Afghanistan's government will soon complete a Taliban prisoner release that is a key condition to the launch of peace talks with the insurgents, President Ashraf Ghani said Thursday.

Under the terms of a US-Taliban deal signed in February, Kabul has pledged to free 5,000 Taliban prisoners in a swap that would see the insurgents release 1,000 Afghan security force captives.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistan-freed-taliban-prisoners-seek-return-to-battlefield-304988">Afghanistan: Freed Taliban prisoners seek return to battlefield</a>

Once the swap is done, the two sides have pledged to begin peace talks that could end nearly 19 years of war.

Kabul has already released 3,000 prisoners, with the remainder due to be freed shortly, Ghani said.

"The remaining commitment -- my colleagues and I have made the decision to release an additional 2,000 prisoners within a very short period. We will announce the date soon," Ghani said in a video interview with a Washington think tank.&nbsp;

Ghani, who this year started his second term after a bitterly contested election that was marred with fraud claims, complained that the Taliban had not been transparent about how many Afghan soldiers they still hold.&nbsp;

"The number keeps shifting. We need clarity regarding the fate of those that are with them and assurance that the last person remaining with them is released," Ghani told the Atlantic Council's South Asia Center and the US Institute for Peace.&nbsp;

Taliban political spokesman Suhail Shaheen said on Twitter the prisoner release so far was "a positive step" and marked "good progress".

Zalmay Khalilzad, the US negotiator on Afghanistan, also called the latest developments "very positive" and said that intra-Afghan talks appeared closer than ever.

"All sides must work to get to the negotiations table ASAP and prevent spoilers from undermining the process and betraying the hopes and yearning of Afghan people for peace," he wrote on Twitter.

The Taliban and Afghan security forces observed a three-day ceasefire last month and have generally reduced violence across Afghanistan since then in an attempt to set the stage for peace talks.

Ghani said he would elaborate the next steps in the peace process next week and called for a "humanitarian ceasefire" to provide food and medical assistance during the coronavirus crisis.

"In terms of reduction of violence, there has been (one) but the casualty figures still average around 60-70 a day. The number of fatalities unfortunately are averaging 30," he said.

Ghani did not say if the casualties were civilians, fighters or a combination.

Ghani said women would form an important part of eventual peace negotiating teams.

Under the US-Taliban deal, American and foreign forces are scheduled to leave Afghanistan over the coming months.

Afghanistan's government will soon complete a Taliban prisoner release that is a key condition to the launch of peace talks with the insurgents, President Ashraf Ghani said Thursday.

Afghanistan's government will soon complete a Taliban prisoner release that is a key condition to the launch of peace talks with the insurgents, President Ashraf Ghani said Thursday. Under the terms of a US-Taliban deal signed in February, Kabul has pledged to free 5,000 Taliban prisoners in a swap that would see the insurgents release 1,000 Afghan security force captives. Also read | Afghanistan: Freed Taliban prisoners seek return to battlefield Once the swap is done, the two sides have pledged to begin peace talks that could end nearly 19 years of war. Kabul has already released 3,000 prisoners, with the remainder due to be freed shortly, Ghani said. "The remaining commitment -- my colleagues and I have made the decision to release an additional 2,000 prisoners within a very short period. We will announce the date soon," Ghani said in a video interview with a Washington think tank. Ghani, who this year started his second term after a bitterly contested election that was marred with fraud claims, complained that the Taliban had not been transparent about how many Afghan soldiers they still hold. "The number keeps shifting. We need clarity regarding the fate of those that are with them and assurance that the last person remaining with them is released," Ghani told the Atlantic Council's South Asia Center and the US Institute for Peace. Taliban political spokesman Suhail Shaheen said on Twitter the prisoner release so far was "a positive step" and marked "good progress". Zalmay Khalilzad, the US negotiator on Afghanistan, also called the latest developments "very positive" and said that intra-Afghan talks appeared closer than ever. "All sides must work to get to the negotiations table ASAP and prevent spoilers from undermining the process and betraying the hopes and yearning of Afghan people for peace," he wrote on Twitter. The Taliban and Afghan security forces observed a three-day ceasefire last month and have generally reduced violence across Afghanistan since then in an attempt to set the stage for peace talks. Ghani said he would elaborate the next steps in the peace process next week and called for a "humanitarian ceasefire" to provide food and medical assistance during the coronavirus crisis. "In terms of reduction of violence, there has been (one) but the casualty figures still average around 60-70 a day. The number of fatalities unfortunately are averaging 30," he said. Ghani did not say if the casualties were civilians, fighters or a combination. Ghani said women would form an important part of eventual peace negotiating teams. Under the US-Taliban deal, American and foreign forces are scheduled to leave Afghanistan over the coming months.

Afghan President says Taliban prisoner release to be completed soon

Afghan authorities freed hundreds more Taliban prisoners on Tuesday, as calls grew for the militants to extend a ceasefire on its third and final day.

The historic pause in fighting, only the second in nearly 19 years of war, has mostly held across Afghanistan, providing a rare respite from the conflict's grinding violence.

Authorities said they had released about 900 Taliban prisoners across the country on Tuesday, approximately 600 of them from the notorious Bagram jail near Kabul.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghan-government-frees-2000-taliban-prisoners-during-ceasefire-301022" hreflang="en">Afghan government frees 2,000 Taliban prisoners during ceasefire</a>

The release is part of a pledge by the Afghan government to free up to 2,000 insurgent prisoners in response to the Taliban's three-day ceasefire offer, which began Sunday to mark the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr.

Each former prisoner was given the equivalent of about $65 in Afghan currency. The buses they had boarded at the prison dropped them in Kabul, where they bid goodbyes to each other and took taxis to their homes.

The release of 900 prisoners marked "good progress," Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen said on Twitter.

He added the group will free a "remarkable" number of Afghan security force personnel, but did not specify when.

Afghan authorities hoped the Taliban would extend the ceasefire so delayed peace talks with the insurgents could begin, National Security Council spokesman Javid Faisal said.

Afghan authorities freed hundreds more Taliban prisoners on Tuesday, as calls grew for the militants to extend a ceasefire on its third and final day. The historic pause in fighting, only the second in nearly 19 years of war, has mostly held across Afghanistan, providing a rare respite from the conflict's grinding violence.

Afghan authorities freed hundreds more Taliban prisoners on Tuesday, as calls grew for the militants to extend a ceasefire on its third and final day. The historic pause in fighting, only the second in nearly 19 years of war, has mostly held across Afghanistan, providing a rare respite from the conflict's grinding violence. Authorities said they had released about 900 Taliban prisoners across the country on Tuesday, approximately 600 of them from the notorious Bagram jail near Kabul. Also read: Afghan government frees 2,000 Taliban prisoners during ceasefire The release is part of a pledge by the Afghan government to free up to 2,000 insurgent prisoners in response to the Taliban's three-day ceasefire offer, which began Sunday to mark the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Fitr. Each former prisoner was given the equivalent of about $65 in Afghan currency. The buses they had boarded at the prison dropped them in Kabul, where they bid goodbyes to each other and took taxis to their homes. The release of 900 prisoners marked "good progress," Taliban spokesman Suhail Shaheen said on Twitter. He added the group will free a "remarkable" number of Afghan security force personnel, but did not specify when. Afghan authorities hoped the Taliban would extend the ceasefire so delayed peace talks with the insurgents could begin, National Security Council spokesman Javid Faisal said.

Afghan government frees 900 Taliban prisoners on last day of truce

Afghan authorities released 100 Taliban prisoners Monday as part of the government's response to a surprise, three-day ceasefire the insurgents called to mark the Eid al-Fitr festival.

The pause in fighting, only the second of its kind in Afghanistan's nearly 19-year-old war, was for the most part holding across the country on day two after the government welcomed the truce by announcing plans to release up to 2,000 Taliban inmates.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghan-president-ghani-pledges-to-release-up-to-2000-taliban-prisoners-300968" hreflang="en">Afghan president Ghani pledges to release up to 2,000 Taliban prisoners</a>

President Ashraf Ghani said his administration was also ready to hold peace talks with the Taliban, seen as key to ending the war in the impoverished country.

"The government of Afghanistan has today released 100 Taliban prisoners from Bagram prison," National Security Council spokesman Javid Faisal said.

He said the prisoner release was to "help the peace process" and will continue until 2,000 prisoners are freed.

Faisal said the authorities plan to release insurgent prisoners in batches of 100 daily.

"We hope this will eventually lead to a lasting peace that the people of Afghanistan so much desire and deserve," he said.

The current ceasefire is the first initiated by the Taliban. The only other comparable pause came over Eid in 2018, and was first offered by Ghani.

Afghan authorities released 100 Taliban prisoners Monday as part of the government's response to a surprise, three-day ceasefire the insurgents called to mark the Eid al-Fitr festival.

Afghan authorities released 100 Taliban prisoners Monday as part of the government's response to a surprise, three-day ceasefire the insurgents called to mark the Eid al-Fitr festival. The pause in fighting, only the second of its kind in Afghanistan's nearly 19-year-old war, was for the most part holding across the country on day two after the government welcomed the truce by announcing plans to release up to 2,000 Taliban inmates. Also read: Afghan president Ghani pledges to release up to 2,000 Taliban prisoners President Ashraf Ghani said his administration was also ready to hold peace talks with the Taliban, seen as key to ending the war in the impoverished country. "The government of Afghanistan has today released 100 Taliban prisoners from Bagram prison," National Security Council spokesman Javid Faisal said. He said the prisoner release was to "help the peace process" and will continue until 2,000 prisoners are freed. Faisal said the authorities plan to release insurgent prisoners in batches of 100 daily. "We hope this will eventually lead to a lasting peace that the people of Afghanistan so much desire and deserve," he said. The current ceasefire is the first initiated by the Taliban. The only other comparable pause came over Eid in 2018, and was first offered by Ghani.

