued. The U.S. advise and assist mission, which works alongside Afghan troops, operates from the base. Foreign forces present at the base were safe as the Taliban could not breach the walls of their compound, two other security officials said. Security officials in Kabul say clashes between the Taliban and government forces backed by foreign forces have not subsided even as U.S. and Taliban officials are holding talks in Qatar to seek a negotiated solution to end Afghanistan's long war. Repeated raids on Camp Shorab, a sprawling base situated on what used to be Camp Bastion, the former British airbase, and Camp Leatherneck, the old U.S. Marine Corps base in Helmand, have underlined the Taliban's ability to target critical security installations. The Taliban said their fighters were engaged in clashes with US and Afghan forces at Shorab base. "Heavy clashes continue as tens of members of the enemy forces had been killed or were wounded," Qari Yousuf Ahmadi, a Taliban spokesman, said in a statement. PRE-ATTACK RECONNAISSANCE Taliban commanders based in Helmand said their suicide bombers who stormed the Shorab base had worked in the same camp previously. “It is the same military base which we attacked in 2012 with a plan to kill Prince Harry. In recent months we provided special training to these attackers and arranged a visit to the base several times," said a commander. A second Taliban commander said some members of the Afghan national army had helped the suicide bombers conduct a reconnaissance of the camp. Prince Harry, Queen Elizabeth’s grandson, was in Afghanistan in 2012 on a four-month tour as a British Army officer. He was based in Camp Bastion on the front line in the NATO-led war against Taliban insurgents who said at the time that they were doing everything in their power to kidnap or kill him. The United States has about 14,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of a NATO-led mission, known as Resolute Support, and a separate U.S. counter-terrorism mission largely directed against militant groups like Islamic State and al Qaeda. US President Donald Trump has said he plans to reduce US forces as talks with the Taliban progress. In addition, some 8,000 troops from 38 other countries in Resolute Support provide training and support for Afghan forces. Helmand is seen as a strategic target for the militants as large stretches of the province provide a source of much of the world’s illegal opium supply. During more than a decade of international intervention, it was the deadliest province for foreign troops, claiming nearly 1,000 lives. In the past week, Afghan soldiers also thwarted a Taliban attack in Zabul province, killing 28 Taliban fighters and at least 15 members of the insurgent groups were killed in air strikes conducted by the Afghan air force in Kandahar province, a senior security official said.

At least 23 Afghan security forces killed by Taliban on US-Afghan base

The United States on Thursday offered a $1 million reward for information on a son of late Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, seeing him as an emerging face of extremism.

The location of Hamza bin Laden, sometimes dubbed the "crown prince of jihad," has been the subject of speculation for years with reports of him living in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria or under house arrest in Iran.

"Hamza bin Laden is the son of deceased former AQ leader Osama bin Laden and is emerging as a leader in the AQ franchise," a State Department statement said, referring to Al-Qaeda.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
WANTED. Up to $1 million for information on Hamza bin Laden, an emerging al-Qa'ida leader. Hamza is son of Usama bin Laden and has threatened attacks against the United States and allies. Relocation possible. Submit a tip, get paid. <a href="https://t.co/LtBVhsrwTc">https://t.co/LtBVhsrwTc</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RFJ?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RFJ</a> <a href="https://t.co/gmx5hkoSzQ">pic.twitter.com/gmx5hkoSzQ</a>
— Rewards for Justice (@Rewards4Justice) <a href="https://twitter.com/Rewards4Justice/status/1101239592903168006?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 28, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

The State Department said that it would offer $1 million for information leading to his location in any country.

Bin Laden, who according to the United States is around 30, has threatened attacks against the United States to avenge the 2011 killing of his father, who was living in hiding in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad, by US special forces.

US intelligence agencies increasingly see the younger bin Laden as a successor to his father for the mantle of global jihad, especially as the even more extreme Islamic State group is down to its last sliver of land in Syria.

In 2015, bin Laden released an audio message urging jihadists in Syria to unite, claiming that the fight in the war-torn country paves the way to "liberating Palestine."

And in a message a year later, following in the footsteps of his father, he urged the overthrow of the leadership in their native Saudi Arabia.

Osama bin Laden's three surviving wives and his children were quietly allowed to return to Saudi Arabia after his killing.

But Hamza bin Laden's whereabouts have been a matter of dispute. He is believed to have spent years along with his mother in Iran, despite Al-Qaeda's strident denunciations of the Shiite branch of Islam that dominates the country.

Observers say that the clerical regime in Tehran kept him under house arrest as a way to maintain pressure on rival Saudi Arabia as well as on Al-Qaeda, dissuading the Sunni militants from attacking Iran.

One of Hamza bin Laden's half-brothers told The Guardian last year that Hamza's whereabouts were unknown but that he may be in Afghanistan.

He also said that Hamza bin Laden married the daughter of Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker in Al-Qaeda's September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States that killed some 3,000 people and sparked the US intervention in Afghanistan.

The United States on Thursday offered a $1 million reward for information on a son of late Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, seeing him as an emerging face of extremism.

The United States on Thursday offered a $1 million reward for information on a son of late Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, seeing him as an emerging face of extremism. The location of Hamza bin Laden, sometimes dubbed the "crown prince of jihad," has been the subject of speculation for years with reports of him living in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Syria or under house arrest in Iran. "Hamza bin Laden is the son of deceased former AQ leader Osama bin Laden and is emerging as a leader in the AQ franchise," a State Department statement said, referring to Al-Qaeda. WANTED. Up to $1 million for information on Hamza bin Laden, an emerging al-Qa'ida leader. Hamza is son of Usama bin Laden and has threatened attacks against the United States and allies. Relocation possible. Submit a tip, get paid. https://t.co/LtBVhsrwTc #RFJ pic.twitter.com/gmx5hkoSzQ — Rewards for Justice (@Rewards4Justice) February 28, 2019 × The State Department said that it would offer $1 million for information leading to his location in any country. Bin Laden, who according to the United States is around 30, has threatened attacks against the United States to avenge the 2011 killing of his father, who was living in hiding in the Pakistani garrison town of Abbottabad, by US special forces. US intelligence agencies increasingly see the younger bin Laden as a successor to his father for the mantle of global jihad, especially as the even more extreme Islamic State group is down to its last sliver of land in Syria. In 2015, bin Laden released an audio message urging jihadists in Syria to unite, claiming that the fight in the war-torn country paves the way to "liberating Palestine." And in a message a year later, following in the footsteps of his father, he urged the overthrow of the leadership in their native Saudi Arabia. Osama bin Laden's three surviving wives and his children were quietly allowed to return to Saudi Arabia after his killing. But Hamza bin Laden's whereabouts have been a matter of dispute. He is believed to have spent years along with his mother in Iran, despite Al-Qaeda's strident denunciations of the Shiite branch of Islam that dominates the country. Observers say that the clerical regime in Tehran kept him under house arrest as a way to maintain pressure on rival Saudi Arabia as well as on Al-Qaeda, dissuading the Sunni militants from attacking Iran. One of Hamza bin Laden's half-brothers told The Guardian last year that Hamza's whereabouts were unknown but that he may be in Afghanistan. He also said that Hamza bin Laden married the daughter of Mohammed Atta, the lead hijacker in Al-Qaeda's September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States that killed some 3,000 people and sparked the US intervention in Afghanistan.

US offers $1 million reward to find bin Laden's son

An influential former adviser to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, now a leading electoral rival, has accused his old boss of hampering peace with the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/taliban-says-held-extensive-talks-with-us-officials-reconvening-saturday-200349">Taliban </a>by blocking efforts to include a broad range of voices in the process.

With Afghan politics in deep confusion as talks between the United States and Taliban representatives proceed, Mohammad Haneef Atmar, a former national security adviser once seen as the second-most powerful man in <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistan-to-hold-grand-council-of-tribal-elders-political-leaders-to-discuss-peace-talks-199665">Afghanistan</a>, accused Ghani of exploiting the uncertainty to gain re-election.

"The president is making things very difficult by taking measures that are extremely unfavourable to the process," Atmar, who resigned from the government last year, told Reuters in an interview.

The comments reflect the extent to which the peace process has become tied into upcoming presidential elections at which Atmar, a veteran of decades of Afghanistan's treacherous and often bloody politics, will be a leading contender.

Like other candidates, Atmar has called for Ghani to step down in May, when his five-year term ends, to clear the way for a caretaker government that would allow a broader-based approach to the peace process.

"We are certainly supportive of a caretaker government when on 21st of May the mandate of this government comes to an end. Given his record we are much better off without him."

Harun Chakhansuri, Ghani's spokesman, said the president has clear plans for bringing peace to Afghanistan and had repeatedly called on the Taliban to talk with the Afghan side.

"The only person that has a proper plan, road map and initiative for peace is President Ghani, and the consensus on peace is the result of this road map," Chakhansuri told Reuters.

Chakhansuri added that the president would stay until elections were held and said Atmar's call for Ghani to step down was "baseless".

Ghani has so far been sidelined from any direct role in the process by the Taliban's refusal to talk to what it considers a US-appointed "puppet" government.

UNCERTAINTY OVER PEACE TALKS

He was reportedly furious when a group of leading politicians outside the government, including both Atmar and former President Hamid Karzai, met Taliban officials in Moscow.

Atmar said the politicians were keen to convince the Taliban to talk to Ghani's peace representatives but had been blocked by the president, who has pushed the United Nations not to relax travel restrictions on Taliban representatives.

"First he criticized everyone who participated and second, he is writing letter to UN to bar the Taliban from travel," Atmar said.

An ethnic Pashtun former intelligence officer in the communist government who lost a leg fighting the anti-Soviet Mujahideen in the 1980s, Atmar, who speaks fluent English, is well liked by Western officials.

He was a central figure behind a 2014 bilateral security agreement with the United States and a 2016 reconciliation accord that allowed former warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar to return to Kabul and rejoin the political mainstream.

If he won the election, he said, his priorities would be national unity, peace, justice and cooperation domestically and beyond.

Atmar's rift with Ghani adds to the uncertainty among many Afghans about the future and questioning whether the peace talks between the United States and the Taliban will bear fruit.

The election is also shaping up as a major challenge for the government, with rising speculation that the poll may be delayed or not held at all if a peace deal is reached with the Taliban.

Atmar, who resigned over "serious differences" with Ghani, said he was not confident the election would be free of the fraud that marred both the 2014 presidential election and last October's parliamentary election.

"We are absolutely concerned about interference of the government in the election and he is seriously abusing his incumbency power," Atmar said.

"If he does not change the way he is behaving, he will be seen as the main obstacle not only to peace but holding a free and fair election."

An influential former adviser to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, now a leading electoral rival, has accused his old boss of hampering peace with the Taliban by blocking efforts to include a broad range of voices in the process.

