Taliban seek international recognition

It must be highly disappointing for Taliban that their government has neither been recognized by Muslim countries as well as non-Muslim countries. The pretext is most whimsical, education for girls.

The dichotomy of super powers is the universal truth, in the recent half century they have killed millions of people in proxy wars, used all sorts of lethal weapons and committed worst war crimes. If the heads of the states ordering killing of people can’t be trialed for war crime, why is Taliban government being punished for not providing education to girls?

One may not be wrong in inferring the conclusion that the world super powers have joined United States in punishing Taliban for defeating the self-proclaimed super power.

A Taliban-run gathering of thousands of male religious and ethnic leaders ended on Saturday by asking foreign governments to formally recognize their administration, but made no signals of changes on international demands such as the opening of girls' high schools.

The Afghan economy has plunged into crisis as Western governments have withdrawn funding and strictly enforced sanctions, saying the Taliban government needs to change course on human rights, especially those of women.

"We ask regional and international countries, especially Islamic countries … to recognize the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan ... release all sanctions, unfreeze (central bank) funds and support in development of Afghanistan," the gathering's participants said in a statement, using the group's name for their government, which has not been formally recognized by any country.

The group's reclusive leader joined the three-day gathering of more than 4,000 men on Friday, and delivered a speech in which he congratulated the participants on the Taliban's victory and underlined the country's independence.

The Taliban went back on an announcement that all schools would open in March, leaving many girls who had turned up at their high schools in tears and drawing criticism from Western governments.

In speeches broadcast on state-run television, a small number of participants brought up girls' and women's education. The Taliban's deputy leader and Interior Minister, Sirajuddin Haqqani, said the world had demanded inclusive government and education and these issues would take time.

But the group's supreme leader, Haibatullah Akhundzada, who is normally based in the southern city of Kandahar and rarely appears in public, said foreigners should not give orders.

The gathering's final statement said defence of the Islamic Emirate was obligatory and that the Islamic State militant group, which has said it was behind several attacks in the country, was illegal.

It said it would not interfere with neighbouring countries and they should not interfere in Afghanistan.

 

State Department says no truth in claims of US involvement in regime change in Pakistan

The US State Department has said that there’s absolutely no truth in Imran Khan’s claim that Washington is behind an alleged conspiracy to overthrow his government.

Khan has been claiming that his independent foreign policy has annoyed foreign powers and they have financed the opposition’s no-trust move against him.

In an address to the nation on Friday, Khan had reiterated his allegations that a senior US diplomat threatened a regime change in Pakistan.

In another statement,Khan also named the official — Donald Lu, Assistant Secretary, Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs in the Department of State — who allegedly threatened a regime-change in Pakistan during a meeting with the then Pakistani Ambassador Asad Majeed Khan.

Official says Washington supports Pakistan’s constitutional process

At a Friday evening news briefing in Washington, a journalist reminded Deputy State Department Spokesperson Jalina Porter that in his address to the nation, Khan renewed his allegation that the US had encouraged the no-confidence vote, saying that he had a diplomatic cable to prove it.

“Let me just say very bluntly there is absolutely no truth to these allegations,” said Ms Porter.

“Of course, we continue to follow these developments, and we respect and support Pakistan’s constitutional process and rule of law. But again, these allegations are absolutely not true,” she added.

A prestigious diplomatic news site, ‘Foreign Policy,’ noted in its latest report on Pakistan that the future of Islamabad’s fragile relationship with Washington remains foggy after Khan levelled serious allegations against the United States, making it a central part of their political crisis”.

The report, however, argued that Khan’s description of the alleged US involvement sounded more like “a US official complaining about the Pakistani prime minister, not plotting his ousting”.

The Washington-based news site noted that in Pakistan, public mistrust of the United States runs deep, in great part because there is a history of US meddling in Pakistan’s internal politics.

The report warned that Khan’s allegations have hurt US-Pakistan relations, especially after Khan publicly named the US official involved in the so-called plot.

The report pointed out that their ties were unsettled before this political crisis too as each country deepens relations with the other’s top rival — Washington with New Delhi and Islamabad with Beijing”.

The report warned that Khan’s allegation of the United States orchestrating regime change will make it more difficult to rein in the unmoored relationship.

Courtesy: Dawn

Can Hezbollah be savior of Lebanon?

The Lebanese people, regardless of sect or component, welcomed the decision, and at a time when the Arab Gulf states, led by Saudi Arabia, have not taken any steps to help the Lebanese people despite their support for Lebanon, Iran became the Lebanese salvation card.

Iran is trying to position itself as a fuel supplier to Lebanon to empower its Lebanese proxy. The goal is to force Lebanon to become dependent on Iran and then all the gas and fuel going to Lebanon will come through Hezbollah, which can then provide it to allies and friends.

Opponents of Hezbollah say that Iran’s goal is to impoverish Lebanon, destroy its middle and upper class, encourage its Sunni and Christian community to emigrate so that Hezbollah can grow in power and that all that will remain is a hollowed-out Lebanese state that is a province within a larger Hezbollahstan that is more powerful than Lebanon.