Afghan government frees 2,000 Taliban prisoners during ceasefire

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has started the process to release up to 2,000 Taliban prisoners as a "goodwill gesture".

The announcement came&nbsp;after the government welcomed the armed group's surprise announcement of a three-day ceasefire during the Eid al-Fitr holiday.

The decision to release the prisoners was taken "to ensure success of the peace process", Ghani's spokesman Sediq Sediqqi said on Twitter on Sunday.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Pres. Ghani today initiated a process to release up to 2000 Taliban prisoners as a good will gesture in response to the Taliban’s announcement of a ceasefire during Eid.The AFG Gov is extending the offer of peace and is taking further steps to ensure success of the peace process. <a href="https://t.co/So0UEB5Bpi">pic.twitter.com/So0UEB5Bpi</a>
— Sediq Sediqqi (@SediqSediqqi) <a href="https://twitter.com/SediqSediqqi/status/1264549213372911617?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 24, 2020</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>

Meanwhile, the ceasefire appeared to hold as there were no reports of clashes between the Taliban and Afghan forces by the end of the first day on Sunday.

Ghani said a government delegation was "ready to immediately start the peace talks" with the Taliban.

Government negotiators would be headed by Ghani's former rival Abdullah Abdullah after the two signed a power-sharing deal last week that ended a months-long political crisis.

Before Sunday's announcement, Kabul had already released about 1,000 Taliban inmates while the Taliban had freed roughly 300 members of the Afghan security forces, according to reports.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has started the process to release up to 2,000 Taliban prisoners as a "goodwill gesture". The announcement came after the government welcomed the armed group's surprise announcement of a three-day ceasefire during the Eid al-Fitr holiday.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has started the process to release up to 2,000 Taliban prisoners as a "goodwill gesture". The announcement came after the government welcomed the armed group's surprise announcement of a three-day ceasefire during the Eid al-Fitr holiday. The decision to release the prisoners was taken "to ensure success of the peace process", Ghani's spokesman Sediq Sediqqi said on Twitter on Sunday. Pres. Ghani today initiated a process to release up to 2000 Taliban prisoners as a good will gesture in response to the Taliban’s announcement of a ceasefire during Eid.The AFG Gov is extending the offer of peace and is taking further steps to ensure success of the peace process. pic.twitter.com/So0UEB5Bpi — Sediq Sediqqi (@SediqSediqqi) May 24, 2020 × Meanwhile, the ceasefire appeared to hold as there were no reports of clashes between the Taliban and Afghan forces by the end of the first day on Sunday. Ghani said a government delegation was "ready to immediately start the peace talks" with the Taliban. Government negotiators would be headed by Ghani's former rival Abdullah Abdullah after the two signed a power-sharing deal last week that ended a months-long political crisis. Before Sunday's announcement, Kabul had already released about 1,000 Taliban inmates while the Taliban had freed roughly 300 members of the Afghan security forces, according to reports.

Afghan president Ghani pledges to release up to 2,000 Taliban prisoners

Extremist group Taliban and Afghan government have announced a three-day Eid ceasefire starting from May 24 to mark the end of the Islamic fasting month of Ramzan

Taliban announces 3-day ceasefire in Afghanistan on occasion of Eid

The United States'&nbsp;special envoy for Afghanistan on Wednesday met Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and his former rival Abdullah Abdullah, to discuss progress towards a peace deal with the insurgent Taliban.

The meeting was the first between the three men since Ghani and Abdullah ended a months-long political impasse in which both claimed to be Afghanistan`s rightful leader.

The pair struck a power-sharing agreement on Sunday, removing a major obstacle to the US-brokered peace process and in which Abdullah was appointed head of a reconciliation council designated to hold talks with the Taliban.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghan-mosque-attack-kills-eight-worshippers-breaking-ramzan-fast-299879">Also read:&nbsp;Afghan mosque attack kills eight worshippers breaking Ramzan fast</a>

Ghani said that during his meeting with Khalilzad, shortly before the three men met, they had discussed a ceasefire with the Taliban.

"Both sides talked about the upcoming steps for the peace process and both side stressed the issue of a ceasefire before the start of the inter-Afghan talks," Ghani's statement said, adding they discussed how to continue with a prisoner swap that the Taliban have demanded before beginning talks.

His statement made no mention of a $1 billion aid cut the United States announced in March when Abdullah and Ghani failed to strike a deal and which officials have asked be reinstated.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/afghanistan/gunmen-kill-11-in-two-separate-attacks-afghanistan-officials-say-299878">Also read:&nbsp;Gunmen kill 11 in two separate attacks, Afghanistan officials say</a>

Khalilzad is in the region to escalate efforts to bring the Afghan government and the Taliban to the negotiating table after months of delays.

The Taliban has increased violence even after a February 29 US-Taliban pact on the withdrawal of US-led foreign forces in exchange for Taliban security guarantees.

In the latest attack in northeastern Takhar province on Tuesday evening the Taliban killed nine pro-government militia force members.

On Wednesday the Taliban's leader Haibatullah Akhundzada released a statement marking the Islamic celebration of Eid, calling for progress on the peace deal but also asking its fighters to stay "focused on their objectives" and "consolidate ... ranks", which government security officials criticised as inciting violence.

The United States' special envoy for Afghanistan on Wednesday met Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and his former rival Abdullah Abdullah, to discuss progress towards a peace deal with the insurgent Taliban.

The United States' special envoy for Afghanistan on Wednesday met Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and his former rival Abdullah Abdullah, to discuss progress towards a peace deal with the insurgent Taliban. The meeting was the first between the three men since Ghani and Abdullah ended a months-long political impasse in which both claimed to be Afghanistan`s rightful leader. The pair struck a power-sharing agreement on Sunday, removing a major obstacle to the US-brokered peace process and in which Abdullah was appointed head of a reconciliation council designated to hold talks with the Taliban. Also read: Afghan mosque attack kills eight worshippers breaking Ramzan fast Ghani said that during his meeting with Khalilzad, shortly before the three men met, they had discussed a ceasefire with the Taliban. "Both sides talked about the upcoming steps for the peace process and both side stressed the issue of a ceasefire before the start of the inter-Afghan talks," Ghani's statement said, adding they discussed how to continue with a prisoner swap that the Taliban have demanded before beginning talks. His statement made no mention of a $1 billion aid cut the United States announced in March when Abdullah and Ghani failed to strike a deal and which officials have asked be reinstated. Also read: Gunmen kill 11 in two separate attacks, Afghanistan officials say Khalilzad is in the region to escalate efforts to bring the Afghan government and the Taliban to the negotiating table after months of delays. The Taliban has increased violence even after a February 29 US-Taliban pact on the withdrawal of US-led foreign forces in exchange for Taliban security guarantees. In the latest attack in northeastern Takhar province on Tuesday evening the Taliban killed nine pro-government militia force members. On Wednesday the Taliban's leader Haibatullah Akhundzada released a statement marking the Islamic celebration of Eid, calling for progress on the peace deal but also asking its fighters to stay "focused on their objectives" and "consolidate ... ranks", which government security officials criticised as inciting violence.

US envoy meets Afghan president and former rival Abdullah in push for peace

The United Nations called Tuesday for an immediate reduction of violence in Afghanistan, saying civilian deaths by both Taliban and Afghanistan's own security forces is on the increase.

In a statement, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, or UNAMA, also expressed concern about the stepped-up attacks and brutality of assaults claimed by the Islamic State group.

A horrific attack last week at a maternity hospital in the capital has not been claimed by any group, but the United States said it bears all the hallmarks of Afghanistan's IS affiliate&nbsp;targeting the country's minority Shiites in a neighborhood of Kabul they have repeatedly attacked in the past.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/afghanistan/seven-killed-in-a-car-bomb-attack-on-spy-agency-in-afghanistan-299392" hreflang="en">Seven killed in a car bomb attack on spy agency in Afghanistan</a>

The Taliban denied involvement in the maternity hospital attack, which killed 24 people, including two infants and several new mothers, calling it vile.

The U.N. Report blamed the Taliban for killing 208 civilians in April, while 172 civilians were killed in the month by the Afghan National Security and Defense Force.

Parties have committed to finding a peaceful solution and should protect the lives of all Afghans and not jeopardize people's hope for an end to the war,&nbsp;said Deborah Lyons, the UNAMA head and the U.N. Secretary- General's Special Representative to Afghanistan. ''Intra-Afghan peace negotiations need to start as soon as possible,''&nbsp;she said.

The UN's call for an end to violence comes as Washington's special peace envoy, Zalmay Khalilzad, began another round of talks with the Taliban to press them to start talking to the newly reconciled Afghan political leadership in Kabul and implement an immediate reduction in violence, said a US&nbsp;State department statement.

Khalilzad, who is the architect of a US-Taliban peace deal signed in February, has been trying to salvage the agreement and jump-start intra-Afghan negotiations between the Taliban and Afghanistan's political leadership.

A power-sharing agreement on Sunday between President Ashraf Ghani and his rival Abdullah Abdullaah brought to an end months of wrangling over who won a deeply controversial presidential election last year.

The agreement raised expectations that the next, critical round of the US-Taliban peace deal, which calls for negotiations between the Taliban and Afghanistan's political leaders, can begin.

The Taliban have said a permanent cease-fire would be one of the first items on the agenda but have been critical of repeated delays in the deals promised prisoner release, which is to be completed before talks can begin.

In Doha, Ambassador Khalilzad will meet with Taliban representatives to discuss implementation of the US-Taliban agreement and press for steps necessary to commence intra-Afghan negotiations, including a significant reduction of violence,&nbsp;said the US&nbsp;State Department statement.