An influential former adviser to Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, now a leading electoral rival, has accused his old boss of hampering peace with the Taliban by blocking efforts to include a broad range of voices in the process. With Afghan politics in deep confusion as talks between the United States and Taliban representatives proceed, Mohammad Haneef Atmar, a former national security adviser once seen as the second-most powerful man in Afghanistan, accused Ghani of exploiting the uncertainty to gain re-election. "The president is making things very difficult by taking measures that are extremely unfavourable to the process," Atmar, who resigned from the government last year, told Reuters in an interview. The comments reflect the extent to which the peace process has become tied into upcoming presidential elections at which Atmar, a veteran of decades of Afghanistan's treacherous and often bloody politics, will be a leading contender. Like other candidates, Atmar has called for Ghani to step down in May, when his five-year term ends, to clear the way for a caretaker government that would allow a broader-based approach to the peace process. "We are certainly supportive of a caretaker government when on 21st of May the mandate of this government comes to an end. Given his record we are much better off without him." Harun Chakhansuri, Ghani's spokesman, said the president has clear plans for bringing peace to Afghanistan and had repeatedly called on the Taliban to talk with the Afghan side. "The only person that has a proper plan, road map and initiative for peace is President Ghani, and the consensus on peace is the result of this road map," Chakhansuri told Reuters. Chakhansuri added that the president would stay until elections were held and said Atmar's call for Ghani to step down was "baseless". Ghani has so far been sidelined from any direct role in the process by the Taliban's refusal to talk to what it considers a US-appointed "puppet" government. UNCERTAINTY OVER PEACE TALKS He was reportedly furious when a group of leading politicians outside the government, including both Atmar and former President Hamid Karzai, met Taliban officials in Moscow. Atmar said the politicians were keen to convince the Taliban to talk to Ghani's peace representatives but had been blocked by the president, who has pushed the United Nations not to relax travel restrictions on Taliban representatives. "First he criticized everyone who participated and second, he is writing letter to UN to bar the Taliban from travel," Atmar said. An ethnic Pashtun former intelligence officer in the communist government who lost a leg fighting the anti-Soviet Mujahideen in the 1980s, Atmar, who speaks fluent English, is well liked by Western officials. He was a central figure behind a 2014 bilateral security agreement with the United States and a 2016 reconciliation accord that allowed former warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar to return to Kabul and rejoin the political mainstream. If he won the election, he said, his priorities would be national unity, peace, justice and cooperation domestically and beyond. Atmar's rift with Ghani adds to the uncertainty among many Afghans about the future and questioning whether the peace talks between the United States and the Taliban will bear fruit. The election is also shaping up as a major challenge for the government, with rising speculation that the poll may be delayed or not held at all if a peace deal is reached with the Taliban. Atmar, who resigned over "serious differences" with Ghani, said he was not confident the election would be free of the fraud that marred both the 2014 presidential election and last October's parliamentary election. "We are absolutely concerned about interference of the government in the election and he is seriously abusing his incumbency power," Atmar said. "If he does not change the way he is behaving, he will be seen as the main obstacle not only to peace but holding a free and fair election."

Election rival says Afghan President Ghani hindering peace deal

Pakistan has a long history of harbouring terrorists and America should not give Islamabad even a dollar until it corrects its behaviour, Indian-American former US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley has said as she praised the Trump administration for wisely restricting financial assistance to the country.

Haley, who has founded a new policy group 'Stand America Now' that will focus on how to keep the US safe, strong, and prosperous, wrote in an op-ed that when the US provides aid to nations, "it is more than fair to ask what the US Gets in return for our generosity" but instead Pakistan routinely opposed the US position at the UN on several issues.

"In 2017, Pakistan received nearly $1 billion in US foreign aid, the sixth most of any country. Much of the aid went to the Pakistani military. Some went for road, highway, and energy projects to assist the Pakistani people," Haley wrote in the op-ed 'Foreign Aid Should Only Go To Friends'.&nbsp;

"On all key votes at the UN, Pakistan opposed the American position 76 per cent of the time. Much more troubling, Pakistan also has a long history of harbouring terrorists who have killed US troops in Afghanistan," she said.&nbsp;

Haley, the former Governor of South Carolina, added that the Trump Administration has "already wisely restricted assistance to Pakistan, but there is much more to be done."&nbsp;

Haley, who had stepped down as the US envoy to the UN at the end of last year, has previously strongly criticised Pakistan for continuing to harbour terrorists that turn around and kill American soldiers while taking billions of dollars in foreign aid from the US.&nbsp;

In an interview to US magazine 'The Atlantic' in December, Haley had said the US did not need to give money to countries that wish harm to America, go behind its back and try and "stop us from doing things".&nbsp;

"The one example I'll give you is, look at Pakistan. Giving them over a billion dollars, and they continue to harbour terrorists that turn around and kill our soldiers that's never okay. We shouldn't even give them a dollar until they correct it. Use the billion dollars. That's not a small amount of change," she had said.&nbsp;

Last September, the Trump administration cancelled $300 million in military aid to Islamabad for not doing enough against terror groups active on its soil. Trump had defended his administration's decision to stop hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan, saying Islamabad does not do "a damn thing" for the US and its government helped late al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden hide near its garrison city of Rawalpindi.&nbsp;

Haley's new policy group aims to promote public policies that strengthen America's economy, culture, and national security.&nbsp;

The group will provide information to grassroots Americans, to highlight the dangers and the opportunities they face domestically and internationally. It will advocate the policies that strengthen the US at all levels of government and in the broader media and culture.

Pakistan has a long history of harbouring terrorists and America should not give Islamabad even a dollar until it corrects its behaviour, Indian-American former US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley has said as she praised the Trump administration for wisely restricting financial assistance to the country.

Pakistan has a long history of harbouring terrorists and America should not give Islamabad even a dollar until it corrects its behaviour, Indian-American former US envoy to the UN Nikki Haley has said as she praised the Trump administration for wisely restricting financial assistance to the country. Haley, who has founded a new policy group 'Stand America Now' that will focus on how to keep the US safe, strong, and prosperous, wrote in an op-ed that when the US provides aid to nations, "it is more than fair to ask what the US Gets in return for our generosity" but instead Pakistan routinely opposed the US position at the UN on several issues. "In 2017, Pakistan received nearly $1 billion in US foreign aid, the sixth most of any country. Much of the aid went to the Pakistani military. Some went for road, highway, and energy projects to assist the Pakistani people," Haley wrote in the op-ed 'Foreign Aid Should Only Go To Friends'. "On all key votes at the UN, Pakistan opposed the American position 76 per cent of the time. Much more troubling, Pakistan also has a long history of harbouring terrorists who have killed US troops in Afghanistan," she said. Haley, the former Governor of South Carolina, added that the Trump Administration has "already wisely restricted assistance to Pakistan, but there is much more to be done." Haley, who had stepped down as the US envoy to the UN at the end of last year, has previously strongly criticised Pakistan for continuing to harbour terrorists that turn around and kill American soldiers while taking billions of dollars in foreign aid from the US. In an interview to US magazine 'The Atlantic' in December, Haley had said the US did not need to give money to countries that wish harm to America, go behind its back and try and "stop us from doing things". "The one example I'll give you is, look at Pakistan. Giving them over a billion dollars, and they continue to harbour terrorists that turn around and kill our soldiers that's never okay. We shouldn't even give them a dollar until they correct it. Use the billion dollars. That's not a small amount of change," she had said. Last September, the Trump administration cancelled $300 million in military aid to Islamabad for not doing enough against terror groups active on its soil. Trump had defended his administration's decision to stop hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid to Pakistan, saying Islamabad does not do "a damn thing" for the US and its government helped late al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden hide near its garrison city of Rawalpindi. Haley's new policy group aims to promote public policies that strengthen America's economy, culture, and national security. The group will provide information to grassroots Americans, to highlight the dangers and the opportunities they face domestically and internationally. It will advocate the policies that strengthen the US at all levels of government and in the broader media and culture.

US should not give aid to Pakistan until it stops harbouring terrorists: Nikki Haley 

Britain should give up control of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean "as rapidly as possible", the UN's top court said Monday in a decades-old row with Mauritius over an archipelago that is home to a huge US airbase.

The International Court of Justice said in a legal opinion that Britain had illegally split the islands from Mauritius before independence in 1968, after which the entire population of islanders was evicted.

Mauritius and the exiled Chagossians reacted with delight to the opinion delivered by judges in The Hague, which is non-binding but will carry heavy symbolic and political weight.

Mauritius Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth hailed a " historic moment for Mauritius and all its people".

"Our territorial integrity will now be made complete, and when that occurs, the Chagossians and their descendants will finally be able to return home," he said in a statement.

Britain, however, defended its hold on the islands, saying the Diego Garcia military base, which has been used to bomb Iraq and Afghanistan, protected people around the world.

"The United Kingdom's continued administration of the Chagos Archipelago constitutes a wrongful act," chief judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf said.

"The United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring an end to its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible, thereby allowing Mauritius to complete the decolonisation of its territory."

The UN General Assembly in 2017 adopted a resolution presented by Mauritius and backed by African countries asking the ICJ to offer legal advice on the island chain's fate and the legality of the deportations.

'So happy'&nbsp;

Colonial power Britain split off the islands from Mauritius -- which lies around 1,200 miles (2,000 kilometres) away -- three years before Port Louis gained independence in 1968. It also paid Mauritius three million pounds.

Between 1968 and 1973 around 2,000 Chagos islanders were evicted, to Britain, Mauritius and Seychelles, to make way for a military base on Diego Garcia, the largest of the islands. The evictions were described in a British diplomatic cable at the time as the removal of "some few Tarzans and Man Fridays".

Diego Garcia is now under lease to the United States and played a key strategic role in the Cold War before being used as a staging ground for US bombing campaigns against Afghanistan and Iraq in the 2000s.

Olivier Bancoult, chairman of the Mauritius-based Chagos Refugees Group, told reporters outside court that he was "so happy".

"It is a big victory against an injustice done by the British government for many years. We people have been suffering for many years -- I am so lucky today," he said.

The ICJ opinion comes as a stunning blow to London in a case that goes to the heart of historic issues of decolonisation and current questions about Britain's place in the world as it prepares to leave the European Union.

Mauritius' lawyer Philippe Sands said there was "no wiggle room" in the judges' view and that Britain would resist pressure to comply.

"I suspect the United Kingdom will say to itself, what resistance can we put up to moving forward -- and particularly in the context of Brexit, as the United Kingdom finds itself a little bit isolated in the world," he told reporters outside court.

Britain's foreign ministry rejected the court's opinion.

"The defence facilities on British Indian Ocean Territory help to protect people here in Britain and around the world from terrorist threats, organised crime and piracy," the Foreign and Commonwealth Office said in a statement.

'Shameful' evictions&nbsp;

A US official said Washington saw the case as "purely a bilateral dispute" between Britain and Mauritius. But he questioned the authority of the court, saying that issues should be resolved through negotiations between governments.

"It is inappropriate to seek to use the court's advisory function to settle disputes between states," the State Department official said in Washington.

When judges heard the case in September, Mauritius argued that it was illegal for Britain to have broken up its territory while it was still the colonial power.

Britain, while apologising for the "shameful" way it evicted thousands of islanders, insisted Mauritius was wrong to have brought the case to the ICJ.

The Chagos Islanders have already taken their battle through the courts in Britain, where their supporters included the current Labour opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn.

The legal opinion is only the 28th since the ICJ was set up in 1946 in the wake of World War II to provide a tribunal to resolve disputes between UN member states.

Previously such opinions include one on Israel's West Bank barrier in 2004, which judges said was illegal, and declaring legal Kosovo's declaration of independence in 2010.

Britain should give up control of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean "as rapidly as possible", the UN's top court said Monday in a decades-old row with Mauritius over an archipelago that is home to a huge US airbase.