They also allege that Iran has been doing this for decades, slowly helping Hezbollah swallow Lebanon and create a parallel state and economy. Hezbollah has its own extra-judicial armed forces, a massive illegal armed militia with 150,000 missiles. Hezbollah sends fighters to Syria and conducts Lebanon’s foreign policy. Hezbollah has its own telecommunications network. It is able to control voting for the presidency and premiership. It also has a parallel construction, banking, and even supermarket network. Now it will be the supplier of fuel to Lebanon.

A report by Iran’s Tasnim media, "The Iranian ships, the triangle of resistance that shattered the American hegemony," lays out the Iranian regime's approach. Iran’s media is linked to the government and it parrots the government’s agenda. “Iran's fuel exports to Lebanon to resolve the country's crisis are currently making headlines in the Middle East and Western media,” the report says. It notes that the ships, making their way via the Suez Canal to Lebanon, are a “point of hope for the country.” Nasrallah said the Iranian ships would arrive soon.

 “The important point is that the import of gas from Egypt to Lebanon must be done through the territory of Syria, which is not possible without the consent of the Syrian government, and the United States must obtain the consent of Damascus, which requires the reduction of sanctions against Syria or it is the general abolition of Caesar Law,” says Tasnim.

In essence, Iran now knows that the fuel weapon can be used to force Lebanon to be dependent on Iran and its allies Hezbollah and Syria. Iran wins either way, either through bringing ships of “salvation” to Lebanon or by getting the US to aid the Syrian regime.

Iran suspects that the US wants to prevent the Iranian oil and gas shipments. “The Americans are in a paradoxical situation - on the one hand, they intend to prevent the import of Iranian fuel to Lebanon, and on the other hand, sanctions against Syria will continue,” the report says.

"The Zionist regime, which along with the United States is considered one of the biggest victims of Iran's fuel imports to Lebanon, has preferred to remain silent for the time being and has not even uttered its usual threats against Iranian ships, but the Zionists fear this action can be clearly seen in the media reports and comments of the regime's experts.”

Iran should be monitoring Israel’s reaction closely. The report notes “Israel's silence on the arrival of Iranian fuel ships in Beirut,” and also says the arrival of fuel “will increase Hezbollah's popularity in Lebanon and expand Iran's national influence in Lebanon, which means the failure of all the projects of Washington and Tel Aviv against the Lebanese resistance.”

The fuel weapon is now Iran’s main priority. The goal is to build up Hezbollah. “The success of Seyyed Hassan Nasrallah in rescuing the Lebanese people from the fuel crisis once again introduced him as a savior for all Lebanese and a leader who is working hard to resolve the country's crises, as opposed to the real face of some Lebanese politicians who it became clear to everyone that they were involved in aligning the positions of the West and the United States in the siege of Lebanon and in creating crisis and sedition inside the country,” Tasnim reported.

The point is that Hezbollah should be perceived as “saving” Lebanon while the West is seen as harming Lebanon. Meanwhile, the opposition to Hezbollah in Lebanon is weakened.

This Janus-face use of Hezbollah, where Hezbollah is responsible for Lebanon’s economic collapse and benefits from it by making Lebanon dependent on Iran, is the same model Qatar used with the Taliban in Afghanistan. It empowered the Taliban to take over Afghanistan and also gained credit from the West for “helping” Afghans flee.

Iran alleges that conglomerates in Lebanon include companies that hoard goods and which are controlled by the US. Iran is thus positioning itself as warring with the US economically in the region. Iran has a new deal with China that may be part of the reason it now sees the economy as a frontline. Hezbollah has created a new equation according to which Lebanese could turn to the East to resolve their economic crisis, led by the Islamic Republic of Iran and then Lebanon. It can operate freely in the commercial and economic spheres and gradually get out of American control.

Iran argues that its enemies in Lebanon include Former Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri and Lebanese Forces head Samir Geagea. Hezbollah assassinated Hariri’s father, who was also prime minister. Iran accuses Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states of laying “siege” to Lebanon.

A Lebanese delegation went to Syria and asserts that this “unprecedented move shows that the Americans were unwittingly forced to reduce pressure on Damascus and Beirut. During the meeting, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad stressed that he was ready to provide any support to the Lebanese brothers.” Iran wins either way is the narrative.

Iran claims the US made a decision to get Lebanon to bring gas from Egypt to Lebanon through Syria. This paves the way for Hezbollah to redouble its efforts to break the US brutal siege of Lebanon, and this could even affect the border demarcation talks between Lebanon and occupied Palestine, and perhaps even use Iranian companies to extract Lebanese gas and oil.

The border issue likely relates to demarcating water borders off the coast. The move could also pave the way for countries such as Russia, Iran, and China to invest in Lebanon and take the Lebanese economy out of Western control.

Iran argues that this defeat of the US is linked to the defeat of the US in Afghanistan which shattered American hegemony and could be an incentive for other nations in the region to relinquish control by Washington.