Khalilzad will also visit the Afghan capital, his first visit to Kabul since Secretary of State Mike Pompeo failed to get the squabbling leaders to reach an agreement during a surprise visit in March. A frustrated Pompeo cut $1 billion in US&nbsp;Aid to Afghanistan.

Following the agreement Sunday, Pompeo called Ghani and bemoaned the time lost to their bickering.

The United States remains committed to supporting the desire of the Afghan people and the international community for a political settlement that ends the 40-year conflict and ensures Afghanistan never again serves as a platform for international terrorism,? the State Department statement said.

The agreement provides for the withdrawal of US&nbsp;And NATO troops, but only if the Taliban live up to their end to battle terrorist groups, like the Islamic State affiliate against whom they have waged bitter battles.

The increasingly brutal attacks by the IS would seem to have given urgency to the US. Efforts to get the Taliban into a coordinated battle against IS.

The United Nations called Tuesday for an immediate reduction of violence in Afghanistan, saying civilian deaths by both Taliban and Afghanistan's own security forces is on the increase.

The United Nations called Tuesday for an immediate reduction of violence in Afghanistan, saying civilian deaths by both Taliban and Afghanistan's own security forces is on the increase. In a statement, the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, or UNAMA, also expressed concern about the stepped-up attacks and brutality of assaults claimed by the Islamic State group. A horrific attack last week at a maternity hospital in the capital has not been claimed by any group, but the United States said it bears all the hallmarks of Afghanistan's IS affiliate targeting the country's minority Shiites in a neighborhood of Kabul they have repeatedly attacked in the past. Also read: Seven killed in a car bomb attack on spy agency in Afghanistan The Taliban denied involvement in the maternity hospital attack, which killed 24 people, including two infants and several new mothers, calling it vile. The U.N. Report blamed the Taliban for killing 208 civilians in April, while 172 civilians were killed in the month by the Afghan National Security and Defense Force. Parties have committed to finding a peaceful solution and should protect the lives of all Afghans and not jeopardize people's hope for an end to the war, said Deborah Lyons, the UNAMA head and the U.N. Secretary- General's Special Representative to Afghanistan. ''Intra-Afghan peace negotiations need to start as soon as possible,'' she said. The UN's call for an end to violence comes as Washington's special peace envoy, Zalmay Khalilzad, began another round of talks with the Taliban to press them to start talking to the newly reconciled Afghan political leadership in Kabul and implement an immediate reduction in violence, said a US State department statement. Khalilzad, who is the architect of a US-Taliban peace deal signed in February, has been trying to salvage the agreement and jump-start intra-Afghan negotiations between the Taliban and Afghanistan's political leadership. A power-sharing agreement on Sunday between President Ashraf Ghani and his rival Abdullah Abdullaah brought to an end months of wrangling over who won a deeply controversial presidential election last year. The agreement raised expectations that the next, critical round of the US-Taliban peace deal, which calls for negotiations between the Taliban and Afghanistan's political leaders, can begin. The Taliban have said a permanent cease-fire would be one of the first items on the agenda but have been critical of repeated delays in the deals promised prisoner release, which is to be completed before talks can begin. In Doha, Ambassador Khalilzad will meet with Taliban representatives to discuss implementation of the US-Taliban agreement and press for steps necessary to commence intra-Afghan negotiations, including a significant reduction of violence, said the US State Department statement. Khalilzad will also visit the Afghan capital, his first visit to Kabul since Secretary of State Mike Pompeo failed to get the squabbling leaders to reach an agreement during a surprise visit in March. A frustrated Pompeo cut $1 billion in US Aid to Afghanistan. Following the agreement Sunday, Pompeo called Ghani and bemoaned the time lost to their bickering. The United States remains committed to supporting the desire of the Afghan people and the international community for a political settlement that ends the 40-year conflict and ensures Afghanistan never again serves as a platform for international terrorism,? the State Department statement said. The agreement provides for the withdrawal of US And NATO troops, but only if the Taliban live up to their end to battle terrorist groups, like the Islamic State affiliate against whom they have waged bitter battles. The increasingly brutal attacks by the IS would seem to have given urgency to the US. Efforts to get the Taliban into a coordinated battle against IS.

Rise in civilian deaths by Taliban and Afghan forces, says UN

Speaking to media on a conference call,&nbsp;US Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad said a new date for the&nbsp;intra-Afghan peace talks is under discussion. He also assured that an inclusive Afghan government will be formed soon.

Talking about his plans to travel soon to talk about release of prisoners, he said he feels that it would be best if the&nbsp;intra-Afghan talks began while there is still a significant U.S. military presence in Afghanistan.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/afghanistan/us-says-islamic-state-conducted-the-attack-on-kabul-hospital-298864">Also read:&nbsp;US says Islamic State conducted the attack on Kabul hospital</a>

Under a&nbsp;Feb. 29 U.S.-Taliban agreement for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, the talks had to happen on&nbsp;March 10. However, the release of prisoners, and the uncertainty and disagreements of&nbsp;Afghan government's composition delayed the talk.

Afghanistan was attacked twice in the past one week.&nbsp;One in a Kabul hospital's maternity ward and second at a funeral. More than 50 people died in these attacks, including kids. This raised questions on the US peace effort.

Khalilzad blamed ISIS for both the attacks, contrary to&nbsp;Afghan officials' claim that Taliban was responsible for the attack on the hospital, which killed two children.

"There are forces such as the ISIS that doesn't see peace in Afghanistan in its interest and are trying to increase violence to undermine the prospects for peace," Khalilzad told reporters. "We are urging both sides not to fall into that trap but indeed to cooperate against terrorists including ISIS. So, we want this to happen as soon as possible when now, we're still there in a significant way."

Talking about drawdown of AMerican troops from Afghanistan,&nbsp;Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said during a press briefing,&nbsp;"That is still going forward. We expect to meet that within the timeline laid out under the agreement with the Taliban."

(With inputs from Reuters)

Speaking to media on a conference call, US Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad said a new date for the intra-Afghan peace talks is under discussion. He also assured that an inclusive Afghan government will be formed soon.

Speaking to media on a conference call, US Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad said a new date for the intra-Afghan peace talks is under discussion. He also assured that an inclusive Afghan government will be formed soon. Talking about his plans to travel soon to talk about release of prisoners, he said he feels that it would be best if the intra-Afghan talks began while there is still a significant U.S. military presence in Afghanistan. Also read: US says Islamic State conducted the attack on Kabul hospital Under a Feb. 29 U.S.-Taliban agreement for the withdrawal of U.S. troops, the talks had to happen on March 10. However, the release of prisoners, and the uncertainty and disagreements of Afghan government's composition delayed the talk. Afghanistan was attacked twice in the past one week. One in a Kabul hospital's maternity ward and second at a funeral. More than 50 people died in these attacks, including kids. This raised questions on the US peace effort. Khalilzad blamed ISIS for both the attacks, contrary to Afghan officials' claim that Taliban was responsible for the attack on the hospital, which killed two children. "There are forces such as the ISIS that doesn't see peace in Afghanistan in its interest and are trying to increase violence to undermine the prospects for peace," Khalilzad told reporters. "We are urging both sides not to fall into that trap but indeed to cooperate against terrorists including ISIS. So, we want this to happen as soon as possible when now, we're still there in a significant way." Talking about drawdown of AMerican troops from Afghanistan, Pentagon spokesman Jonathan Hoffman said during a press briefing, "That is still going forward. We expect to meet that within the timeline laid out under the agreement with the Taliban." (With inputs from Reuters)

New date for intra-Afghan peace talks in discussion: Zalmay Khalilzad

While the world is battling the coronavirus crisis, Afghanistan continues to grapple from endless warfare.

The scale of violence has escalated in the country even during the&nbsp;pandemic.&nbsp;A series of attacks in the past few days reflects the level of bloodshed across the country.

The innocent women and children of the country were targetted during the&nbsp;demonic attacks.&nbsp;In a terror attack at a hospital in Kabul on May 12, armed men rampaged through a maternity ward, shooting dead mothers, pregnant women and even babies. At least 24 people died in&nbsp;the&nbsp;gruesome attack.

The United States on Thursday blamed Taliban terrorists for the attack and&nbsp;it renewed calls for Afghans to embrace a troubled peace push with the Taliban insurgency.

There was another attack at a funeral for a martyred police commander in Nangarhar where a suicide bomber killed at least 15 people and wounded 50.&nbsp;Taliban terrorists were behind these attacks.

On May 14,&nbsp;a truck packed with explosives blew up near a court in the city of Gardez. Five&nbsp;people were killed while&nbsp;15 civilians were wounded in the&nbsp;attack. Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack. 
&nbsp; 
It is ironic that the Taliban&nbsp;demands peace and wants the Afghan government to conduct an impartial investigation to&nbsp;find out who are the real culprits of such gruesome attacks&nbsp;when they themselves are responsible for it. 
&nbsp; 
It&nbsp;signifies that the very idea of a peace process is dead even before it got underway. This violence is only a terrible preview of the future. 
&nbsp; 
Holding a peace dialogue with such terrorists will not shape Afghanistan's future.&nbsp;Afghan President&nbsp;Ashraf Ghani believes that these terrorists can only be dealt with on the battlefield. 
&nbsp; 
He wants his troops to switch from a defence mode to active offensive and punish&nbsp;those responsible for the deaths of innocent babies.

While the world is battling the coronavirus crisis, Afghanistan continues to grapple from endless warfare. The scale of violence has escalated in the country even during the pandemic.