Britain should give up control of the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean "as rapidly as possible", the UN's top court said Monday in a decades-old row with Mauritius over an archipelago that is home to a huge US airbase. The International Court of Justice said in a legal opinion that Britain had illegally split the islands from Mauritius before independence in 1968, after which the entire population of islanders was evicted. Mauritius and the exiled Chagossians reacted with delight to the opinion delivered by judges in The Hague, which is non-binding but will carry heavy symbolic and political weight. Mauritius Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth hailed a " historic moment for Mauritius and all its people". "Our territorial integrity will now be made complete, and when that occurs, the Chagossians and their descendants will finally be able to return home," he said in a statement. Britain, however, defended its hold on the islands, saying the Diego Garcia military base, which has been used to bomb Iraq and Afghanistan, protected people around the world. "The United Kingdom's continued administration of the Chagos Archipelago constitutes a wrongful act," chief judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf said. "The United Kingdom is under an obligation to bring an end to its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible, thereby allowing Mauritius to complete the decolonisation of its territory." The UN General Assembly in 2017 adopted a resolution presented by Mauritius and backed by African countries asking the ICJ to offer legal advice on the island chain's fate and the legality of the deportations. 'So happy' Colonial power Britain split off the islands from Mauritius -- which lies around 1,200 miles (2,000 kilometres) away -- three years before Port Louis gained independence in 1968. It also paid Mauritius three million pounds. Between 1968 and 1973 around 2,000 Chagos islanders were evicted, to Britain, Mauritius and Seychelles, to make way for a military base on Diego Garcia, the largest of the islands. The evictions were described in a British diplomatic cable at the time as the removal of "some few Tarzans and Man Fridays". Diego Garcia is now under lease to the United States and played a key strategic role in the Cold War before being used as a staging ground for US bombing campaigns against Afghanistan and Iraq in the 2000s. Olivier Bancoult, chairman of the Mauritius-based Chagos Refugees Group, told reporters outside court that he was "so happy". "It is a big victory against an injustice done by the British government for many years. We people have been suffering for many years -- I am so lucky today," he said. The ICJ opinion comes as a stunning blow to London in a case that goes to the heart of historic issues of decolonisation and current questions about Britain's place in the world as it prepares to leave the European Union. Mauritius' lawyer Philippe Sands said there was "no wiggle room" in the judges' view and that Britain would resist pressure to comply. "I suspect the United Kingdom will say to itself, what resistance can we put up to moving forward -- and particularly in the context of Brexit, as the United Kingdom finds itself a little bit isolated in the world," he told reporters outside court. Britain's foreign ministry rejected the court's opinion. "The defence facilities on British Indian Ocean Territory help to protect people here in Britain and around the world from terrorist threats, organised crime and piracy," the Foreign and Commonwealth Office said in a statement. 'Shameful' evictions A US official said Washington saw the case as "purely a bilateral dispute" between Britain and Mauritius. But he questioned the authority of the court, saying that issues should be resolved through negotiations between governments. "It is inappropriate to seek to use the court's advisory function to settle disputes between states," the State Department official said in Washington. When judges heard the case in September, Mauritius argued that it was illegal for Britain to have broken up its territory while it was still the colonial power. Britain, while apologising for the "shameful" way it evicted thousands of islanders, insisted Mauritius was wrong to have brought the case to the ICJ. The Chagos Islanders have already taken their battle through the courts in Britain, where their supporters included the current Labour opposition leader, Jeremy Corbyn. The legal opinion is only the 28th since the ICJ was set up in 1946 in the wake of World War II to provide a tribunal to resolve disputes between UN member states. Previously such opinions include one on Israel's West Bank barrier in 2004, which judges said was illegal, and declaring legal Kosovo's declaration of independence in 2010.

Britain should give up Chagos Islands: UN court

More civilians were killed in the Afghan war in 2018 than during any other year on record after nearly two decades of fighting, according to a UN report released Sunday.

Civilian deaths jumped by 11 per cent from 2017 with 3,804 people killed and another 7,189 wounded, according to the UN figures, as suicide attacks and bombings wreaked havoc across the war-torn country.

The report's release comes a day before the US and the Taliban hold their next round of talks aimed at ending the conflict, raising tentative hopes for peace along with fears that an American withdrawal could spark an even bloodier civil war. &nbsp;

The talks in Doha follow years of escalating violence in Afghanistan. According to the UN, at least 32,000 civilians have been killed and another 60,000 wounded in the last decade when the organisation began compiling the data.

The uptick in violence in 2018 coincides with a significant increase in the number of deaths caused by the "deliberate targeting of civilians", according to the report, mostly stemming from suicide attacks by insurgents allied with the Taliban or Islamic State (IS).

"It is time to put an end to this human misery and tragedy," said Tadamichi Yamamoto, the head of the UN mission in Afghanistan.&nbsp;

"The best way to halt the killings and maiming of civilians is to stop the fighting," he said.

At least 65 suicide attacks were recorded in 2018 -- the majority hitting Kabul -- with militants responsible for the death of more than 2,200 civilians across the country.&nbsp;

An increase in air strikes by US and Afghan forces also led to more civilian deaths in 2018, with more than 500 civilians killed by "aerial operations for the first time on record", the report noted.

The US intensified its air campaign against Taliban and IS fighters as Washington seeks to pile pressure on the militants, dropping twice as many munitions on insurgent positions in 2018 compared to the previous year.

Yamamoto said the civilian casualties were &nbsp;"wholly unacceptable" and called on all parties to take “immediate and additional concrete steps to stop a further escalation in the number of civilians harmed and lives destroyed".

More civilians were killed in the Afghan war in 2018 than during any other year on record after nearly two decades of fighting, according to a UN report released Sunday.

More civilians were killed in the Afghan war in 2018 than during any other year on record after nearly two decades of fighting, according to a UN report released Sunday. Civilian deaths jumped by 11 per cent from 2017 with 3,804 people killed and another 7,189 wounded, according to the UN figures, as suicide attacks and bombings wreaked havoc across the war-torn country. The report's release comes a day before the US and the Taliban hold their next round of talks aimed at ending the conflict, raising tentative hopes for peace along with fears that an American withdrawal could spark an even bloodier civil war. The talks in Doha follow years of escalating violence in Afghanistan. According to the UN, at least 32,000 civilians have been killed and another 60,000 wounded in the last decade when the organisation began compiling the data. The uptick in violence in 2018 coincides with a significant increase in the number of deaths caused by the "deliberate targeting of civilians", according to the report, mostly stemming from suicide attacks by insurgents allied with the Taliban or Islamic State (IS). "It is time to put an end to this human misery and tragedy," said Tadamichi Yamamoto, the head of the UN mission in Afghanistan. "The best way to halt the killings and maiming of civilians is to stop the fighting," he said. At least 65 suicide attacks were recorded in 2018 -- the majority hitting Kabul -- with militants responsible for the death of more than 2,200 civilians across the country. An increase in air strikes by US and Afghan forces also led to more civilian deaths in 2018, with more than 500 civilians killed by "aerial operations for the first time on record", the report noted. The US intensified its air campaign against Taliban and IS fighters as Washington seeks to pile pressure on the militants, dropping twice as many munitions on insurgent positions in 2018 compared to the previous year. Yamamoto said the civilian casualties were "wholly unacceptable" and called on all parties to take “immediate and additional concrete steps to stop a further escalation in the number of civilians harmed and lives destroyed".

Civilian deaths in Afghan war hit record in 2018: UN

In a big boost to regional connectivity, Afghanistan will from Sunday start sending its goods to India via the Chabahar port in Iran.&nbsp;

Afghan president Ashraf Ghani along with Indian ambassador to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar will be present at the event which will take place in the western Afghan city of Zaranj, the capital of Nimroz province bordering Iran.&nbsp;

While speaking exclusively to WION, Afghanistan President Ghani’s spokesman Haroon Chakhansuri said, ''The first trade convoy will involve 23 trucks carrying 570 tonnes of goods. The convoy will leave for Chabahar from the border city of Zaranj in a ceremony which will be attended by President Ashraf Ghani."

<img alt="Afghan shipment that will be sent to India via Chabahar port" data-entity-type="file" data-entity-uuid="ffc51694-c825-417f-a3fc-35707507099d" src="//cdn.wionews.com/sites/default/files/inline-images/Untitled%20design%20%287%29_1.jpg" />

Highlighting the importance of the port, Chakhansuri told WION, "Chabahar Port is the result of healthy cooperation between India, Iran and Afghanistan. This will ensure enhanced connectivity and economic growth for the countries."

Chakhansuri added,&nbsp;"Other countries in the region should utilise the economic potentials of regional projects and enhance state to state cooperation instead of having illegal relations with non-state actors." He did not however name any of the "other countries".&nbsp;

Last month on January 27, India formally established shipping lanes with the port by sending ships. It has already been decided that every two weeks Indian ships will go from three Indian ports--Mumbai, Kandla and Mundra.

Commercial operations at the port began on December 30, 2018 with the arrival of MV Macheras, a Cyprus registered bulk carrier with 72458 MT of corn cargo.

India took over the operations of a part of Shahid Beheshti Port, Chabahar in Iran during the Chabahar Trilateral Agreement meeting that was held on December 24, 2018. In 2017, India sent 1.1 million tonnes of wheat to Afghanistan through the Chabahar port.

India has been focusing on connecting with Afghanistan which is a landlocked country. Other than Chabahar, India already has ''India-Afghan air corridor'' with Afghanistan that was launched in 2017. Pakistan has not been keen to allow an overland route for India Afghan trade, that makes Chabahar's emergence as a game changer.

On February 26, Iran will celebrate "Chabahar day" in the city of Chabahar itself during which a number of conferences will take place to attract investors.

In a big boost to regional connectivity, Afghanistan will from Sunday start sending its goods to India via the Chabahar port in Iran. Afghan president Ashraf Ghani along with Indian ambassador to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar will be present at the event which will take place in the western Afghan city of Zaranj, the capital of Nimroz province bordering Iran.

In a big boost to regional connectivity, Afghanistan will from Sunday start sending its goods to India via the Chabahar port in Iran. Afghan president Ashraf Ghani along with Indian ambassador to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar will be present at the event which will take place in the western Afghan city of Zaranj, the capital of Nimroz province bordering Iran. While speaking exclusively to WION, Afghanistan President Ghani’s spokesman Haroon Chakhansuri said, ''The first trade convoy will involve 23 trucks carrying 570 tonnes of goods. The convoy will leave for Chabahar from the border city of Zaranj in a ceremony which will be attended by President Ashraf Ghani." Highlighting the importance of the port, Chakhansuri told WION, "Chabahar Port is the result of healthy cooperation between India, Iran and Afghanistan. This will ensure enhanced connectivity and economic growth for the countries." Chakhansuri added, "Other countries in the region should utilise the economic potentials of regional projects and enhance state to state cooperation instead of having illegal relations with non-state actors." He did not however name any of the "other countries". Last month on January 27, India formally established shipping lanes with the port by sending ships. It has already been decided that every two weeks Indian ships will go from three Indian ports--Mumbai, Kandla and Mundra. Commercial operations at the port began on December 30, 2018 with the arrival of MV Macheras, a Cyprus registered bulk carrier with 72458 MT of corn cargo. India took over the operations of a part of Shahid Beheshti Port, Chabahar in Iran during the Chabahar Trilateral Agreement meeting that was held on December 24, 2018. In 2017, India sent 1.1 million tonnes of wheat to Afghanistan through the Chabahar port. India has been focusing on connecting with Afghanistan which is a landlocked country. Other than Chabahar, India already has ''India-Afghan air corridor'' with Afghanistan that was launched in 2017. Pakistan has not been keen to allow an overland route for India Afghan trade, that makes Chabahar's emergence as a game changer. On February 26, Iran will celebrate "Chabahar day" in the city of Chabahar itself during which a number of conferences will take place to attract investors.

