Read on Twitter
THREAD: Reflecting on the two proposed agendas in Afghan peace talks, what stands out?
-Afghan govt implicitly demands: Taliban must cease relationship with Pakistan & vice versa; Taliban must also effectively give up means of generating revenue. /1 https://tolonews.com/afghanistan-168520
-Afghan govt implicitly demands: Taliban must cease relationship with Pakistan & vice versa; Taliban must also effectively give up means of generating revenue. /1 https://tolonews.com/afghanistan-168520
-While Taliban included discussion of women's "Islamic" rights, Afg govt did NOT specifically refer to women or minorities;
instead placed rights & freedoms in the same point as "protection of Afghan achievements" (ie, preserving current constitution). /2 https://twitter.com/FroghWazhma/status/1338519206099292160?s=20
instead placed rights & freedoms in the same point as "protection of Afghan achievements" (ie, preserving current constitution). /2 https://twitter.com/FroghWazhma/status/1338519206099292160?s=20
-Unsurprisingly, few of Islamic Republic's proposed agenda points suggest radically altering the current constitutional order.
Points such as "a roadmap to political participation" sound more like the deal the Afghan govt struck with Hekmatyar in 2016. /3 https://www.usip.org/publications/2018/07/political-deal-hezb-e-islami
Points such as "a roadmap to political participation" sound more like the deal the Afghan govt struck with Hekmatyar in 2016. /3 https://www.usip.org/publications/2018/07/political-deal-hezb-e-islami
-Islamic Republic seeks to preserve status quo as much as possible... but lack of major revisions to current structure of govt could irk many Afghans who see strongly centralised presidential system as deeply unfair.
Is it the right or wrong time to address these grievances? /4
Is it the right or wrong time to address these grievances? /4
-An entire section of govt's agenda proposes discussing aspects of development. These points are less relevant to resolving the war than post-peace initiatives.
Such points may provide common ground for general agreement, but does not address causes/drivers of the conflict. /5
Such points may provide common ground for general agreement, but does not address causes/drivers of the conflict. /5
-Instead, govt makes very clear what it believes are primary drivers of war in Afghanistan: multiple oblique references to Pakistan & role as sanctuary & supporter of Taliban.
Has long been the lens through which many frame the war. But almost certain Taliban won't discuss. /6
Has long been the lens through which many frame the war. But almost certain Taliban won't discuss. /6
Finally, neither side suggests an agenda that would rapidly move into interim govt arrangement (in spite of the stated preference of US envoy Khalilzad for this approach & fears the Taliban sought this).
Positively, both agendas are outlines for comprehensive discussion. /end
Positively, both agendas are outlines for comprehensive discussion. /end
(PS: @JJSchroden's comparison of the two agendas' points is additionally useful; hopefully his exercise is being replicated on both sides during this pause in negotiations) https://twitter.com/JJSchroden/status/1339348356083101699