While the world is battling the coronavirus crisis, Afghanistan continues to grapple from endless warfare. The scale of violence has escalated in the country even during the pandemic. A series of attacks in the past few days reflects the level of bloodshed across the country. The innocent women and children of the country were targetted during the demonic attacks. In a terror attack at a hospital in Kabul on May 12, armed men rampaged through a maternity ward, shooting dead mothers, pregnant women and even babies. At least 24 people died in the gruesome attack. The United States on Thursday blamed Taliban terrorists for the attack and it renewed calls for Afghans to embrace a troubled peace push with the Taliban insurgency. There was another attack at a funeral for a martyred police commander in Nangarhar where a suicide bomber killed at least 15 people and wounded 50. Taliban terrorists were behind these attacks. On May 14, a truck packed with explosives blew up near a court in the city of Gardez. Five people were killed while 15 civilians were wounded in the attack. Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack. It is ironic that the Taliban demands peace and wants the Afghan government to conduct an impartial investigation to find out who are the real culprits of such gruesome attacks when they themselves are responsible for it. It signifies that the very idea of a peace process is dead even before it got underway. This violence is only a terrible preview of the future. Holding a peace dialogue with such terrorists will not shape Afghanistan's future. Afghan President Ashraf Ghani believes that these terrorists can only be dealt with on the battlefield. He wants his troops to switch from a defence mode to active offensive and punish those responsible for the deaths of innocent babies.

Why the Afghan peace process is dead even before getting underway

The US military called on the parties to the conflict in Afghanistan to settle the disagreements through political means and threatened with retaliatory actions if the Taliban militants did not reduce the scale of violence, Col. Sonny Leggett, spokesman for US forces in Afghanistan, said on Saturday.

Leggett sent a two-page letter to the Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid, posted on Twitter. According to the US side, all parties must embark on the path of a "political solution" to the conflict, urging Afghans to sit down and start discussing the country`s future.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/jammu-and-kashmir-colonel-major-killed-in-kupwara-encounter-296332">Also read:&nbsp;Jammu and Kashmir: Colonel, major killed in Kupwara encounter</a>

"Reducing violence is an absolute necessity--and this is up to the leaders of all military forces-- [Afghan National Security Forces] ANDSF, Taliban fighters and, yes, the Coalition. Attacks generate attacks, while restraint produces restraint. All sides must choose restraint to prevent more killing and violence," Leggett wrote on Twitter.

The Taliban spokesman responded to the call on his social media account, saying that the path to resolution of the conflict "lies in the implementation of the agreement concluded in Doha." He also called upon Washington not to "harm the current state of things".

On February 29, the US and the Taliban inked a peace agreement in the Qatari capital of Doha, according to which an intra-Afghan negotiation was scheduled to begin on March 10. The talks, however, failed to begin due to disagreements between Kabul and the Taliban, in particular on the subject of the prisoner exchange.&nbsp;

The US military called on the parties to the conflict in Afghanistan to settle the disagreements through political means and threatened with retaliatory actions if the Taliban militants did not reduce the scale of violence, Col.

The US military called on the parties to the conflict in Afghanistan to settle the disagreements through political means and threatened with retaliatory actions if the Taliban militants did not reduce the scale of violence, Col. Sonny Leggett, spokesman for US forces in Afghanistan, said on Saturday. Leggett sent a two-page letter to the Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid, posted on Twitter. According to the US side, all parties must embark on the path of a "political solution" to the conflict, urging Afghans to sit down and start discussing the country`s future. Also read: Jammu and Kashmir: Colonel, major killed in Kupwara encounter "Reducing violence is an absolute necessity--and this is up to the leaders of all military forces-- [Afghan National Security Forces] ANDSF, Taliban fighters and, yes, the Coalition. Attacks generate attacks, while restraint produces restraint. All sides must choose restraint to prevent more killing and violence," Leggett wrote on Twitter. The Taliban spokesman responded to the call on his social media account, saying that the path to resolution of the conflict "lies in the implementation of the agreement concluded in Doha." He also called upon Washington not to "harm the current state of things". On February 29, the US and the Taliban inked a peace agreement in the Qatari capital of Doha, according to which an intra-Afghan negotiation was scheduled to begin on March 10. The talks, however, failed to begin due to disagreements between Kabul and the Taliban, in particular on the subject of the prisoner exchange.

US threatens Taliban with retaliatory actions if violence in Afghanistan continues

The Taliban will no longer participate in "fruitless" discussions with the Afghan government over a prisoner swap that had formed a key part of a deal with the US, the insurgents said.

In a tweet first sent in Pashto around midnight Tuesday&nbsp;the Taliban's political spokesman Suhail Shaheen blamed the administration of President Ashraf Ghani for delaying the prisoner release "under one pretext or another".

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/planned-1-billion-us-aid-cut-would-hit-afghan-security-force-funds-report-290684" hreflang="en">Planned $1 billion US aid cut would hit Afghan security force funds: Report</a>

"Therefore, our technical team will not participate in fruitless meetings with relevant sides starting from tomorrow," Shaheen, who is based in Doha, said in a subsequent tweet in English.

The two foes have been holding talks in Kabul since last week to try to finalise the prisoner swap that was originally supposed to have happened by March 10.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-to-allow-afghan-nationals-to-return-home-foreign-office-290572" hreflang="en">Pakistan to allow Afghan nationals to return home: Foreign Office</a>

Matin Bek, a member of the government's negotiating team, said the release had been delayed because the Taliban are demanding the release of 15 "top commanders".

"We cannot release the killers of our people," Bek told reporters on Monday.

"We don't want them to go back to the battlefield and capture a whole province." Bek added that the government was ready to release up to 400 low-threat Taliban prisoners as a goodwill gesture in return for a "considerable" reduction in violence, but the Taliban rejected that offer.

Washington signed a deal with the Taliban in late February that required the Afghan government -- which was not a signatory to the accord -- to free 5,000 Taliban prisoners, and for the insurgents to release 1,000 pro-government captives in return.

The imbalance is one of many aspects of the agreement that observers say give the Taliban a better deal. 
In the accord, Washington promised the withdrawal of US and foreign troops from Afghanistan by July next year, provided the Taliban start talks with Kabul and adhere to other guarantees.

On Sunday, the Taliban released a statement accusing the Afghan government of violating the "peace agreement" between the US and the insurgents, even though the Taliban have killed scores of security forces since the deal was signed.&nbsp;

The Taliban will no longer participate in "fruitless" discussions with the Afghan government over a prisoner swap that had formed a key part of a deal with the US, the insurgents said.

The Taliban will no longer participate in "fruitless" discussions with the Afghan government over a prisoner swap that had formed a key part of a deal with the US, the insurgents said. In a tweet first sent in Pashto around midnight Tuesday the Taliban's political spokesman Suhail Shaheen blamed the administration of President Ashraf Ghani for delaying the prisoner release "under one pretext or another". Also read: Planned $1 billion US aid cut would hit Afghan security force funds: Report "Therefore, our technical team will not participate in fruitless meetings with relevant sides starting from tomorrow," Shaheen, who is based in Doha, said in a subsequent tweet in English. The two foes have been holding talks in Kabul since last week to try to finalise the prisoner swap that was originally supposed to have happened by March 10. Also read: Pakistan to allow Afghan nationals to return home: Foreign Office Matin Bek, a member of the government's negotiating team, said the release had been delayed because the Taliban are demanding the release of 15 "top commanders". "We cannot release the killers of our people," Bek told reporters on Monday. "We don't want them to go back to the battlefield and capture a whole province." Bek added that the government was ready to release up to 400 low-threat Taliban prisoners as a goodwill gesture in return for a "considerable" reduction in violence, but the Taliban rejected that offer. Washington signed a deal with the Taliban in late February that required the Afghan government -- which was not a signatory to the accord -- to free 5,000 Taliban prisoners, and for the insurgents to release 1,000 pro-government captives in return. The imbalance is one of many aspects of the agreement that observers say give the Taliban a better deal. In the accord, Washington promised the withdrawal of US and foreign troops from Afghanistan by July next year, provided the Taliban start talks with Kabul and adhere to other guarantees. On Sunday, the Taliban released a statement accusing the Afghan government of violating the "peace agreement" between the US and the insurgents, even though the Taliban have killed scores of security forces since the deal was signed.

Taliban to end 'fruitless' meetings over prisoner swap

The Taliban said Monday they were resuming offensive operations against Afghan security forces, ending the partial truce that preceded the signing of a deal between the insurgents and Washington.

Taliban resumes ops against Afghanistan

How India changed its gameplan on tackling the Taliban in Afghanistan

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/taliban-has-to-integrate-into-new-afghanistan-afghan-chief-of-mission-tells-wion-267232">Taliban</a> Monday denied agreeing to any ceasefire in Afghanistan after rumours swirled of a potential deal that would see a reduction in fighting after more than 18 years of war.

The statement from the insurgents comes as local and international forces brace for another bloody winter amid renewed US-Taliban talks after President Donald Trump called off the negotiations earlier this year over insurgent attacks.

"In the past few days, some media have been releasing untrue reports about a ceasefire... The fact is that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has no ceasefire plans," the Taliban said, after multiple media reports, including a story in the Wall Street Journal, suggested the group was on the verge of announcing some type of temporary truce.&nbsp;

The US and the Afghan government in Kabul have long called for a ceasefire with the Taliban, including during the year of negotiations between Washington and the militants that were abruptly called off by Trump in September.

Watch:&nbsp;

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/taliban-has-to-integrate-into-new-afghanistan-says-afghan-chief-of-mission-267213/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

However, the insurgents have repeatedly stated that any potential truce will only be ironed out after American troops withdraw from the country.&nbsp; 
The US-Taliban talks, held mainly in Doha, were aimed at allowing Washington to begin withdrawing troops in return for various security guarantees.&nbsp;

They were on the brink of a deal when Trump abandoned the effort in September, citing Taliban violence. Negotiations have since restarted in Doha, but were earlier this month put on a "pause".