Afghanistan begins sending goods to Iran's Chabahar port, final destination is India

Afghanistan on Sunday got officially connected with India via the Chabahar port in Iran, a port in which India's has invested heavily. Afghan President Ashraf Ghani was in the city of Zaranj in the western province of Nimroz and along with Indian Ambassador Vinay Kumar led a ceremony in which Afghan goods were sent to Chabahar to be shipped to India. Also present during occasion were ambassadors of Iran, Turkey and diplomats of Indonesia and Kazakhstan.&nbsp;

Speaking at the flagging off ceremony, Afghan President said, "Afghanistan is no more a landlocked country", according to Afghan news agency Tolo news.

He announced that an elite unit from Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security(NDS) which is the Afghan intelligence agency will be deployed to protect the route that leads to Chabahar from Nimruz to ensure the safe flow of goods while meeting provincial council members in the province.&nbsp;

He also said that the people of Nimruz play a substantial role in guaranteeing export and import of goods from Afghanistan to Chabahar and beyond.

The export consignment, loaded in 23 trucks consisted of Afghan carpets, dry fruits, cotton, talc, stones and other items weighing 570 tonnes.&nbsp;

Speaking from Nimroz Indian envoy Vinay Kumar told WION that it was "a landmark event to provide access for the Afghan exporters to the large Indian market to build on the success of air corridor which has already helped increase Afghan exports to India by more than forty per cent."

Afghanistan has a huge trade surplus with India, the only such surplus for Afghans with any country. Bilateral trade between India and Afghanistan has seen a quantum jump of over 40% in 2018-19, crossing US dollar 1 billion. Afghan exports to India stood at US dollars 740 million last year.&nbsp;

The development comes days before Iran will organise Chabahar day. It will take place on 26th February and will be a business event to attract investment for the port. Secretary of the Shipping ministry of India will lead the Indian delegation with industry chamber CII taking a strong business delegation of 30 Indian companies.

The Chabahar project is a major connectivity program which will help India connect not only with landlocked Afghanistan but also central Asia. The project is also part of the international north-south corridor that will connect Mumbai to Moscow via Iran and Azerbaijan.&nbsp;

India has already established shipping links with the port with Indian ships going there every 2 weeks from 3 Indian ports--Mumbai, Kandla and Mundra. Commercial operations at the port began on 30th December 2018 with India formally taking over operations of a part of the Shahid Beheshti Port on 24th December 2018.

Afghanistan on Sunday got officially connected with India via the Chabahar port in Iran, a port in which India's has invested heavily. Afghan President Ashraf Ghani was in the city of Zaranj in the western province of Nimroz and along with Indian Ambassador Vinay Kumar led a ceremony in which Afghan goods were sent to Chabahar to be shipped to India.

Afghanistan on Sunday got officially connected with India via the Chabahar port in Iran, a port in which India's has invested heavily. Afghan President Ashraf Ghani was in the city of Zaranj in the western province of Nimroz and along with Indian Ambassador Vinay Kumar led a ceremony in which Afghan goods were sent to Chabahar to be shipped to India. Also present during occasion were ambassadors of Iran, Turkey and diplomats of Indonesia and Kazakhstan. Speaking at the flagging off ceremony, Afghan President said, "Afghanistan is no more a landlocked country", according to Afghan news agency Tolo news. He announced that an elite unit from Afghanistan's National Directorate of Security(NDS) which is the Afghan intelligence agency will be deployed to protect the route that leads to Chabahar from Nimruz to ensure the safe flow of goods while meeting provincial council members in the province. He also said that the people of Nimruz play a substantial role in guaranteeing export and import of goods from Afghanistan to Chabahar and beyond. The export consignment, loaded in 23 trucks consisted of Afghan carpets, dry fruits, cotton, talc, stones and other items weighing 570 tonnes. Speaking from Nimroz Indian envoy Vinay Kumar told WION that it was "a landmark event to provide access for the Afghan exporters to the large Indian market to build on the success of air corridor which has already helped increase Afghan exports to India by more than forty per cent." Afghanistan has a huge trade surplus with India, the only such surplus for Afghans with any country. Bilateral trade between India and Afghanistan has seen a quantum jump of over 40% in 2018-19, crossing US dollar 1 billion. Afghan exports to India stood at US dollars 740 million last year. The development comes days before Iran will organise Chabahar day. It will take place on 26th February and will be a business event to attract investment for the port. Secretary of the Shipping ministry of India will lead the Indian delegation with industry chamber CII taking a strong business delegation of 30 Indian companies. The Chabahar project is a major connectivity program which will help India connect not only with landlocked Afghanistan but also central Asia. The project is also part of the international north-south corridor that will connect Mumbai to Moscow via Iran and Azerbaijan. India has already established shipping links with the port with Indian ships going there every 2 weeks from 3 Indian ports--Mumbai, Kandla and Mundra. Commercial operations at the port began on 30th December 2018 with India formally taking over operations of a part of the Shahid Beheshti Port on 24th December 2018.

Chabahar port opens for Afghan goods as Afghanistan President says will deploy security to safeguard the route

The US and the Taliban are to meet in Qatar for fresh talks Monday seeking an end to 17 years of grinding conflict in Afghanistan, with the stakes ratcheting higher as the spring fighting season approaches.

Marathon talks held in Doha last month have stoked hopes of a breakthrough after the two sides walked away with a "draft framework" that included a Taliban commitment to prevent Afghanistan from once again becoming a safe haven for international terror groups.

It was the most substantial engagement by Washington with the militants since US forces ousted them from power in 2001. But there is still no accord on a timetable for a US withdrawal or a ceasefire -- both major issues on which previous efforts have foundered.&nbsp;

This time Washington's special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who has spearheaded the months-long effort, is expected to face an expanded Taliban negotiating team headed by Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's former deputy minister of foreign affairs.

Neither side has stated how long they expect the meetings to last or the details of what will be discussed.

Analysts say this round will likely see the Taliban push for the removal of its leaders from a UN travel blacklist, matched with pressure from the US for the militants to open a dialogue with the Afghan government.

"Both sides are going into this process with open minds and a sense of urgency as the weather gets warmer and fighting season draws closer," Graeme Smith, a consultant based with International Crisis Group, told AFP.

The Taliban have steadfastly refused to negotiate with Kabul, whom they dismiss as "puppets". They have also stated that, without a withdrawal timetable, further progress is "impossible".&nbsp;

US President Donald Trump's apparent eagerness to end America's longest war, the Afghan government's fear of being sidelined, and the coming of spring all weigh on the process. &nbsp; &nbsp;

"Eyes are on the Taliban to see if they are capable of compromising," said analyst Michael Semple.

"Can they come up with a sufficient compromise to agree to a formula for an intra-Afghan dialogue that absolutely involves the current Afghan government?"

Khalilzad, he added, "has stirred up the peace process in a way that nobody over the previous two decades had".

Pakistan's influence waning?&nbsp;

The gathering momentum has spurred fresh peace demonstrations and cautious hope in Afghanistan.

But there is also growing unease, with fears the government is being pushed aside and that progress which many Afghans have paid for with their lives could yet be undone if the US rushes for the exits.

Women's groups and civil society organisations have warned that a speedy withdrawal or lenient deal with the Taliban could pave the way for a return of their repressive rule, or an even bloodier civil war.

Many watched in astonishment earlier this month as Taliban militants shared meals and prayers with Afghan political leaders, including presidential contender Mohammad Atta Noor and former president Hamid Karzai, in Moscow.

But not one representative from the current administration of President Ashraf Ghani was present at the informal talks, deepening the sense of anxiety.

Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are also playing a role in the talks, as Russia and China watch closely, and many observers fear regional disputes could yet derail the process.

Pakistan, which has long wielded influence over the militants and been seen as key to any peace push, has already suggested that soaring tensions with its nuclear arch-rival India could disrupt the talks.&nbsp;

But Taliban expert Rahimullah Yusufzai said this time around Pakistan's stance may be more chest-thumping bravado than an actual threat.

He said that with the US and the Taliban talking to each other directly, "I think Pakistan's role will not be that important now."

'Challenging' climate

The talks have been buttressed by heavy snowfall across Afghanistan, sharply reducing fighting and providing much-needed space for negotiations.

But Yusufzai warned that another bloody fighting season will likely kick off once the snow melts, as the Taliban seeks to maintain its momentum on the battlefield to maximise pressure at the negotiating table. &nbsp;

"I think they have to keep up the momentum until a ceasefire," he said.

Others warned that more bloodshed might undercut the fragile gains the talks have achieved so far.

"It will be more challenging to pursue peace in the months that come if the Taliban... resort to a large-scale spring offensive," said Semple.

The US and the Taliban are to meet in Qatar for fresh talks Monday seeking an end to 17 years of grinding conflict in Afghanistan, with the stakes ratcheting higher as the spring fighting season approaches.

The US and the Taliban are to meet in Qatar for fresh talks Monday seeking an end to 17 years of grinding conflict in Afghanistan, with the stakes ratcheting higher as the spring fighting season approaches. Marathon talks held in Doha last month have stoked hopes of a breakthrough after the two sides walked away with a "draft framework" that included a Taliban commitment to prevent Afghanistan from once again becoming a safe haven for international terror groups. It was the most substantial engagement by Washington with the militants since US forces ousted them from power in 2001. But there is still no accord on a timetable for a US withdrawal or a ceasefire -- both major issues on which previous efforts have foundered. This time Washington's special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad, who has spearheaded the months-long effort, is expected to face an expanded Taliban negotiating team headed by Sher Mohammad Abbas Stanikzai, the Taliban's former deputy minister of foreign affairs. Neither side has stated how long they expect the meetings to last or the details of what will be discussed. Analysts say this round will likely see the Taliban push for the removal of its leaders from a UN travel blacklist, matched with pressure from the US for the militants to open a dialogue with the Afghan government. "Both sides are going into this process with open minds and a sense of urgency as the weather gets warmer and fighting season draws closer," Graeme Smith, a consultant based with International Crisis Group, told AFP. The Taliban have steadfastly refused to negotiate with Kabul, whom they dismiss as "puppets". They have also stated that, without a withdrawal timetable, further progress is "impossible". US President Donald Trump's apparent eagerness to end America's longest war, the Afghan government's fear of being sidelined, and the coming of spring all weigh on the process. "Eyes are on the Taliban to see if they are capable of compromising," said analyst Michael Semple. "Can they come up with a sufficient compromise to agree to a formula for an intra-Afghan dialogue that absolutely involves the current Afghan government?" Khalilzad, he added, "has stirred up the peace process in a way that nobody over the previous two decades had". Pakistan's influence waning? The gathering momentum has spurred fresh peace demonstrations and cautious hope in Afghanistan. But there is also growing unease, with fears the government is being pushed aside and that progress which many Afghans have paid for with their lives could yet be undone if the US rushes for the exits. Women's groups and civil society organisations have warned that a speedy withdrawal or lenient deal with the Taliban could pave the way for a return of their repressive rule, or an even bloodier civil war. Many watched in astonishment earlier this month as Taliban militants shared meals and prayers with Afghan political leaders, including presidential contender Mohammad Atta Noor and former president Hamid Karzai, in Moscow. But not one representative from the current administration of President Ashraf Ghani was present at the informal talks, deepening the sense of anxiety. Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are also playing a role in the talks, as Russia and China watch closely, and many observers fear regional disputes could yet derail the process. Pakistan, which has long wielded influence over the militants and been seen as key to any peace push, has already suggested that soaring tensions with its nuclear arch-rival India could disrupt the talks. But Taliban expert Rahimullah Yusufzai said this time around Pakistan's stance may be more chest-thumping bravado than an actual threat. He said that with the US and the Taliban talking to each other directly, "I think Pakistan's role will not be that important now." 'Challenging' climate The talks have been buttressed by heavy snowfall across Afghanistan, sharply reducing fighting and providing much-needed space for negotiations. But Yusufzai warned that another bloody fighting season will likely kick off once the snow melts, as the Taliban seeks to maintain its momentum on the battlefield to maximise pressure at the negotiating table. "I think they have to keep up the momentum until a ceasefire," he said. Others warned that more bloodshed might undercut the fragile gains the talks have achieved so far. "It will be more challenging to pursue peace in the months that come if the Taliban... resort to a large-scale spring offensive," said Semple.

