Read on Twitter
The practice in previous years has been to renew the mandate of the Monitoring Team for two years. However, in 2019 US proposed a shorter mandate period. It seems that the US initially suggested that the mandate of the team be renewed for only 3 months.
https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2020/12/afghanistan-vote-on-sanctions-draft-resolution.php?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=17%20December%202020%20Campaign%201&utm_content=17%20December%202020%20Campaign%201+CID_2d8a95b6152a311926605744f69e60d3&utm_source=Email%20Newsletter&utm_term=Afghanistan%20Vote%20on%20Sanctions%20Draft%20Resolution
https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2020/12/afghanistan-vote-on-sanctions-draft-resolution.php?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=17%20December%202020%20Campaign%201&utm_content=17%20December%202020%20Campaign%201+CID_2d8a95b6152a311926605744f69e60d3&utm_source=Email%20Newsletter&utm_term=Afghanistan%20Vote%20on%20Sanctions%20Draft%20Resolution
It is possible that the impetus behind the US proposal for a shorter mandate was its desire to facilitate progress in its negotiations with the Taliban at the time.
The US seemingly sought to remove language contained in res 2501 that referenced the TB’s terrorist activities and its role in the narcotics trade in Afghanistan. It also added language referencing the review of designations in the 1988 sanctions regime stipulated by res 2513.
This was opposed by EU who preferred language identical to 2501.
A compromise was reached by retaining the original reference to TB’s role in the narcotics trade and illicit exploitation of natural resources, while removing the reference to the TB’s activities as terrorist acts
A compromise was reached by retaining the original reference to TB’s role in the narcotics trade and illicit exploitation of natural resources, while removing the reference to the TB’s activities as terrorist acts
It appears that the US similarly took issue with characterising Taliban activities as terrorist in nature during the negotiations on the 3 December General Assembly resolution on the situation in Afghanistan.
In its explanation of vote following the adoption of that resolution, which the US voted for but did not co-sponsor, the US representative regretted that the resolution failed to make a distinction between the Taliban on the one hand and ISIL and Al‑Qaida on the other.
In less diplomatic terms:
US is:
1. Seeking to remove lnaguage that implies TB involved in terrorist activities as well as narcotics and exploitations of natural resources.
2. Seeking to limit monitoring teams mandate from 2 years to 3 months to give intra-AFG talks boost
US is:
1. Seeking to remove lnaguage that implies TB involved in terrorist activities as well as narcotics and exploitations of natural resources.
2. Seeking to limit monitoring teams mandate from 2 years to 3 months to give intra-AFG talks boost
Both proposals opposed by some including EU.
Current compromise:
1. No reference to terrorist activities but narcotics and natural resources retained.
2. 1 year mandate instead of 2 years or 3 months.
Vote to be held tomorrow.
Current compromise:
1. No reference to terrorist activities but narcotics and natural resources retained.
2. 1 year mandate instead of 2 years or 3 months.
Vote to be held tomorrow.