Trump is looking to slash the troop presence in Afghanistan, potentially even before a deal between Washington and the Taliban is cemented. 
Deadly bouts of fighting continue however, with tens of thousands of Afghan security forces killed since they inherited combat operations from NATO at the end of 2014.

Grim milestone

Earlier Monday, in northern Afghanistan’s Jowzjan province, the Taliban killed at least 13 Afghan security forces during a raid on a pro-government militia position, according to a provincial spokesman.

Every day Afghan civilians also continue to bear the brunt of the bloody conflict. The country passed a grim milestone this year, with more than 100,000 killed or wounded over the past decade, the United Nations said last week.

A UN tally found last year was the deadliest on record, with at least 3,804 civilian deaths caused by the war -- including 927 children.

Afghanistan is also struggling with an ongoing political dispute after officials announced preliminary results in the latest presidential elections that put President Ashraf Ghani on track to secure a second term.

Election authorities have yet to declare the results as final after receiving more than 16,000 complaints about the polls, with the ultimate tally expected in the coming weeks.

The Taliban have long viewed Ghani as an American stooge and have refused to negotiate with his government, leading many to fear that fighting against Afghan forces will continue even if the US secures an eventual deal with the militants to withdraw.

The Taliban Monday denied agreeing to any ceasefire in Afghanistan after rumours swirled of a potential deal that would see a reduction in fighting after more than 18 years of war.

The Taliban Monday denied agreeing to any ceasefire in Afghanistan after rumours swirled of a potential deal that would see a reduction in fighting after more than 18 years of war. The statement from the insurgents comes as local and international forces brace for another bloody winter amid renewed US-Taliban talks after President Donald Trump called off the negotiations earlier this year over insurgent attacks. "In the past few days, some media have been releasing untrue reports about a ceasefire... The fact is that the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has no ceasefire plans," the Taliban said, after multiple media reports, including a story in the Wall Street Journal, suggested the group was on the verge of announcing some type of temporary truce. The US and the Afghan government in Kabul have long called for a ceasefire with the Taliban, including during the year of negotiations between Washington and the militants that were abruptly called off by Trump in September. Watch: However, the insurgents have repeatedly stated that any potential truce will only be ironed out after American troops withdraw from the country. The US-Taliban talks, held mainly in Doha, were aimed at allowing Washington to begin withdrawing troops in return for various security guarantees. They were on the brink of a deal when Trump abandoned the effort in September, citing Taliban violence. Negotiations have since restarted in Doha, but were earlier this month put on a "pause". Trump is looking to slash the troop presence in Afghanistan, potentially even before a deal between Washington and the Taliban is cemented. Deadly bouts of fighting continue however, with tens of thousands of Afghan security forces killed since they inherited combat operations from NATO at the end of 2014. Grim milestone Earlier Monday, in northern Afghanistan’s Jowzjan province, the Taliban killed at least 13 Afghan security forces during a raid on a pro-government militia position, according to a provincial spokesman. Every day Afghan civilians also continue to bear the brunt of the bloody conflict. The country passed a grim milestone this year, with more than 100,000 killed or wounded over the past decade, the United Nations said last week. A UN tally found last year was the deadliest on record, with at least 3,804 civilian deaths caused by the war -- including 927 children. Afghanistan is also struggling with an ongoing political dispute after officials announced preliminary results in the latest presidential elections that put President Ashraf Ghani on track to secure a second term. Election authorities have yet to declare the results as final after receiving more than 16,000 complaints about the polls, with the ultimate tally expected in the coming weeks. The Taliban have long viewed Ghani as an American stooge and have refused to negotiate with his government, leading many to fear that fighting against Afghan forces will continue even if the US secures an eventual deal with the militants to withdraw.

Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan has no ceasefire plans: Taliban

The Taliban claimed responsibility after&nbsp;a US soldier was killed in&nbsp;an attack on an American convoy&nbsp;in&nbsp;Afghanistan.

The name of the US serviceman was withheld by the military.&nbsp;According to newswire AFP, the Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack.

The latest incident comes even as US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad prepares to meet Afghan leaders to discuss the Taliban peace talks.

Khalilzad was earlier in Pakistan to discuss the latest development on the Afghan talks with Pakistan officials.

In September, President Donald Trump had declared talks with the Taliban "dead" after an attack in Kabul in which one soldier was killed.

AFP reported that Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said its outfit "blew up an American vehicle in Char Dara district of Kunduz".

Last month while making a &nbsp;surprise stopover to Bagram airfield in Afghanistan to celebrate Thanksgiving holiday with troops, President Trump had said that he was still interested in a "deal" with the Taliban.

"The Taliban wants to make a deal and we're meeting with them and we're saying it has to be a ceasefire," Trump had said during his visit to Bagram airbase.

Trump added that Afghanistan "will not be decided on the battlefield" and "ultimately there will need to be a political solution" decided by people in the region.&nbsp;

US troops had entered Afghanistan after the 2001 September attack in New York and Washington to destroy the al-Qaida, about 13,000 troops still remain in Afghanistan even as the US president said he will cut down the number of troops in the region.

At least 20 American soldiers have died in Afghanistan this year.

The Taliban claimed responsibility after a US soldier was killed in an attack on an American convoy in Afghanistan. The name of the US serviceman was withheld by the military.

The Taliban claimed responsibility after a US soldier was killed in an attack on an American convoy in Afghanistan. The name of the US serviceman was withheld by the military. According to newswire AFP, the Taliban claimed responsibility for the attack. The latest incident comes even as US special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad prepares to meet Afghan leaders to discuss the Taliban peace talks. Khalilzad was earlier in Pakistan to discuss the latest development on the Afghan talks with Pakistan officials. In September, President Donald Trump had declared talks with the Taliban "dead" after an attack in Kabul in which one soldier was killed. AFP reported that Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said its outfit "blew up an American vehicle in Char Dara district of Kunduz". Last month while making a surprise stopover to Bagram airfield in Afghanistan to celebrate Thanksgiving holiday with troops, President Trump had said that he was still interested in a "deal" with the Taliban. "The Taliban wants to make a deal and we're meeting with them and we're saying it has to be a ceasefire," Trump had said during his visit to Bagram airbase. Trump added that Afghanistan "will not be decided on the battlefield" and "ultimately there will need to be a political solution" decided by people in the region. US troops had entered Afghanistan after the 2001 September attack in New York and Washington to destroy the al-Qaida, about 13,000 troops still remain in Afghanistan even as the US president said he will cut down the number of troops in the region. At least 20 American soldiers have died in Afghanistan this year.

US soldier killed in Afghanistan

Afghans are bracing for fresh violence after Donald Trump abruptly scuttled US-Taliban talks, yanking this month's presidential election back into the spotlight as the militants look to keep voters from the polls with bloody attacks.

For months now a question mark has hung over the September 28 vote, in which President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistan-commits-to-holding-presidential-polls-on-time-248549">Ashraf Ghani</a> will face off against his own Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah, as America prioritized securing a deal with the insurgents that would allow it to begin exiting its longest war.

With the agreement seemingly imminent and the US-backed government in Kabul undermined as rumours swirled of an interim regime, many Afghans and observers had expected the poll to be cancelled outright.

Even the more-than-a-dozen candidates who include former warlords, ex-spies and onetime members of the country's communist regime did not appear to believe it would take place, with little in the way of campaigning.

As the incumbent, Ghani is presumed to be the favourite, though with the lack of campaigning or credible polling observers cautioned against making any predictions.

But with Trump's bombshell announcement Saturday that the<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/afghanistans-taliban-sends-warning-to-us-president-donald-trump-in-bitter-exchange-249252"> US-Taliban</a> talks were off, the situation changed.

The Taliban quickly made it known that the only alternative was more fighting and with renewed focus on the election, which they have always opposed, the polls are a prime target, as they seek to delegitimize any resulting government by minimizing turnout.

"The Taliban will do everything possible to disrupt the election, we expect more violence," Haroun Mir, an independent analyst based in Kabul, told AFP.

Abdul Waheed Wafa, the executive director of the Afghanistan Centre at Kabul University, described a mood of confusion and fear.

"Nobody at the moment is ready, not the people of Afghanistan, not the election commission and not even the government," he said.

The presidential vote, Afghanistan's fourth since the fall of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-attack-kabul-commando-base-in-afghanistan-four-killed-249198">Taliban </a>in 2001, has already been delayed twice this year.

Turnout could be "very, very low", Wafa added, citing fear of violence and a loss of hope among voters following widespread fraud allegations during the 2014 election, for which there was no credible turnout estimate.

Both Ghani and former anti-Soviet fighter Abdullah claimed they had won that contest, with the US stepping in to broker a fragile power-sharing agreement.

No incentive to back off

Last October's legislative elections were bloodied by a series of deadly attacks as the Taliban called on citizens to stay away.

"We are so scared we are wary, we are concerned and we don't know what kind of election we will have," Wafa said.

With US-Taliban suddenly scuppered by Trump's tweets, the insurgents are now expected to try to deprive Ghani of legitimacy which some already feel is in short supply after he was sidelined by Washington in their Taliban talks.

Ghani and his officials had complained loudly over being kept out. They see the election as a way to reaffirm their right to negotiate for Afghans.

"Any future path towards peace has to be based on the will of the Afghan people and it should be owned and led by the Afghan government," said government spokesman Sediq Sediqqi.

A key element of the US-Taliban talks had been securing a guarantee from the insurgents that they will hold a direct dialogue with Kabul, deemed crucial to ending the nearly 18-year conflict.

They have historically refused to speak to a government they deem a "puppet" of the US.

But if the government which has also been blighted by corruption and disunity does win a strong mandate, then "the Taliban will have no alternative but to deal with it", argues the analyst Mir.

The question is whether the elections can be seen as fair and representative, say experts from the Afghanistan Analysts Network.