Fear and hoping: Expectations surge ahead of new US-Taliban talks

In a big boost to regional connectivity, Afghanistan will formally start sending its goods to India from the Chabahar port in Iran from Sunday.&nbsp;

Afghan president Ashraf Ghani along with Indian ambassador to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar will be present at the event that will take place in the western Afghan city of Zaranj, the capital of Nimroz province bordering Iran.&nbsp;

"The first trade convoy will involve 23 trucks carrying 570 tonnes of goods. The convoy will leave for India from the border city of Zaranj in a ceremony which will be attended by President Ashraf Ghani," Afghanistan president's spokesman Haroon Chakhansuri told WION in an exclusive conversation.&nbsp;

Highlighting the importance of the port he said from Kabul ''Chabahar Port is the result of healthy cooperation between India, Iran and Afghanistan. This will ensure enhanced connectivity and economic growth for the countries."

Without naming any country in the region he suggested, "Other countries in the region should utilise the economic potentials of regional projects and enhance state-to-state cooperation instead of having illegal relations with non-state actors."

on 27 January, India formally established shipping lanes with the port by sending ships. It has already been decided that every two weeks Indian ships will go from three Indian ports--Mumbai, Kandla and Mundra.

Commercial operations at the port began on December 30, 2018 with the arrival of MV Macheras, a Cyprus registered bulk carrier with 72458 MT of corn cargo.

India took over the operations of a part of Shahid Beheshti Port, Chabahar in Iran during the Chabahar Trilateral Agreement meeting that was held in December 2018. In 2017, India sent 1.1 million tonnes of Wheat to Afghanistan through the Chabahar port.

India has been focusing on connecting itself with Afghanistan which is a landlocked country. Other than Chabahar, India already has India Afghan air corridor with Afghanistan that was launched in 2017.&nbsp;

Pakistan has not been keen to allow an overland route for India Afghan trade, that makes Chabahar's emergence as a game changer.

On 26 February Iran will celebrate "Chabahar day" in the city of Chabahar itself during which a number of conferences will take place to attract investors.

In a big boost to regional connectivity, Afghanistan will formally start sending its goods to India from the Chabahar port in Iran from Sunday. Afghan president Ashraf Ghani along with Indian ambassador to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar will be present at the event that will take place in the western Afghan city of Zaranj, the capital of Nimroz province bordering Iran.

In a big boost to regional connectivity, Afghanistan will formally start sending its goods to India from the Chabahar port in Iran from Sunday. Afghan president Ashraf Ghani along with Indian ambassador to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar will be present at the event that will take place in the western Afghan city of Zaranj, the capital of Nimroz province bordering Iran. "The first trade convoy will involve 23 trucks carrying 570 tonnes of goods. The convoy will leave for India from the border city of Zaranj in a ceremony which will be attended by President Ashraf Ghani," Afghanistan president's spokesman Haroon Chakhansuri told WION in an exclusive conversation. Highlighting the importance of the port he said from Kabul ''Chabahar Port is the result of healthy cooperation between India, Iran and Afghanistan. This will ensure enhanced connectivity and economic growth for the countries." Without naming any country in the region he suggested, "Other countries in the region should utilise the economic potentials of regional projects and enhance state-to-state cooperation instead of having illegal relations with non-state actors." on 27 January, India formally established shipping lanes with the port by sending ships. It has already been decided that every two weeks Indian ships will go from three Indian ports--Mumbai, Kandla and Mundra. Commercial operations at the port began on December 30, 2018 with the arrival of MV Macheras, a Cyprus registered bulk carrier with 72458 MT of corn cargo. India took over the operations of a part of Shahid Beheshti Port, Chabahar in Iran during the Chabahar Trilateral Agreement meeting that was held in December 2018. In 2017, India sent 1.1 million tonnes of Wheat to Afghanistan through the Chabahar port. India has been focusing on connecting itself with Afghanistan which is a landlocked country. Other than Chabahar, India already has India Afghan air corridor with Afghanistan that was launched in 2017. Pakistan has not been keen to allow an overland route for India Afghan trade, that makes Chabahar's emergence as a game changer. On 26 February Iran will celebrate "Chabahar day" in the city of Chabahar itself during which a number of conferences will take place to attract investors.

Afghanistan all set to get connected to India via Chabahar from Sunday

Ali Ahmad Alizai has no choice but to obey when the Taliban come knocking on his door demanding food, shelter or a slice of his hard-earned harvest to fund their insurgency.

"The Taliban run a dictatorship here. They have their own laws. We have some security, but no freedom," the farmer told AFP by telephone from a militant-controlled district of Afghanistan's southern Helmand province.

Alizai is one of millions living under Taliban rule in Afghanistan, where the group controls more territory than at any time since being toppled in 2001 by US-led forces.

As momentum for peace talks builds, with a fresh round of negotiations between the Taliban and Washington set to begin in Doha on Monday, testimonies from Afghans like him paint a picture of what life might be like should the militants return to power if the US exits its longest war.

In some ways, Taliban governance appears to have evolved, with the insurgents open to some small compromises as Afghans refuse to part with their hard-won freedoms.

But zeal for the harsh brand of Islamic justice that defined their former regime is unwavering and remains pivotal to enforcing obedience today in the countryside under its influence.&nbsp;

Abdul Bari, who abandoned his home in an insurgent fiefdom in Uruzgan province three months ago, spoke darkly of life under the white flag of the Taliban.

"They would stage public executions from time to time," the 66-year-old told AFP in Kandahar, where he fled with his family.

"Their fighters would decide the fate of people."

'People are terrified'

Taliban courts preside over justice in huge swathes of the country -- even areas ostensibly under government control, said Ashley Jackson, a research associate with the Overseas Development Institute.

Verdicts under their own strict interpretation of Sharia law are swift, and punishments severe, from limbs amputated for theft to condemned prisoners hung by roadsides as a warning.

"People are terrified of them," said Sayed Omar, who escaped Taliban brutality in Uruzgan.

"They have not changed, they are the same as they were during their rule."

Mohammad Qasem, a shopkeeper who spoke to AFP by phone from another Taliban bastion in Kandahar, said the militants had banned smartphones and confined women to the home -- effectively reversing the clock to 1996, when they stormed to power.

But they were "a bit easier" on men having shorter beards -- a floggable offence under their former regime.

The Taliban have told AFP they want to establish "an Islamic system" as opposed to the democracy built since 2001, but that they have modified their stance on some issues including dropping a ban on the education of women and girls.

AFP was unable to speak to any women currently living under Taliban rule.

Human Rights Watch senior researcher Heather Barr said in some areas the militants now allow girls to attend primary school, "if it was segregated by gender, the teachers were female, and the Taliban controlled the curriculum".

However, it was "ridiculous and harmful" to suggest that proved the Taliban had softened their stance on women, she said.

"Limiting girls to primary education is an extreme form of misogyny ... Too many men are in a rush to argue that a Taliban deal will be fine for women. Women know better -- but is anyone listening to them?"

Qasem said the restrictions were unpopular. Times have changed since the Taliban were deposed, he added.

"This time, if they don't change, it might create a backlash," he told AFP.

There are some signs the insurgents are listening.

Phone use is permitted during the day and televisions watched without fear of punishment, a far cry from the violent Taliban purges against technology in the past.

"What they say is don't listen to music, listen to sermons and religious programs. But there is no smashing of TV sets anymore," Thomas Ruttig, from the Afghanistan Analysts Network, told AFP.&nbsp;

Carrot and stick

The Taliban are also keen to show they can govern a modern nation.

In territory where control is split with the government, the militants ensure teachers and clinic staff show up for work and prod electricity providers to fix power outages.

Jackson said this Taliban "shadow government" exists partly to embarrass corrupt local politicians, but also to exert soft power and demonstrate competence.

"It's both carrot and stick. I think they realise they have to provide... some tangible benefit," Jackson said.

Mullah Rauf, a former Taliban commander, said the insurgents had evolved.

"They can't have a hardline government anymore. Nowhere in the world do such governments exist," he told AFP by telephone from Panjwaee, a Taliban district in Kandahar.

As America pushes for a peace deal, many Afghans want to know the Taliban's intentions once foreign troops leave.

The militants say they do not want to rule by force, but share power with other parties.

Taliban justice is one area "where compromise will be the hardest", Jackson said.

Ruttig said the militants had not abandoned their ideology, but know "they cannot rule against the population", and therefore might be open to some compromise.

"But whether that's good enough for most Afghans -- who now have tasted completely different freedoms than what they had under the Taliban -- that will be up to the Afghan population," Ruttig said.

Ali Ahmad Alizai has no choice but to obey when the Taliban come knocking on his door demanding food, shelter or a slice of his hard-earned harvest to fund their insurgency.

Ali Ahmad Alizai has no choice but to obey when the Taliban come knocking on his door demanding food, shelter or a slice of his hard-earned harvest to fund their insurgency. "The Taliban run a dictatorship here. They have their own laws. We have some security, but no freedom," the farmer told AFP by telephone from a militant-controlled district of Afghanistan's southern Helmand province. Alizai is one of millions living under Taliban rule in Afghanistan, where the group controls more territory than at any time since being toppled in 2001 by US-led forces. As momentum for peace talks builds, with a fresh round of negotiations between the Taliban and Washington set to begin in Doha on Monday, testimonies from Afghans like him paint a picture of what life might be like should the militants return to power if the US exits its longest war. In some ways, Taliban governance appears to have evolved, with the insurgents open to some small compromises as Afghans refuse to part with their hard-won freedoms. But zeal for the harsh brand of Islamic justice that defined their former regime is unwavering and remains pivotal to enforcing obedience today in the countryside under its influence. Abdul Bari, who abandoned his home in an insurgent fiefdom in Uruzgan province three months ago, spoke darkly of life under the white flag of the Taliban. "They would stage public executions from time to time," the 66-year-old told AFP in Kandahar, where he fled with his family. "Their fighters would decide the fate of people." 'People are terrified' Taliban courts preside over justice in huge swathes of the country -- even areas ostensibly under government control, said Ashley Jackson, a research associate with the Overseas Development Institute. Verdicts under their own strict interpretation of Sharia law are swift, and punishments severe, from limbs amputated for theft to condemned prisoners hung by roadsides as a warning. "People are terrified of them," said Sayed Omar, who escaped Taliban brutality in Uruzgan. "They have not changed, they are the same as they were during their rule." Mohammad Qasem, a shopkeeper who spoke to AFP by phone from another Taliban bastion in Kandahar, said the militants had banned smartphones and confined women to the home -- effectively reversing the clock to 1996, when they stormed to power. But they were "a bit easier" on men having shorter beards -- a floggable offence under their former regime. The Taliban have told AFP they want to establish "an Islamic system" as opposed to the democracy built since 2001, but that they have modified their stance on some issues including dropping a ban on the education of women and girls. AFP was unable to speak to any women currently living under Taliban rule. Human Rights Watch senior researcher Heather Barr said in some areas the militants now allow girls to attend primary school, "if it was segregated by gender, the teachers were female, and the Taliban controlled the curriculum". However, it was "ridiculous and harmful" to suggest that proved the Taliban had softened their stance on women, she said. "Limiting girls to primary education is an extreme form of misogyny ... Too many men are in a rush to argue that a Taliban deal will be fine for women. Women know better -- but is anyone listening to them?" Qasem said the restrictions were unpopular. Times have changed since the Taliban were deposed, he added. "This time, if they don't change, it might create a backlash," he told AFP. There are some signs the insurgents are listening. Phone use is permitted during the day and televisions watched without fear of punishment, a far cry from the violent Taliban purges against technology in the past. "What they say is don't listen to music, listen to sermons and religious programs. But there is no smashing of TV sets anymore," Thomas Ruttig, from the Afghanistan Analysts Network, told AFP. Carrot and stick The Taliban are also keen to show they can govern a modern nation. In territory where control is split with the government, the militants ensure teachers and clinic staff show up for work and prod electricity providers to fix power outages. Jackson said this Taliban "shadow government" exists partly to embarrass corrupt local politicians, but also to exert soft power and demonstrate competence. "It's both carrot and stick. I think they realise they have to provide... some tangible benefit," Jackson said. Mullah Rauf, a former Taliban commander, said the insurgents had evolved. "They can't have a hardline government anymore. Nowhere in the world do such governments exist," he told AFP by telephone from Panjwaee, a Taliban district in Kandahar. As America pushes for a peace deal, many Afghans want to know the Taliban's intentions once foreign troops leave. The militants say they do not want to rule by force, but share power with other parties. Taliban justice is one area "where compromise will be the hardest", Jackson said. Ruttig said the militants had not abandoned their ideology, but know "they cannot rule against the population", and therefore might be open to some compromise. "But whether that's good enough for most Afghans -- who now have tasted completely different freedoms than what they had under the Taliban -- that will be up to the Afghan population," Ruttig said.

