No dignified peace unless presidential polls held

By: M. W. Qasemi

Negotiators from both sides (the US and the Taliban group) have said they will take consultation with their leaders, following the eighth round of peace talks, believed to end the nearly 18-year war in the country.
The Taliban side expected the long-but-useful talks that ended few days ago, would open the way for both sides to consult their leaders for taking the next steps, while of the US’s Zalmay Khalilzad hoped “this is the last Eid where Afghanistan is at war.”
“I know Afghans yearn for peace. We stand with them and are working hard toward a lasting & honorable peace agreement and a sovereign Afghanistan which poses no threat to any other country,” Khalilzad’s tweet was quoted by many local and world media including The Washington Post as saying.
According to some details emerged about the most recent peace negotiations between the US and the Taliban, the deal is expected to cover the foreign forces withdrawal from Afghanistan, but in exchange for guarantees by the Taliban that “Afghanistan would not become a haven for other extremist groups.
The Taliban representatives have repeatedly refused negotiation with the government of Afghanistan, while the people who have elected the present system would stay against any deals pushing aside their own democratic system.
Actually the government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is waiting for what would be the result from the so long discussions that took up to eight rounds so far, with the possible ensuing processes, still unknown how long will they take to have a lasting peace restored in the war suffered nation.
In addition to the available legitimate system, no Afghan is ready to accept such deals with no share from the government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan.
After fear of potential disorders anarchism over the failure of the IEC to announce a transparent and fair presidential election results in 2014, the US came along to help form the National Unity Government (NUG), which was agreed and supported by the two rival sides. All Afghans supported the agreement to have a free powerful conflict on the system.
But as seen the US has forgotten what it had done for Afghanistan (establishment of the NUG) so it’s likely resorting to a one-side deal with the key anti-government rebels.
The US should not give the Taliban an opportunity to oppose the current system – but rather – to join a direct peace deal with its negotiators. The US should provide the ground for an intra-Afghan dialogue between the government and the Taliban, as no peace negotiation would not be acceptable, unless the government was the key side and such an accord would be followed by a political settlement and a permanent cease-fire between the two sides.
As the country’s President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani said, the fate of the Afghans cannot be decided outside the country and they will never allow their fate to be dealt by the foreign without any discussion with their own picked representatives.
President Ghani once again insisted that peace was only possible between the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Taliban movement.
On the other side, the presidential election would never be canceled even in the event of a peace settlement and the current system would never be replaced with an interim government
The presidential election set for September 1 is inevitably held as it’s the willing of the people not other internal malicious circles or foreigners.
A dignified peace would never be achieved unless a legitimate and strong government coming through an election.
In conclusion, peace has to come but not in the price of the presidential election annulment or a replacement of the interim administration with the current system.

Related posts

Restoration of peace, stability in interests of regional, neighboring countries

Saida Ahmadi

IEC making effort to hold transparent parliamentary elections

Saida Ahmadi

Afghanistan more optimistic about peace: survey

Saida Ahmadi