AAN analyst Thomas Ruttig told AFP that with the election so near it was "difficult to speculate there is very little time left for campaigning".

The Taliban, he said, "have enough power to disrupt the vote".

If they do, as ever in Afghanistan, it is civilians who will pay a disproportionate price.

"Stop breaking more hearts!" Facebook user Omid Sharifi wrote this week, adding that there are no winners in the escalating violence. 
&nbsp;

Afghans are bracing for fresh violence after Donald Trump abruptly scuttled US-Taliban talks, yanking this month's presidential election back into the spotlight as the militants look to keep voters from the polls with bloody attacks.

Afghans are bracing for fresh violence after Donald Trump abruptly scuttled US-Taliban talks, yanking this month's presidential election back into the spotlight as the militants look to keep voters from the polls with bloody attacks. For months now a question mark has hung over the September 28 vote, in which President Ashraf Ghani will face off against his own Chief Executive Abdullah Abdullah, as America prioritized securing a deal with the insurgents that would allow it to begin exiting its longest war. With the agreement seemingly imminent and the US-backed government in Kabul undermined as rumours swirled of an interim regime, many Afghans and observers had expected the poll to be cancelled outright. Even the more-than-a-dozen candidates who include former warlords, ex-spies and onetime members of the country's communist regime did not appear to believe it would take place, with little in the way of campaigning. As the incumbent, Ghani is presumed to be the favourite, though with the lack of campaigning or credible polling observers cautioned against making any predictions. But with Trump's bombshell announcement Saturday that the US-Taliban talks were off, the situation changed. The Taliban quickly made it known that the only alternative was more fighting and with renewed focus on the election, which they have always opposed, the polls are a prime target, as they seek to delegitimize any resulting government by minimizing turnout. "The Taliban will do everything possible to disrupt the election, we expect more violence," Haroun Mir, an independent analyst based in Kabul, told AFP. Abdul Waheed Wafa, the executive director of the Afghanistan Centre at Kabul University, described a mood of confusion and fear. "Nobody at the moment is ready, not the people of Afghanistan, not the election commission and not even the government," he said. The presidential vote, Afghanistan's fourth since the fall of the Taliban in 2001, has already been delayed twice this year. Turnout could be "very, very low", Wafa added, citing fear of violence and a loss of hope among voters following widespread fraud allegations during the 2014 election, for which there was no credible turnout estimate. Both Ghani and former anti-Soviet fighter Abdullah claimed they had won that contest, with the US stepping in to broker a fragile power-sharing agreement. No incentive to back off Last October's legislative elections were bloodied by a series of deadly attacks as the Taliban called on citizens to stay away. "We are so scared we are wary, we are concerned and we don't know what kind of election we will have," Wafa said. With US-Taliban suddenly scuppered by Trump's tweets, the insurgents are now expected to try to deprive Ghani of legitimacy which some already feel is in short supply after he was sidelined by Washington in their Taliban talks. Ghani and his officials had complained loudly over being kept out. They see the election as a way to reaffirm their right to negotiate for Afghans. "Any future path towards peace has to be based on the will of the Afghan people and it should be owned and led by the Afghan government," said government spokesman Sediq Sediqqi. A key element of the US-Taliban talks had been securing a guarantee from the insurgents that they will hold a direct dialogue with Kabul, deemed crucial to ending the nearly 18-year conflict. They have historically refused to speak to a government they deem a "puppet" of the US. But if the government which has also been blighted by corruption and disunity does win a strong mandate, then "the Taliban will have no alternative but to deal with it", argues the analyst Mir. The question is whether the elections can be seen as fair and representative, say experts from the Afghanistan Analysts Network. AAN analyst Thomas Ruttig told AFP that with the election so near it was "difficult to speculate there is very little time left for campaigning". The Taliban, he said, "have enough power to disrupt the vote". If they do, as ever in Afghanistan, it is civilians who will pay a disproportionate price. "Stop breaking more hearts!" Facebook user Omid Sharifi wrote this week, adding that there are no winners in the escalating violence.

Afghan election back in spotlight after Trump's Taliban tweets

9/11 attacks in US: Afghan civilians suffer as 'war on terror' drags on

The United States and the Taliban opened fresh negotiations in Doha on Saturday, a Taliban spokesman said, as Washington eyes a breakthrough before Afghanistan's September presidential election.

Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid tweeted that the "seventh round of talks between US representatives and the negotiation team of the Islamic Emirate have begun in Doha".

The talks mark the seventh round of negotiations aimed at ending America's longest war.

They kicked off in the Qatari capital just as news broke that at least 25 pro-government militiamen were killed in a Taliban attack in northern Afghanistan.

The attack happened in Nahrin district of northern Baghlan province before dawn when the militia members attempted to rescue a group of soldiers surrounded by Taliban militants.

An hour-and-a-half after announcing the resumption of talks, Mujahid tweeted again posting a video of a group of men, some armed and with covered faces, gathered around a waterfall singing "beautiful Afghanistan".

The video was captioned "jihadi tourism in Farah", a southern Afghan region that has previously been touted as a possible tourist draw.&nbsp;

A potential deal would see the US agree to withdraw its troops after more than 17 years in Afghanistan. In return the Taliban would guarantee the country never again became a safe haven for violent extremist groups, as happened with Al-Qaeda before the September 11, 2001 attacks.

The negotiations have so far centred on four issues -- counter-terrorism, the foreign troop presence, an intra-Afghan dialogue and a permanent ceasefire.

US officials have previously said they are hoping for a deal before the upcoming Afghan presidential elections, which have already been delayed twice and are now set for September.

On Tuesday, the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo paid an unannounced visit to Kabul and said he hoped for a peace deal with the Taliban "before September 1".

The United States and the Taliban opened fresh negotiations in Doha on Saturday, a Taliban spokesman said, as Washington eyes a breakthrough before Afghanistan's September presidential election.

The United States and the Taliban opened fresh negotiations in Doha on Saturday, a Taliban spokesman said, as Washington eyes a breakthrough before Afghanistan's September presidential election. Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid tweeted that the "seventh round of talks between US representatives and the negotiation team of the Islamic Emirate have begun in Doha". The talks mark the seventh round of negotiations aimed at ending America's longest war. They kicked off in the Qatari capital just as news broke that at least 25 pro-government militiamen were killed in a Taliban attack in northern Afghanistan. The attack happened in Nahrin district of northern Baghlan province before dawn when the militia members attempted to rescue a group of soldiers surrounded by Taliban militants. An hour-and-a-half after announcing the resumption of talks, Mujahid tweeted again posting a video of a group of men, some armed and with covered faces, gathered around a waterfall singing "beautiful Afghanistan". The video was captioned "jihadi tourism in Farah", a southern Afghan region that has previously been touted as a possible tourist draw. A potential deal would see the US agree to withdraw its troops after more than 17 years in Afghanistan. In return the Taliban would guarantee the country never again became a safe haven for violent extremist groups, as happened with Al-Qaeda before the September 11, 2001 attacks. The negotiations have so far centred on four issues -- counter-terrorism, the foreign troop presence, an intra-Afghan dialogue and a permanent ceasefire. US officials have previously said they are hoping for a deal before the upcoming Afghan presidential elections, which have already been delayed twice and are now set for September. On Tuesday, the US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo paid an unannounced visit to Kabul and said he hoped for a peace deal with the Taliban "before September 1".

Washington eyes breakthrough as US, Taliban resume talks on ending war

Taliban forces attacked the northern Afghan city of Kunduz on Saturday, a day after the launch of their <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-announce-spring-offensive-amid-afghan-peace-push-209755">annual spring offensive</a>, as fighting intensified across the country ahead of the next round of peace talks with US&nbsp;representatives.

Heavy fighting has been going on for weeks but the announcement of the spring offensive while peace talks were due was a blow to any hopes of a quick agreement and was criticised as "reckless" by US&nbsp;special peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad.

Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said in a statement the movement was committed to the peace process but accused Afghan and international forces of stepping up their own operations.

"We are committed to the ongoing process of negotiation and peaceful resolution, but we cannot be unmoved in the face of military operations and the terrorist wave of occupiers and mercenaries," Khalilzad said.

However, security officials in Kabul said that apart from the operation in Kunduz, Saturday's attacks in 15 provinces across the country were limited in scope and had largely been contained.

"They engaged Afghan security forces to show their presence with the start of their spring offensive," one senior official said. "But Afghan forces were on high alert across the country and therefore several attacks were pushed back."

Strategic city

In Kunduz, the strategic city which briefly fell to the Taliban in 2015, fighters attacked from several directions in the early hours of the morning, causing heavy casualties, the provincial governor's spokesman Enhamuddin Rahmani said.

A local health official said more than 70 dead and wounded had been brought into the main city hospital.

There were also attacks in the northern provinces of Baghlan, Takhar and Badakhshan, as well as Faryab, Sar-e Pul and Balkh, but there were no reports of significant casualties among security forces.

In southern <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/at-least-27-afghan-taliban-fighters-killed-in-own-attack-on-govt-building-210061">Afghanistan</a>, Taliban forces launched attacks in the opium-rich province of Helmand, with operations in Nad Ali, Gereshk and Sangin districts, areas that have been fought over for the past 17 years.

Omar Zwak, the provincial governor's spokesman, said the attacks had been repelled at the cost of four soldiers and 15 Taliban. "The fighting will further increase as the weather warms up," he said.

Separately, seven members of the security forces were killed in an ambush in the western province of Ghor, leading to an hours-long firefight, provincial government spokesman Abdul Hai Khatibi said.

While much of the fighting consisted of small-scale engagements, the spread of operations across most parts of the country underlined the struggle facing the Afghan government, still shut out of the peace process by the Taliban's refusal to talk to what they consider a puppet regime.