The Taliban have not changed, warn Afghans living under their rule

An unstable Aghanistan will hurt South Asia's prospects: Afghan social activist Zakia Wardak

Afghanistan on Wednesday summoned Pakistan's ambassador to the country over a statement that Afghan peace process will be impacted if India acts on Pakistan in the aftermath of the Pulwama terror attack.&nbsp;

The Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs in Afghan foreign ministry Idrees Zaman in a tweet said, "Today @mfa_afghanistan summoned Pakistani ambassador and handed him a diplomatic démarche, in protest to his latest statement quoted by Reuters. We will issue a formal statement with details shortly!

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Today <a href="https://twitter.com/mfa_afghanistan?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mfa_afghanistan</a> summoned Pakistani ambassador and handed him a diplomatic démarches, in protest to his latest statement quoted by Reuters. We will issue a formal statement with details shortly! <a href="https://t.co/t2uBxw8JUH">https://t.co/t2uBxw8JUH</a>
— Idrees Zaman (@IdreesZaman) <a href="https://twitter.com/IdreesZaman/status/1098150547243393024?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Zahid Nasrullah, the Pakistani envoy to Afghanistan, was quoted by news agency Reuters as saying that Afghan talks will be impacted if India retaliates after the Pulwama terror attack.&nbsp;

Pakistan based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed claimed responsibility for the terror attack that killed more than 40 CRPF personnel.

This comes even as Afghanistan complained to United Nation Security Council (UNSC) on Islamabad's engagement with the Taliban and support to terror groups.&nbsp;

In the last six days, three neighbours of Pakistan-- Iran, India and Afghanistan -- have summoned Pakistani envoys stationed in respective countries.&nbsp;

On Sunday, Iran summoned Pakistan envoy in Tehran, Riffat Masood, to protest against the terror attack in the country that killed 27 revolutionary guards. A Pakistani national has been named in the suicide attack that took place in the southeastern province of Sistan and Balouchestan.&nbsp;

According to a release from Iranian foreign ministry, Tehran highlighted the growing number of terrorist attacks "designed in and led from Pakistan including the latest terrorist attack".

India summoned the Pakistani High Commissioner to New Delhi, Sohail Mahmood, a day after the Pulwama attack. This was the second summoning by New Delhi of the envoy on 2019. In January, India had summoned the envoy after Pakistani foreign minister SM Qureshi called on separatist leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq.&nbsp;

The development comes even as New Delhi has unleashed a diplomatic campaign to isolate Pakistan as a fallout out of Pulwama attack. It has been briefing foreign envoys of several countries including ASEAN, Africa, Central Asia, Gulf, Permanent five and non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to brief about Islamabad's involvement in the Pulwama terror attack.&nbsp;

More than 70 countries have condemned the terror attack.&nbsp;

New Zealand became the first country to pass a motion in the parliament to condemn the attack. Deputy Prime minister and Foreign Minister Winston Peter moved a government motion in the parliament condemning Pulwama attack.

Afghanistan on Wednesday summoned Pakistan's ambassador to the country over a statement that Afghan peace process will be impacted if India acts on Pakistan in the aftermath of the Pulwama terror attack.

Afghanistan on Wednesday summoned Pakistan's ambassador to the country over a statement that Afghan peace process will be impacted if India acts on Pakistan in the aftermath of the Pulwama terror attack. The Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs in Afghan foreign ministry Idrees Zaman in a tweet said, "Today @mfa_afghanistan summoned Pakistani ambassador and handed him a diplomatic démarche, in protest to his latest statement quoted by Reuters. We will issue a formal statement with details shortly! Today @mfa_afghanistan summoned Pakistani ambassador and handed him a diplomatic démarches, in protest to his latest statement quoted by Reuters. We will issue a formal statement with details shortly! https://t.co/t2uBxw8JUH — Idrees Zaman (@IdreesZaman) February 20, 2019 × Zahid Nasrullah, the Pakistani envoy to Afghanistan, was quoted by news agency Reuters as saying that Afghan talks will be impacted if India retaliates after the Pulwama terror attack. Pakistan based terror group Jaish-e-Mohammed claimed responsibility for the terror attack that killed more than 40 CRPF personnel. This comes even as Afghanistan complained to United Nation Security Council (UNSC) on Islamabad's engagement with the Taliban and support to terror groups. In the last six days, three neighbours of Pakistan-- Iran, India and Afghanistan -- have summoned Pakistani envoys stationed in respective countries. On Sunday, Iran summoned Pakistan envoy in Tehran, Riffat Masood, to protest against the terror attack in the country that killed 27 revolutionary guards. A Pakistani national has been named in the suicide attack that took place in the southeastern province of Sistan and Balouchestan. According to a release from Iranian foreign ministry, Tehran highlighted the growing number of terrorist attacks "designed in and led from Pakistan including the latest terrorist attack". India summoned the Pakistani High Commissioner to New Delhi, Sohail Mahmood, a day after the Pulwama attack. This was the second summoning by New Delhi of the envoy on 2019. In January, India had summoned the envoy after Pakistani foreign minister SM Qureshi called on separatist leader Mirwaiz Umar Farooq. The development comes even as New Delhi has unleashed a diplomatic campaign to isolate Pakistan as a fallout out of Pulwama attack. It has been briefing foreign envoys of several countries including ASEAN, Africa, Central Asia, Gulf, Permanent five and non-permanent members of the United Nations Security Council to brief about Islamabad's involvement in the Pulwama terror attack. More than 70 countries have condemned the terror attack. New Zealand became the first country to pass a motion in the parliament to condemn the attack. Deputy Prime minister and Foreign Minister Winston Peter moved a government motion in the parliament condemning Pulwama attack.

After Iran and India, Afghanistan summons Pakistan envoy over remarks on Pulwama terror attack

US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation, Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday said that "a unified negotiating team" under the umbrella of the Afghan government is required in order to achieve peace in war-torn Afghanistan.

In an interview to Tolo news, Zalmay Khalilzad &nbsp;said, "There is a need of integration of a strong and unified negotiating team under Afghan government’s umbrella for achieving a breakthrough in the strides for peace in Afghanistan."

When asked whether the peace talks have hit a deadlock, &nbsp;Khalilzad said, "There are difficulties, but we have agreed with the Taliban to meet again on February 25 in Doha. We agreed in principle to talk in details and with more authenticity about two topics to find whether there is the possibility to make more progress on the issue of terrorism and the issue of forces.”

This has come a day after Afghanistan voiced its concern to United Nations Security Council on Pakistan’s engagements with Taliban, saying it not only undermines ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan`s National Sovereignty and UNSC Resolution 1988.

While criticising Moscow talks which were held from February 5 to February 8, Ghani said, "The nation says that they (Afghan politicians and Taliban members) did not go to Mecca but they went to Moscow (for talks on peace); therefore, they should answer to this question.”

Earlier also, during the Russia talks, Afghanistan criticised the invitation to UN blacklisted Taliban members by Russia and said that the talks were against the spirit of Afghan-led and owned peace process.

The government also lodged a complaint with the United Nations over a recent trip by UN-blacklisted Taliban members to Moscow to attend talks.

However, the declaration stated that all parties, excluding the Afghan government which was not invited in the Russia talks, have agreed that a dignified and lasting peace is the aspiration of all the people of Afghanistan and this principle has been achieved in Moscow.

Meanwhile, Zalmay is on his six-nation visit to facilitate a peace process that protects the national security interests of the United States and brings all parties in Afghanistan together into an intra-Afghan dialogue.

US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation, Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday said that "a unified negotiating team" under the umbrella of the Afghan government is required in order to achieve peace in war-torn Afghanistan.

US Special Representative for Afghanistan Reconciliation, Zalmay Khalilzad on Monday said that "a unified negotiating team" under the umbrella of the Afghan government is required in order to achieve peace in war-torn Afghanistan. In an interview to Tolo news, Zalmay Khalilzad said, "There is a need of integration of a strong and unified negotiating team under Afghan government’s umbrella for achieving a breakthrough in the strides for peace in Afghanistan." When asked whether the peace talks have hit a deadlock, Khalilzad said, "There are difficulties, but we have agreed with the Taliban to meet again on February 25 in Doha. We agreed in principle to talk in details and with more authenticity about two topics to find whether there is the possibility to make more progress on the issue of terrorism and the issue of forces.” This has come a day after Afghanistan voiced its concern to United Nations Security Council on Pakistan’s engagements with Taliban, saying it not only undermines ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan`s National Sovereignty and UNSC Resolution 1988. While criticising Moscow talks which were held from February 5 to February 8, Ghani said, "The nation says that they (Afghan politicians and Taliban members) did not go to Mecca but they went to Moscow (for talks on peace); therefore, they should answer to this question.” Earlier also, during the Russia talks, Afghanistan criticised the invitation to UN blacklisted Taliban members by Russia and said that the talks were against the spirit of Afghan-led and owned peace process. The government also lodged a complaint with the United Nations over a recent trip by UN-blacklisted Taliban members to Moscow to attend talks. However, the declaration stated that all parties, excluding the Afghan government which was not invited in the Russia talks, have agreed that a dignified and lasting peace is the aspiration of all the people of Afghanistan and this principle has been achieved in Moscow. Meanwhile, Zalmay is on his six-nation visit to facilitate a peace process that protects the national security interests of the United States and brings all parties in Afghanistan together into an intra-Afghan dialogue.

Unified team under Afghan governemnt is required to achieve peace: Zalmay Khalilzad

Afghanistan's foreign minister Salahuddin Rabbani on Monday met Indian envoy to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar in Kabul. During the meeting, both the sides discussed a range of issues including the Pulwama terror attack.&nbsp;

During the meet, the Afghan FM called terror a global threat and "asked for a serious struggle of all countries against this phenomenon," according to a release by Afghan foreign ministry.

