Pak Government Talks With Pak Taliban Going Well

December 12, 2011

Superpositioning these two talk-denials via Al Jazeerah and Reuters we can safely assume that the talks between the Pakistani government and the Pakistani Taliban are indeed going well and are likely to be successful.

Pakistani government denies talks with Taliban

Pakistan's interior minister and prime minister have both denied the government is holding peace talks with its homegrown Taliban, according to media, saying it would do so only if the militants first disarmed and surrendered.

Pakistani Taliban deny talks with government

A spokesman for the Pakistani Taliban has denied earlier claims that the group was in talks with the government in Islamabad.
…
"Talks by a handful of people with the government cannot be deemed as the Taliban talking," Ehsan told The Associated Press by telephone from an undisclosed location.

Ehsan said there would be no talks with the government until Islamabad agreed to impose Sharia law.

Posted by b on December 12, 2011 at 07:47 UTC | Permalink

Comments

Right. 🙂
“Never believe anything in politics until it has been officially denied.” – Bismark.

Posted by: Northern Night Owl | Dec 12 2011 8:59 utc | 1

Pakistan Taliban shift focus to Afghanistan
By Amir Mir
ISLAMABAD – With the Pakistan Taliban finally holding peace talks with a government in Islamabad that is increasingly seen at odds with the United States in the aftermath of the November 26 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) air strike that killed 25 soldiers, Pakistani suicide bombers seem to have shifted the focus of their deadly attacks from their homeland to neighboring Afghanistan…

Posted by: Frank | Dec 12 2011 14:57 utc | 2

Dawn editorial

. . .the Pakistani experience thus far with peace deals has not been very promising. However, there are reasons to believe that this time things may, just may, be different. Since the death of Baitullah Mehsud, the TTP appears to have increasingly suffered from cracks and a lack of direction. In Bajaur, the state appears to have re-established its writ over most areas and only small pockets of resistance remain. Faqir Muhammad himself is believed to have reached a deal with local tribal elders in Bajaur in 2009 to stop his radio broadcasts and some other militant activities in the agency. . .So if peace deals are being contemplated and quietly worked at behind the scenes, they may be occurring in circumstances where the state is in the ascendant rather than on the defensive, as it was earlier. That would be good news.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 12 2011 15:53 utc | 3

The intention of the U.S. airstrike against Pakistan, to get Pakistan back into line, did not work. In fact it had the opposite reaction. Pakistan is now more at odds with the U.S. not least because the U.S. strategy to leave Afghanistan is changing to a long-term occupation with logistical support from the air and from Central Asia. (The plan to have the ANA be responsible for security responsibilities is impossible.) This would be with increased Indian involvement, encouraged by the U.S., on Pakistan’s western flank.
The loss of Pakistan as a U.S. ally, highlighted at Bonn, and the U.S. reaction to it, has an historical precedent. In 1958 Washington supported General Ayub Khan’s coup, fearing that an elected government in Pakistan might refuse to collaborate as the US’s Cold War ally against the Soviet Union. We can assume that General Petraeus is working on it.
Meanwhile the U.S. has been tossed out of Iraq and needs bases in Afghanistan for any military action against Iran, which is becoming more likely. Plus the U.S. is committed to its commercial interests via its “Silk Road” strategy. It’s a complicated situation, involving not only the U.S. and NATO but also India, China, Russia, the -stans and especially Pakistan.
So Pakistan needs to work on its internal security to better deal with its regional problems.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 12 2011 17:37 utc | 4

@Don Bacon – Agree, but Hillary’s “silk road” strategy is completely nuts. No one believes in that.

Posted by: b | Dec 12 2011 18:45 utc | 5

@b – re Silk Road – of course it’s fanciful, it requires Pakistan for one thing to reach the sea, Iran being off limits, but the ‘safe havens’ excuse for occupying Afghanistan and building bases in Central Asia is getting a bit tired so they need a Silk Road variation to keep the bankers interested.
//STRENGTHENING KAZAKHSTAN’S ECONOMY: USAID’s work in the economic growth sector is co-funded by the Government of Kazakhstan under the joint Program for Economic Develop-ment. USAID’s economic policy program helps strengthen the budget and public sector audit processes by improving monetary and competition policies. . .//
Thank you, American taxpayers, for strengthening Kazakhstan’s economy because they have a lot of oil and if you don’t have a job then don’t be selfish and think of the Kazakhstanis who are getting jobs with your financial help.

Posted by: Don Bacon | Dec 12 2011 19:26 utc | 6

Watch David Frost interview with Imran Khan, Dec 10, 2011. He discusses this directly.
Frost Over the World – Imran Khan: Pakistan’s next leader?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z8JlW8kwozg

Posted by: MRW | Dec 13 2011 11:33 utc | 7

U.S. military drone crashes in Seychelles 12/13/2011
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/drone-crashes-in-seychelles/2011/12/13/gIQAQ3PsrO_blog.html

Posted by: kim sky | Dec 15 2011 18:10 utc | 8

Back to Main