According to US&nbsp;estimates, government forces control just over half the country, but with many areas out of reach of easy communications, an accurate picture is difficult.

Peace talks are due to resume in Doha next week between US&nbsp;envoy Khalilzad and Taliban officials.

Taliban forces attacked the northern Afghan city of Kunduz on Saturday, a day after the launch of their annual spring offensive, as fighting intensified across the country ahead of the next round of peace talks with US representatives.

Taliban forces attacked the northern Afghan city of Kunduz on Saturday, a day after the launch of their annual spring offensive, as fighting intensified across the country ahead of the next round of peace talks with US representatives. Heavy fighting has been going on for weeks but the announcement of the spring offensive while peace talks were due was a blow to any hopes of a quick agreement and was criticised as "reckless" by US special peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad. Taliban spokesman Zabihullah Mujahid said in a statement the movement was committed to the peace process but accused Afghan and international forces of stepping up their own operations. "We are committed to the ongoing process of negotiation and peaceful resolution, but we cannot be unmoved in the face of military operations and the terrorist wave of occupiers and mercenaries," Khalilzad said. However, security officials in Kabul said that apart from the operation in Kunduz, Saturday's attacks in 15 provinces across the country were limited in scope and had largely been contained. "They engaged Afghan security forces to show their presence with the start of their spring offensive," one senior official said. "But Afghan forces were on high alert across the country and therefore several attacks were pushed back." Strategic city In Kunduz, the strategic city which briefly fell to the Taliban in 2015, fighters attacked from several directions in the early hours of the morning, causing heavy casualties, the provincial governor's spokesman Enhamuddin Rahmani said. A local health official said more than 70 dead and wounded had been brought into the main city hospital. There were also attacks in the northern provinces of Baghlan, Takhar and Badakhshan, as well as Faryab, Sar-e Pul and Balkh, but there were no reports of significant casualties among security forces. In southern Afghanistan, Taliban forces launched attacks in the opium-rich province of Helmand, with operations in Nad Ali, Gereshk and Sangin districts, areas that have been fought over for the past 17 years. Omar Zwak, the provincial governor's spokesman, said the attacks had been repelled at the cost of four soldiers and 15 Taliban. "The fighting will further increase as the weather warms up," he said. Separately, seven members of the security forces were killed in an ambush in the western province of Ghor, leading to an hours-long firefight, provincial government spokesman Abdul Hai Khatibi said. While much of the fighting consisted of small-scale engagements, the spread of operations across most parts of the country underlined the struggle facing the Afghan government, still shut out of the peace process by the Taliban's refusal to talk to what they consider a puppet regime. According to US estimates, government forces control just over half the country, but with many areas out of reach of easy communications, an accurate picture is difficult. Peace talks are due to resume in Doha next week between US envoy Khalilzad and Taliban officials.

Afghanistan: Taliban forces attack northern city of Kunduz, open offensive before peace talks

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

The Taliban warned on Wednesday that ongoing clashes between <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/amid-tensions-at-the-border-india-summons-pakistan-deputy-high-commissioner-200067">India and Pakistan</a> would impact the Afghan peace process and told India to refrain from further military action after its air strike against a militant camp in Pakistan the previous day.

"The continuation of such conflict will affect the Afghanistan peace process," Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said in a statement.

The <a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/taliban-says-did-not-issue-statement-on-india-pakistan-clashes-200031">Taliban</a> issued the statement at the same time that its leaders are holding talks with US&nbsp;officials in Qatar aimed at bringing an end to the 17-year war in Afghanistan.

The Taliban warned on Wednesday that ongoing clashes between India and Pakistan would impact the Afghan peace process and told India to refrain from further military action after its air strike against a militant camp in Pakistan the previous day.

The Taliban warned on Wednesday that ongoing clashes between India and Pakistan would impact the Afghan peace process and told India to refrain from further military action after its air strike against a militant camp in Pakistan the previous day. "The continuation of such conflict will affect the Afghanistan peace process," Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid said in a statement. The Taliban issued the statement at the same time that its leaders are holding talks with US officials in Qatar aimed at bringing an end to the 17-year war in Afghanistan.

Taliban warns India, Pakistan clashes will impact Afghan peace process

The Taliban was created by assassinated former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto in 1993. A quarter-century later, the terrorist group threatens to disrupt the fragile balance of power in Afghanistan.

India has many irons in the Afghan fire. Its quiet developmental work has created enormous goodwill among Afghans. That could be compromised as events move rapidly in Afghanistan.

The US-Taliban “peace” talks leading to an interim deal could bring the Taliban back into mainstream Afghan politics. The biggest losers will be the Afghan people who experienced Taliban rule in 1996-2001.

When United States President Donald Trump appointed Zalmay Khalilzad as Special Envoy to Afghanistan in September 2018, the hope was Khalilzad would be a tough negotiator able to contain the Taliban’s ambition to again run the Afghan government. He has done the exact opposite. After six-day-long talks with Taliban leaders in Qatar recently, the contours of a deal with the terrorist organisation have emerged.

There are several villains in this plot. The biggest, of course, is Pakistan. It not only created the Taliban 26 years ago, but has nurtured it, protected it and used it to terrorise the Afghan people.

The second villain is the United States. It has fought the Taliban in Afghanistan since 2001, but has refused to attack it in its Pakistan-based safe havens. These are protected by the Pakistani Army.

American drones have attacked Taliban targets along the amorphous Durand Line that separates Afghanistan and Pakistan. But apart from assassinating al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in Abbotabad in 2011, it has left Pakistan well alone. Significantly, Washington has not classified the Taliban as a designated terrorist organisation.

Former President Barack Obama set today’s events into motion in 2012 by publicly announcing a withdrawal timetable for US troops from Afghanistan. The Taliban gleefully hunkered down, killing Afghan security forces and civilians at will in the knowledge that, once US troops left, it could, with the help of the rogue Pakistani Army, once again take over the Afghanistan government.&nbsp;

Trump emboldened the Taliban further by tweeting last month that he intends to pull out all remaining US troops from Afghanistan within a short period of time.

Where does this leave India? Taliban representation in a future coalition Afghan government is now increasingly likely. President Ashraf Ghani has put himself up for re-election in the July 2019 elections. The Taliban has ignored him, refusing to talk to him while it deals with Afghanistan’s opposition leaders. India too has been sidelined in the ongoing peace talks.

But the situation is hardly irretrievable. Afghanistan’s northern and central ethnic groups — Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras — have long fought the Pashtun-dominated Taliban.

Even Pashtun civilians, who have borne the brunt of terror attacks in Afghanistan, are not united behind the Taliban. Pakistan’s terror factory, which spews out terrorists from the LeT and JeM into Kashmir, is looking forward to unleashing the Taliban on the Valley once the terror group increases its hold over Afghanistan and US troops leave.

For Pakistan, the Taliban’s resurgence is a Godsend. But it could be playing with fire. The jihadi culture that washes over the Taliban also creates splinter terror groups that attack Pakistani targets.

In the past, the Tehreek-e-Taliban launched a series of attacks on targets in Pakistan before a massive operation by the Pakistani Army, helped by US drones, killed virtually its entire leadership.

The likelihood of other Taliban breakaway terror groups emerging cannot be ruled out. As former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “You can’t keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbours. Eventually, those snakes are going to turn on whoever has (kept) them in the backyard.”

India now has to play its cards carefully. The Russians and Iranians are closely watching the evolving situation in Afghanistan. Russia created the Afghan problem to begin with by invading the country in 1979, causing the US to hire Pakistan as a jihadi recruiter to counter the Soviets. After Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, out-of-work jihadis trained by America’s CIA and Pakistan’s ISI turned their attention to Kashmir.

History could repeat itself once US troops, like the Soviets before them, leave Afghanistan to the predations of Pakistan.

Iran has a porous 921-km border with Afghanistan. The worst outcome for Tehran is Taliban-linked groups fomenting trouble at the border.

China too has an interest in curtailing terrorism in Afghanistan. Its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), already under severe criticism over high-cost loans for inflated infrastructure projects in Asia and Africa, is vulnerable to attacks by splinter terror groups. It will not welcome a Taliban government in Afghanistan without protection guarantees for the BRI.

India’s best option is to double down on its developmental work while keeping a line of communication open with the Taliban. In a coalition government under an interim accord with the US, the Taliban will make a pretence of abandoning terrorism. That will give India a window to strengthen its position in Afghanistan where Pakistan is reviled and India admired.

It won’t be enough and it won’t last. But if peace does break out in Afghanistan, however fleetingly, the Afghan people will receive a well-deserved respite from the violence that has torn their country apart.

(This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-india-s-new-afghan-challenge-2719719">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

 
&nbsp;

The Taliban was created by assassinated former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto in 1993. A quarter-century later, the terrorist group threatens to disrupt the fragile balance of power in Afghanistan.