The Afghan government had condemned the recent terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama and expressed their condolences for the loss.

Both sides discussed the expansion of trilateral cooperation between Afghanistan, India and China; the Afghan peace talks and the upcoming presidential elections in Afghanistan.

During the informal summit last year between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Wuhan, both agreed to work in Afghanistan and initially decided to train Afghan diplomats jointly.

On Sunday, the Indian ambassador met Afghan President’s Special Envoy and CEO of the High Peace Council, M Umer Daudzai, to discuss the Afghan peace process.

India has been engaging with Afghanistan and with neighbouring countries like Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia on the peace process in the South Asian country. India's official policy on the Afghan peace process is that it should be "Afghan-owned, Afghan-led and Afghan-controlled".

Afghanistan's foreign minister Salahuddin Rabbani on Monday met Indian envoy to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar in Kabul. During the meeting, both the sides discussed a range of issues including the Pulwama terror attack.

Afghanistan's foreign minister Salahuddin Rabbani on Monday met Indian envoy to Afghanistan Vinay Kumar in Kabul. During the meeting, both the sides discussed a range of issues including the Pulwama terror attack. During the meet, the Afghan FM called terror a global threat and "asked for a serious struggle of all countries against this phenomenon," according to a release by Afghan foreign ministry. The Afghan government had condemned the recent terrorist attack in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama and expressed their condolences for the loss. Both sides discussed the expansion of trilateral cooperation between Afghanistan, India and China; the Afghan peace talks and the upcoming presidential elections in Afghanistan. During the informal summit last year between Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Wuhan, both agreed to work in Afghanistan and initially decided to train Afghan diplomats jointly. On Sunday, the Indian ambassador met Afghan President’s Special Envoy and CEO of the High Peace Council, M Umer Daudzai, to discuss the Afghan peace process. India has been engaging with Afghanistan and with neighbouring countries like Iran, Russia and Saudi Arabia on the peace process in the South Asian country. India's official policy on the Afghan peace process is that it should be "Afghan-owned, Afghan-led and Afghan-controlled".

Indian envoy to Afghanistan meets Afghan FM; discusses terror, peace process

WION Fineprint: Afghanistan protests to UN on Pakistan's role in Taliban peace talks

Negotiations between <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-taliban-meeting-afghanistan-seeks-unsc-intervention-197962">US officials and Taliban</a> members which were supposed to be held in Islamabad on Monday has now been postponed.

In a statement, Taliban said that they were ready for talks on a peace process to end the nearly two-decades-long conflict in Afghanistan, but asserted that most of its members would be not able to attend the meeting as they are blacklisted by the US and the UN, TOLOnews reported.

Officials said that Afghanistan's foreign ministry had lodged a formal complaint with the UN Security Council over the planned meeting between Taliban representatives and Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, terming it a clear violation of Afghanistan`s sovereignty.

In its complaint, the Afghan government stated that the Taliban officials invited to Pakistan have a travel ban against them and is a clear violation of international law.

Interestingly, the Taliban did not elaborate on how its representatives were able to travel to the UAE and Russia for similar meetings. The group has a political office in Qatar, where the negotiating team lives.

Earlier this month, Afghanistan lodged a similar complaint with the UN over a recent visit by Taliban members to Moscow. Kabul said that Moscow allowed them to enter the country despite them being blacklisted by the world body.

The Afghan government has criticised the talks from the beginning by saying that the talks hosted by Russia were against the spirit of Afghan-led and owned peace process.

Negotiations between US officials and Taliban members which were supposed to be held in Islamabad on Monday has now been postponed. In a statement, Taliban said that they were ready for talks on a peace process to end the nearly two-decades-long conflict in Afghanistan, but asserted that most of its members would be not able to attend the meeting as they are blacklisted by the US and the UN, TOLOnews reported.

Negotiations between US officials and Taliban members which were supposed to be held in Islamabad on Monday has now been postponed. In a statement, Taliban said that they were ready for talks on a peace process to end the nearly two-decades-long conflict in Afghanistan, but asserted that most of its members would be not able to attend the meeting as they are blacklisted by the US and the UN, TOLOnews reported. Officials said that Afghanistan's foreign ministry had lodged a formal complaint with the UN Security Council over the planned meeting between Taliban representatives and Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, terming it a clear violation of Afghanistan`s sovereignty. In its complaint, the Afghan government stated that the Taliban officials invited to Pakistan have a travel ban against them and is a clear violation of international law. Interestingly, the Taliban did not elaborate on how its representatives were able to travel to the UAE and Russia for similar meetings. The group has a political office in Qatar, where the negotiating team lives. Earlier this month, Afghanistan lodged a similar complaint with the UN over a recent visit by Taliban members to Moscow. Kabul said that Moscow allowed them to enter the country despite them being blacklisted by the world body. The Afghan government has criticised the talks from the beginning by saying that the talks hosted by Russia were against the spirit of Afghan-led and owned peace process.

US, Taliban talks in Pakistan postponed

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/iran-summons-pakistans-envoy-over-deadly-suicide-bomb-attack-report-197911">Iran on Sunday summoned Pakistan ambassador</a> Riffat Masood to lodge a formal protest over a terror attack in the Southeastern Sistan-Baluchistan region that killed 27 of its Revolutionary Guards.&nbsp;

Pakistan based Jaish ul-Adl took the responsibility for <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/iran-general-says-pakistan-backs-group-behind-suicide-bomb-197757">the attack</a>. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani pledged to avenge the attack saying, "our nation will certainly take revenge for the blood of these dear martyrs”.

On Friday, India had summoned Pakistani High Commissioner Sohail Mahmood over Thursday's ghastly terror attack on CRPF convoy in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama that claimed over 40 lives.&nbsp;

Reactions poured in from Iran condemning the heinous attack. Iran's Commander of Revolution Guards (IRGC) <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/iran-general-says-pakistan-backs-group-behind-suicide-bomb-197757">Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari said</a>, “Iran will retaliate against the group [that conducted the attack] if Pakistan fails to punish them”. Iran's Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani also slammed Pakistan and called on Islamabad to be held accountable for the terror attack.

Meanwhile, Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi called on his Iranian counterpart Javad Zarif and said that his country is ready to cooperate to investigate the attack.&nbsp;

India's External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj had made a stopover in Tehran on Saturday while going to Bulgaria and held a meeting with Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs Seyyed Abbas Araqchi. During the meeting, both discussed the recent Pulwama terror attack in India and the attack on Iran's Revolutionary Guards.

The press statement issued by Iran's foreign ministry read, "They condemned the recent terrorist attacks in Iran's Sistan and Baluchestan and India's Srinagar, and offered sympathy to each other".

Adding further the release said, "The two sides underlined the necessity of establishing peace and calm in the region through dialogue". After the meet, Araqchi tweeted out saying, "we agreed on close cooperation to combat terrorism in the region. Enough is enough!"

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Iran &amp; India suffered from two heinous terrorist attacks in the past few days resulted in big casualties. Today in my meeting with Sushma Swaraj the Indian FM, when she had a stopover in Tehran, we agreed on close cooperation to combat terrorism in the region. Enough is enough! <a href="https://t.co/uvwlx45pZ6">pic.twitter.com/uvwlx45pZ6</a>
— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) <a href="https://twitter.com/araghchi/status/1096802730881048578?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Afghanistan complains to UNSC about Pakistan

Afghanistan has also come hard on Pakistan. Afghan foreign ministry spokesperson Sibghatullah Ahmadi said Kabul has complained to United Nations Security Council (UNSC) against Islamabad over its engagement with Taliban.

In a tweet, Ahmadi said, "Afghanistan complains to UN Security Council on Pakistan’s engagements with the Taliban on which Afghan Government is not consulted." Elaborating further he said, "It not only undermines the ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan's National Sovereignty, also falls in violation of UNSC Resolution 1988."&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Afghanistan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Afghanistan</a> complains to <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/UNSecurityCouncil?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#UNSecurityCouncil</a> on <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Pakistan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Pakistan</a>’s engagements with the Taliban on which <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Afg?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Afg</a> Government is not consulted. It not only undermines the ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan's National Sovereignty, also falls in violation of UNSC Resolution 1988. <a href="https://t.co/FtmnwivvX2">pic.twitter.com/FtmnwivvX2</a>
— Sibghatullah Ahmadi (@Sibghat_Ah) <a href="https://twitter.com/Sibghat_Ah/status/1097092008093593600?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Pakistan government had invited the Taliban for talks along with the United States. The Taliban in a release said at the "formal invitation of the government of Pakistan" meeting was scheduled to take place "between the negotiation teams of the Islamic Emirate and the US on 18th of February 2019 in Islamabad." The meeting now stands cancelled according to reports emanating from Pakistani media. The reason was not known immediately.&nbsp; 
‏ 
In past, Afghanistan had also raised the matter of Pakistan's support to terror in the region and asked Islamabad to stop giving safe haven to terrorists. A number of terror attacks in Afghanistan have been linked to terror outfits based in Pakistan.

India's diplomatic campaign against Pak continues

More diplomatic action is expected from India in the coming week. Argentina's President and Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman will meet Prime Minister Modi next week. PM Modi will be travelling to South Korea on a two-day visit starting February 21 where he will meet South Korean President Moon Jae-in. In all the meetings, Pakistan's support to terror and its involvement in the Pulwama attack is due to be highlighted.

New Delhi has been calling on Islamabad to take immediate and verifiable action against Jaish-e-Mohammad, however, Pak Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has been saying it needs evidence to crack down on the terror outfit.&nbsp;

India had given evidence of Pakistan's involvement after the Parliament terror attack in 2001, the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks in 2008 and most recently Uri and Pathankote attacks but Islamabad did not take any action on terror infrastructure on its territory.

India, as part of the fallout of the Pulwama attack, has withdrawn Most Favoured Nation status (MNF) from Pakistan due to which customs duty on all Pak imports stands at 200 per cent now.&nbsp;

India has also mounted a <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/mission-to-isolate-pakistan-india-raises-pulwama-terror-attack-issue-at-munich-conference-197912">diplomatic campaign against Pakistan</a> to isolate the South Asian country. New Delhi has briefed as many as 40 envoys from ASEAN, Central Asia, Gulf, members of the United Nations Security Council over Pakistan's involvement in the Pulwama terror attack.&nbsp;

Iran on Sunday summoned Pakistan ambassador Riffat Masood to lodge a formal protest over a terror attack in the Southeastern Sistan-Baluchistan region that killed 27 of its Revolutionary Guards.