Iran sees a tectonic shift in the region. This is big news for Israel because if Iran has successfully engineered an economic war by which Hezbollah and the Syrian regime are empowered, then Iran will likely use this leverage to further entrench itself in Syria and Lebanon in order to threaten Israel.

Iran has shown its cards that it has a long-term economic goal stretching from China via Afghanistan to Iran and then through Iraq to Lebanon. This is the wider impact of the fuel war currently being waged.

Is west ready to bargain with new Iranian president?

For years, Iranian moderates, such as former President Hassan Rouhani, tried but failed to reach an understanding with the West. Now, a hardliner is in charge. Does President Ebrahim Raisi’s election spell the end of what Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei once called Iran’s ‘heroic flexibility’ in dealing with the West? In the wake of the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan, the question now matters even more.

The answer is yes as well as no. Raisi is not going to take up the mantle of attempting to reconcile with the West. The ideological confrontation with the United States is central to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s fundamentalist identity.

Moreover, both moderates and radicals in Iran still view the strategy of building a proxy-supported Iranian ‘empire’ across the Middle East—advanced by the late military commander Qassem Suleimani, who was assassinated by the US last year—as vital to uphold and advance the Islamic Revolution’s purpose. No true rapprochement is possible between the West and Iran, especially now that hardliners are fully running the show.

It’s also worth noting that ‘heroic flexibility’ never applied to Iran’s dealings with Israel—another fundamental bugbear. Raisi’s administration will certainly maintain Iran’s shadow war with the ‘Zionist entity’.

Iran’s recent attack on an Israeli-managed cargo ship near Oman in the Arabian Sea has been viewed by some as a kind of strategic shift—or, at least, escalation—as it represented a blatant violation of freedom of navigation in international waters. But, in truth, it is merely a continuation of a war in which both Iran and Israel have never shown much regard for international norms.

Israel assumed that, by not using its own merchant fleet—99% of its foreign trade is handled by international ships, it could avoid such assaults. But just as Iran’s forces in Syria are vulnerable to Israeli attacks, Israeli-linked entities in the Arabian Sea, a theatre thousands of miles from the country’s coast, but close to Iran’s mainland are vulnerable to Iranian attacks.

Iran will not forgo the opportunities this represents, not only to impose direct costs on Israel, but also to undermine the Abraham Accords, which, by establishing diplomatic relations between Israel and four Arab states, are viewed by Iran as a strategic setback. Already, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia are reaching out to Iran, out of concern that US President Joe Biden’s foreign policy in the region won’t protect their interests.

But none of this means that Iran is gearing up for a direct confrontation with the West. Raisi has inherited an economy on life support. The Covid-19 pandemic and Western sanctions have cost Iran about 1.5 million jobs. Moreover, oil and gas export revenues have plummeted; annual inflation has reached almost 50%, with the cost of basic foods soaring by nearly 60%.

Clearly, Khamenei’s 2011 vision of a self-reliant Iranian ‘resistance economy’ hasn’t been realized. Furthermore, now that Raisi is President, Iran’s hardliners can no longer blame pro-Western moderates for Iran’s economic woes. To stave off potential unrest, Iran’s government must stem the economy’s decline by persuading the international community to ease sanctions, which will require it to reach some sort of understanding with the US over its nuclear program.

Russia and China are Iran’s more natural allies, but neither country will give Iran the resources it needs to sustain its costly proxy wars or reverse its economic decline. China, in particular, views Iran as a pawn in its broader chess match with the US, one that it would willingly sacrifice for, say, an agreement on vital trade issues.

An Iranian empire in the Middle East is simply not a strategic priority for China. At the same time, Iranian fundamentalists can’t be too happy with their Chinese ally’s brutal crackdown on its Muslim Uyghur population. The bilateral relationship thus does not represent a way out of Iran’s current predicament.

A new nuclear agreement is an existential imperative for Iran. And, as much as he dislikes the idea of striking a deal with the US, Khamenei understands this. Remaining on the threshold of nuclear breakout, a position it attained following America’s withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in 2018, without actually crossing it may be Iran’s current bargaining position. This is what Raisi might have meant when, prior to his election, he upheld Iran’s need to return to the JCPOA in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.

But the real bone of contention lies not in whether the parties are willing to go back to the old JCPOA, but the terms on which Iran would accept the US demand for a new, long-term deal once the JCPOA expires. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has unrealistically called for a ‘longer and stronger’ accord, one that stops Iran from amassing nuclear material for generations, halts its missile tests and ends its support of terrorist groups.

What is clear is that Washington should do all it can to encourage Iran’s ‘heroic flexibility’. After America’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan, the last thing the US needs is even more chaos in the Middle East. Likewise, the victory in Afghanistan of the Sunni Taliban, staunch ideological enemies of Shia Iran, should strengthen Iran’s commitment to avoid stoking conflict with the West. Now might be as good an opportunity as the US is going to get to reach a lasting nuclear agreement with Iran.