The Taliban was created by assassinated former Pakistani prime minister Benazir Bhutto in 1993. A quarter-century later, the terrorist group threatens to disrupt the fragile balance of power in Afghanistan. India has many irons in the Afghan fire. Its quiet developmental work has created enormous goodwill among Afghans. That could be compromised as events move rapidly in Afghanistan. The US-Taliban “peace” talks leading to an interim deal could bring the Taliban back into mainstream Afghan politics. The biggest losers will be the Afghan people who experienced Taliban rule in 1996-2001. When United States President Donald Trump appointed Zalmay Khalilzad as Special Envoy to Afghanistan in September 2018, the hope was Khalilzad would be a tough negotiator able to contain the Taliban’s ambition to again run the Afghan government. He has done the exact opposite. After six-day-long talks with Taliban leaders in Qatar recently, the contours of a deal with the terrorist organisation have emerged. There are several villains in this plot. The biggest, of course, is Pakistan. It not only created the Taliban 26 years ago, but has nurtured it, protected it and used it to terrorise the Afghan people. The second villain is the United States. It has fought the Taliban in Afghanistan since 2001, but has refused to attack it in its Pakistan-based safe havens. These are protected by the Pakistani Army. American drones have attacked Taliban targets along the amorphous Durand Line that separates Afghanistan and Pakistan. But apart from assassinating al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden in Abbotabad in 2011, it has left Pakistan well alone. Significantly, Washington has not classified the Taliban as a designated terrorist organisation. Former President Barack Obama set today’s events into motion in 2012 by publicly announcing a withdrawal timetable for US troops from Afghanistan. The Taliban gleefully hunkered down, killing Afghan security forces and civilians at will in the knowledge that, once US troops left, it could, with the help of the rogue Pakistani Army, once again take over the Afghanistan government. Trump emboldened the Taliban further by tweeting last month that he intends to pull out all remaining US troops from Afghanistan within a short period of time. Where does this leave India? Taliban representation in a future coalition Afghan government is now increasingly likely. President Ashraf Ghani has put himself up for re-election in the July 2019 elections. The Taliban has ignored him, refusing to talk to him while it deals with Afghanistan’s opposition leaders. India too has been sidelined in the ongoing peace talks. But the situation is hardly irretrievable. Afghanistan’s northern and central ethnic groups — Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras — have long fought the Pashtun-dominated Taliban. Even Pashtun civilians, who have borne the brunt of terror attacks in Afghanistan, are not united behind the Taliban. Pakistan’s terror factory, which spews out terrorists from the LeT and JeM into Kashmir, is looking forward to unleashing the Taliban on the Valley once the terror group increases its hold over Afghanistan and US troops leave. For Pakistan, the Taliban’s resurgence is a Godsend. But it could be playing with fire. The jihadi culture that washes over the Taliban also creates splinter terror groups that attack Pakistani targets. In the past, the Tehreek-e-Taliban launched a series of attacks on targets in Pakistan before a massive operation by the Pakistani Army, helped by US drones, killed virtually its entire leadership. The likelihood of other Taliban breakaway terror groups emerging cannot be ruled out. As former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said, “You can’t keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbours. Eventually, those snakes are going to turn on whoever has (kept) them in the backyard.” India now has to play its cards carefully. The Russians and Iranians are closely watching the evolving situation in Afghanistan. Russia created the Afghan problem to begin with by invading the country in 1979, causing the US to hire Pakistan as a jihadi recruiter to counter the Soviets. After Soviet troops withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989, out-of-work jihadis trained by America’s CIA and Pakistan’s ISI turned their attention to Kashmir. History could repeat itself once US troops, like the Soviets before them, leave Afghanistan to the predations of Pakistan. Iran has a porous 921-km border with Afghanistan. The worst outcome for Tehran is Taliban-linked groups fomenting trouble at the border. China too has an interest in curtailing terrorism in Afghanistan. Its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), already under severe criticism over high-cost loans for inflated infrastructure projects in Asia and Africa, is vulnerable to attacks by splinter terror groups. It will not welcome a Taliban government in Afghanistan without protection guarantees for the BRI. India’s best option is to double down on its developmental work while keeping a line of communication open with the Taliban. In a coalition government under an interim accord with the US, the Taliban will make a pretence of abandoning terrorism. That will give India a window to strengthen its position in Afghanistan where Pakistan is reviled and India admired. It won’t be enough and it won’t last. But if peace does break out in Afghanistan, however fleetingly, the Afghan people will receive a well-deserved respite from the violence that has torn their country apart. (This article was originally published on The DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

India’s new Afghan challenge

Russia will host the Taliban and Afghan politicians <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/will-participate-in-all-formats-of-talks-that-bring-peace-india-on-afghan-peace-process-194136">opposed to President Ashraf Ghani </a>on Tuesday, Russian and Taliban sources said, promoting its role of power broker in what a US official called an attempt to "muddle" the US-backed peace process.

Moscow snubbed the Afghan government, sources said, to ensure the<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/kabul-control-slips-in-afghanistan-amid-us-talks-with-taliban-194042"> participation of the Taliban</a> who refuse to hold talks with Ghani's representatives to end the 17-year-old Afghan war, branding them puppets of the United States.

"Senior Taliban leaders and prominent Afghan politicians will travel to Moscow for a day-long summit. At this sensitive stage, it was best to not have Afghan government officials at the table," said a Russian official on condition of anonymity.

The Russian embassy in Kabul was not available for comment.

The Moscow talks underline the increasing role Russia is playing in Afghanistan, decades after Soviet forces withdrew from the country, with business investment plans, diplomatic and cultural outreach and small military support for the central government.

They also come as the Afghan government is struggling to recover control of districts lost to the Taliban.

The latest quarterly report by the US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction noted that the control of Afghanistan's territory and population "became somewhat more contested (and) Afghan government control or influence continued to decline".

The news of Russia hosting Ghani's critics, including former President Hamid Karzai who believes Russia can play a decisive role in ending America’s longest war, has angered Kabul and US officials.

"Russia is again trying to muddle the US-backed peace process and the political situation of Afghanistan," said a senior US official, adding that Russia's repeated overtures towards the Taliban and Ghani's critics proved its determination to belittle the government.

Prominent outspoken critics of Ghani, Mohammad Mohaqiq, Mohammad Ismail Khan and Atta Mohammad Noor, who fought against the Soviets after their 1979 invasion, will travel to Moscow.

Sohail Shahin, a spokesman for the Taliban political office in Qatar, said a delegation led by Mohammad Abbas Stanekzai, a senior political leader, would travel to Moscow for what he said would be a two-day meeting.

Last November, Moscow hosted a multilateral summit to try to find ways to end the war, drawing delegates from a body appointed by the Western-backed government, the Taliban and officials from a dozen nations, including the United States.

Analysts said Russia wants to maintain good relations with the Taliban, who are fighting to restore strict Islamic rule after their 2001 ouster.

"Russia knows that Ghani's government was established with American support that is why they are not giving importance to it," said Wadir Safi, a political science professor at Kabul University.

"The Moscow meeting can cause hurdles to the ongoing peace talks if it is not in close cooperation with the US peace efforts."

Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in January her country welcomed Washington’s peace initiative, but US special peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad’s attempts to convince the Taliban to sit down to talks with the Kabul government have failed.

The United States has some 14,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led Resolute Support mission and a separate counter-terrorism effort largely directed at groups such as al Qaeda and Islamic State.

The next round of peace talks between Khalizad and the Taliban's newly appointed political leader, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, is scheduled for Qatar on February 25th.

Russia will host the Taliban and Afghan politicians opposed to President Ashraf Ghani on Tuesday, Russian and Taliban sources said, promoting its role of power broker in what a US official called an attempt to "muddle" the US-backed peace process.

Russia will host the Taliban and Afghan politicians opposed to President Ashraf Ghani on Tuesday, Russian and Taliban sources said, promoting its role of power broker in what a US official called an attempt to "muddle" the US-backed peace process. Moscow snubbed the Afghan government, sources said, to ensure the participation of the Taliban who refuse to hold talks with Ghani's representatives to end the 17-year-old Afghan war, branding them puppets of the United States. "Senior Taliban leaders and prominent Afghan politicians will travel to Moscow for a day-long summit. At this sensitive stage, it was best to not have Afghan government officials at the table," said a Russian official on condition of anonymity. The Russian embassy in Kabul was not available for comment. The Moscow talks underline the increasing role Russia is playing in Afghanistan, decades after Soviet forces withdrew from the country, with business investment plans, diplomatic and cultural outreach and small military support for the central government. They also come as the Afghan government is struggling to recover control of districts lost to the Taliban. The latest quarterly report by the US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction noted that the control of Afghanistan's territory and population "became somewhat more contested (and) Afghan government control or influence continued to decline". The news of Russia hosting Ghani's critics, including former President Hamid Karzai who believes Russia can play a decisive role in ending America’s longest war, has angered Kabul and US officials. "Russia is again trying to muddle the US-backed peace process and the political situation of Afghanistan," said a senior US official, adding that Russia's repeated overtures towards the Taliban and Ghani's critics proved its determination to belittle the government. Prominent outspoken critics of Ghani, Mohammad Mohaqiq, Mohammad Ismail Khan and Atta Mohammad Noor, who fought against the Soviets after their 1979 invasion, will travel to Moscow. Sohail Shahin, a spokesman for the Taliban political office in Qatar, said a delegation led by Mohammad Abbas Stanekzai, a senior political leader, would travel to Moscow for what he said would be a two-day meeting. Last November, Moscow hosted a multilateral summit to try to find ways to end the war, drawing delegates from a body appointed by the Western-backed government, the Taliban and officials from a dozen nations, including the United States. Analysts said Russia wants to maintain good relations with the Taliban, who are fighting to restore strict Islamic rule after their 2001 ouster. "Russia knows that Ghani's government was established with American support that is why they are not giving importance to it," said Wadir Safi, a political science professor at Kabul University. "The Moscow meeting can cause hurdles to the ongoing peace talks if it is not in close cooperation with the US peace efforts." Russian foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in January her country welcomed Washington’s peace initiative, but US special peace envoy Zalmay Khalilzad’s attempts to convince the Taliban to sit down to talks with the Kabul government have failed. The United States has some 14,000 troops in Afghanistan as part of the NATO-led Resolute Support mission and a separate counter-terrorism effort largely directed at groups such as al Qaeda and Islamic State. The next round of peace talks between Khalizad and the Taliban's newly appointed political leader, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, is scheduled for Qatar on February 25th.

Russia to host Taliban, Afghan politicians opposed to President Ghani: Sources

Global Leadership Series: Former Afghan president Hamid Karzai speaks exclusively to WION