Iran on Sunday summoned Pakistan ambassador Riffat Masood to lodge a formal protest over a terror attack in the Southeastern Sistan-Baluchistan region that killed 27 of its Revolutionary Guards. Pakistan based Jaish ul-Adl took the responsibility for the attack. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani pledged to avenge the attack saying, "our nation will certainly take revenge for the blood of these dear martyrs”. On Friday, India had summoned Pakistani High Commissioner Sohail Mahmood over Thursday's ghastly terror attack on CRPF convoy in Jammu and Kashmir's Pulwama that claimed over 40 lives. Reactions poured in from Iran condemning the heinous attack. Iran's Commander of Revolution Guards (IRGC) Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari said, “Iran will retaliate against the group [that conducted the attack] if Pakistan fails to punish them”. Iran's Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani also slammed Pakistan and called on Islamabad to be held accountable for the terror attack. Meanwhile, Pakistan's Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi called on his Iranian counterpart Javad Zarif and said that his country is ready to cooperate to investigate the attack. India's External Affairs Minister Sushma Swaraj had made a stopover in Tehran on Saturday while going to Bulgaria and held a meeting with Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs Seyyed Abbas Araqchi. During the meeting, both discussed the recent Pulwama terror attack in India and the attack on Iran's Revolutionary Guards. The press statement issued by Iran's foreign ministry read, "They condemned the recent terrorist attacks in Iran's Sistan and Baluchestan and India's Srinagar, and offered sympathy to each other". Adding further the release said, "The two sides underlined the necessity of establishing peace and calm in the region through dialogue". After the meet, Araqchi tweeted out saying, "we agreed on close cooperation to combat terrorism in the region. Enough is enough!" Iran & India suffered from two heinous terrorist attacks in the past few days resulted in big casualties. Today in my meeting with Sushma Swaraj the Indian FM, when she had a stopover in Tehran, we agreed on close cooperation to combat terrorism in the region. Enough is enough! pic.twitter.com/uvwlx45pZ6 — Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) February 16, 2019 × Afghanistan complains to UNSC about Pakistan Afghanistan has also come hard on Pakistan. Afghan foreign ministry spokesperson Sibghatullah Ahmadi said Kabul has complained to United Nations Security Council (UNSC) against Islamabad over its engagement with Taliban. In a tweet, Ahmadi said, "Afghanistan complains to UN Security Council on Pakistan’s engagements with the Taliban on which Afghan Government is not consulted." Elaborating further he said, "It not only undermines the ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan's National Sovereignty, also falls in violation of UNSC Resolution 1988." #Afghanistan complains to #UNSecurityCouncil on #Pakistan’s engagements with the Taliban on which #Afg Government is not consulted. It not only undermines the ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan's National Sovereignty, also falls in violation of UNSC Resolution 1988. pic.twitter.com/FtmnwivvX2 — Sibghatullah Ahmadi (@Sibghat_Ah) February 17, 2019 × Pakistan government had invited the Taliban for talks along with the United States. The Taliban in a release said at the "formal invitation of the government of Pakistan" meeting was scheduled to take place "between the negotiation teams of the Islamic Emirate and the US on 18th of February 2019 in Islamabad." The meeting now stands cancelled according to reports emanating from Pakistani media. The reason was not known immediately. ‏ In past, Afghanistan had also raised the matter of Pakistan's support to terror in the region and asked Islamabad to stop giving safe haven to terrorists. A number of terror attacks in Afghanistan have been linked to terror outfits based in Pakistan. India's diplomatic campaign against Pak continues More diplomatic action is expected from India in the coming week. Argentina's President and Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammad Bin Salman will meet Prime Minister Modi next week. PM Modi will be travelling to South Korea on a two-day visit starting February 21 where he will meet South Korean President Moon Jae-in. In all the meetings, Pakistan's support to terror and its involvement in the Pulwama attack is due to be highlighted. New Delhi has been calling on Islamabad to take immediate and verifiable action against Jaish-e-Mohammad, however, Pak Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has been saying it needs evidence to crack down on the terror outfit. India had given evidence of Pakistan's involvement after the Parliament terror attack in 2001, the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks in 2008 and most recently Uri and Pathankote attacks but Islamabad did not take any action on terror infrastructure on its territory. India, as part of the fallout of the Pulwama attack, has withdrawn Most Favoured Nation status (MNF) from Pakistan due to which customs duty on all Pak imports stands at 200 per cent now. India has also mounted a diplomatic campaign against Pakistan to isolate the South Asian country. New Delhi has briefed as many as 40 envoys from ASEAN, Central Asia, Gulf, members of the United Nations Security Council over Pakistan's involvement in the Pulwama terror attack.

Neighbours mount pressure on Pakistan: Iran Summons Pak envoy; Afghanistan goes to UNSC against Islamabad

Afghanistan has also come hard on Pakistan and complained about the country to the United Nations security council (UNSC) on Islamabad's engagement with the Taliban and support to terror groups. The letter accessed by WION talks about how Pakistan is undermining the sovereignty of Afghanistan with its engagement with the Taliban.

The letter written by Afghanistan's Deputy Permanent Representative to United Nations Nazifullah Salarzai on Friday says Pakistan's engagements with Taliban which "are taking place under the pretext of support for peace efforts in Afghanistan" are "void of any degree of coordination and consultation with the Government of Afghanistan."

The letter explained Ghani's government's viewpoint of the Afghan peace process and said "Government of Afghanistan welcomes and appreciates all efforts aimed at achieving the goal of a peaceful settlement...so long as they are rendered in a manner that conforms to the established principle of Afghan ownership and leadership of the process"

Pakistan government had invited the Taliban for talks along with the United States on Monday with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan also meeting the group. The Taliban in a release said at the "formal invitation of the government of Pakistan" meeting was scheduled to take place "between the negotiation teams of the Islamic Emirate and the US on 18th of February 2019 in Islamabad." The Taliban in a statement said the meet has been postponed since most of the members of the group are on US/UN blacklist and cannot travel.&nbsp;

The Afghan govt in the letter slammed Khan-Taliban meet and said, "This initiative is a source of deep regret and concern to the people and Government of Afghanistan as it amounts to the official recognition and legitimization of an armed-group that poses a serious threat to the security and stability of Afghanistan"

Kabul said Pakistan's engagement with the Taliban also violates the "provisions of the 1988 Committee’s Sanctions Regime undermine efforts for a peaceful settlement of the current conflict."

Based on the Taliban statement issued on 12 February on the group’s website, members of the Taliban delegation who have been introduced and are listed in the 1988 Committee’s sanctions regime include: Sher Mohammad Stanekzai; Ziauddin Madani; Salam Hanafi; Shahabuddin Delawar; Abdul Latif Mansur; Amir Khan Motaqi; Fazl Mohammad Mazloom and Nurullah Nuri.

Afghan foreign ministry spokesperson Sibghatullah Ahmadi also tweeted about the developments. In a tweet, Ahmadi said, "Afghanistan complains to UN Security Council on Pakistan’s engagements with the Taliban on which Afg Government is not consulted." Elaborating further he said, "It not only undermines the ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan's National Sovereignty, also falls in violation of UNSC Resolution 1988."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Afghanistan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Afghanistan</a> complains to <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/UNSecurityCouncil?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#UNSecurityCouncil</a> on <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Pakistan?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Pakistan</a>’s engagements with the Taliban on which <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Afg?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Afg</a> Government is not consulted. It not only undermines the ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan's National Sovereignty, also falls in violation of UNSC Resolution 1988. <a href="https://t.co/FtmnwivvX2">pic.twitter.com/FtmnwivvX2</a>
— Sibghatullah Ahmadi (@Sibghat_Ah) <a href="https://twitter.com/Sibghat_Ah/status/1097092008093593600?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

India's official policy on the Afghan peace process is that it should be "Afghan-owned, Afghan-led and Afghan-controlled".

Afghanistan also slammed Pakistan on its support to terrorism. The letter written a day after the Pulwama terror attack in India, said, "we also expect of, and call on the Government of Pakistan to take decisive action against known terrorist and extremist groups on its territory, which pose a common threat to Afghanistan, Pakistan and the region."

Further adding, " Any passivity in fulfilling this objective not only undermines broader counterterrorism efforts but also have a profound impact in providing further space and capacity for such groups to continue their attacks in Afghanistan and the wider region."

In past Afghanistan has raised Pakistan's support to terror in the region and asked Islamabad to stop giving safe haven to terrorists. A number of terror attacks in Afghanistan have been linked to terror outfits based in Pakistan.

Afghanistan has also come hard on Pakistan and complained about the country to the United Nations security council (UNSC) on Islamabad's engagement with the Taliban and support to terror groups.

Afghanistan has also come hard on Pakistan and complained about the country to the United Nations security council (UNSC) on Islamabad's engagement with the Taliban and support to terror groups. The letter accessed by WION talks about how Pakistan is undermining the sovereignty of Afghanistan with its engagement with the Taliban. The letter written by Afghanistan's Deputy Permanent Representative to United Nations Nazifullah Salarzai on Friday says Pakistan's engagements with Taliban which "are taking place under the pretext of support for peace efforts in Afghanistan" are "void of any degree of coordination and consultation with the Government of Afghanistan." The letter explained Ghani's government's viewpoint of the Afghan peace process and said "Government of Afghanistan welcomes and appreciates all efforts aimed at achieving the goal of a peaceful settlement...so long as they are rendered in a manner that conforms to the established principle of Afghan ownership and leadership of the process" Pakistan government had invited the Taliban for talks along with the United States on Monday with Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan also meeting the group. The Taliban in a release said at the "formal invitation of the government of Pakistan" meeting was scheduled to take place "between the negotiation teams of the Islamic Emirate and the US on 18th of February 2019 in Islamabad." The Taliban in a statement said the meet has been postponed since most of the members of the group are on US/UN blacklist and cannot travel. The Afghan govt in the letter slammed Khan-Taliban meet and said, "This initiative is a source of deep regret and concern to the people and Government of Afghanistan as it amounts to the official recognition and legitimization of an armed-group that poses a serious threat to the security and stability of Afghanistan" Kabul said Pakistan's engagement with the Taliban also violates the "provisions of the 1988 Committee’s Sanctions Regime undermine efforts for a peaceful settlement of the current conflict." Based on the Taliban statement issued on 12 February on the group’s website, members of the Taliban delegation who have been introduced and are listed in the 1988 Committee’s sanctions regime include: Sher Mohammad Stanekzai; Ziauddin Madani; Salam Hanafi; Shahabuddin Delawar; Abdul Latif Mansur; Amir Khan Motaqi; Fazl Mohammad Mazloom and Nurullah Nuri. Afghan foreign ministry spokesperson Sibghatullah Ahmadi also tweeted about the developments. In a tweet, Ahmadi said, "Afghanistan complains to UN Security Council on Pakistan’s engagements with the Taliban on which Afg Government is not consulted." Elaborating further he said, "It not only undermines the ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan's National Sovereignty, also falls in violation of UNSC Resolution 1988." #Afghanistan complains to #UNSecurityCouncil on #Pakistan’s engagements with the Taliban on which #Afg Government is not consulted. It not only undermines the ongoing peace efforts but violates Afghanistan's National Sovereignty, also falls in violation of UNSC Resolution 1988. pic.twitter.com/FtmnwivvX2 — Sibghatullah Ahmadi (@Sibghat_Ah) February 17, 2019 × India's official policy on the Afghan peace process is that it should be "Afghan-owned, Afghan-led and Afghan-controlled". Afghanistan also slammed Pakistan on its support to terrorism. The letter written a day after the Pulwama terror attack in India, said, "we also expect of, and call on the Government of Pakistan to take decisive action against known terrorist and extremist groups on its territory, which pose a common threat to Afghanistan, Pakistan and the region." Further adding, " Any passivity in fulfilling this objective not only undermines broader counterterrorism efforts but also have a profound impact in providing further space and capacity for such groups to continue their attacks in Afghanistan and the wider region." In past Afghanistan has raised Pakistan's support to terror in the region and asked Islamabad to stop giving safe haven to terrorists. A number of terror attacks in Afghanistan have been linked to terror outfits based in Pakistan.

Afghanistan complains about Pakistan to UNSC on terror, Taliban

afghanistan-0

Afghanistan, News on Afghanistan, stories on Afghanistan, articles on Afghanistan, Afghanistan stories at Wion, Afghanistan news, Afghanistan latest news

afghanistan 0