Editor in Chief: Moh. Reza Huwaida Sunday, September 27th, 2020

Stifle the Evil Attempts

Things are getting hazier in Afghanistan. President talks of US-led occupation and the Afghans' uprising against them if NATO air operations are continued. Certain notorious elements optimize the opportunity to raise anti-American sentiments in public. Thanks to the current freedom of expression, some media channels vividly provoke people to launch demonstrations that most likely turn into uncontrolled violence.

Many analysts wonder how a so-called Afghan intellectual, a University professor, didn't distinguish between the Soviet invasion and the US-led war in Afghanistan. He bluntly said US's presence here was a clear occupation of the country as they carried guns while patrolling. There seems to be no relevance of carrying gun and necessarily being an occupier. The United Nations Security Council sees the International Security Assistance Forces operating in Afghanistan as legitimate body to help Afghanistan get stable in the pro-Taliban age. However, there are some commentators excerpting president's statements and conclude an occupied Afghanistan.

President Karzai's heated speech came following a controversial attack that led to civilian deaths in southern Afghanistan. He thus ordered the U.S.-led coalition to stop bombing homes because too many civilians were being killed. "I warn NATO forces that a repeat of airstrikes on the houses of Afghanistan's people will not be allowed," Karzai said at a news conference at the presidential palace. "The people of Afghanistan will not allow this to happen anymore, and there is no excuse for such strikes." It was Karzai's strongest-ever statement against NATO alliance airstrikes and further complicated a difficult relationship with the Obama administration as it prepares a troop drawdown in the increasingly unpopular war.

In response to the rising concerns on civilian casualties, the top NATO commander in Afghanistan said on Thursday June 02, 2011 that he is committed to reducing the loss of innocent lives to an absolute minimum. The statement marked Gen. David Petraeus's latest attempt to ease President Hamid Karzai's anger over civilian casualties. "We share President Karzai's emotion about this," Petraeus said. "We are here to protect the people, to safeguard them, not to harm them or their property."

On the other side, some experts maintain that president Karzai's harsh criticism and the warning comes as he is in the second term of presidency and will no longer keep silent for having US's support. So, they say, for president, it would be a good chance to amend his image in public and fulfill his promises to the Afghans. However, reports said that he had received advice that the Chinese could prove more reliable allies than the Americans. But that is not what the Afghans demand and how the process moves. Afghans need the international community and the US-led NATO presence for longer time to get capable of an independent fight against extremism. The entire county would come under attacks from more extremist groups and will see more external meddling as soon as NATO forces abandon Afghanistan.

Karzai's government is not yet ready to take on the Taliban insurgency by itself. In the short term, the government needs to avoid impractical statements on the US-led forces here and the country's foreign policy towards the regional and neighboring countries. And more importantly, it needs to prevent misuse of presidential statements and the situation by certain infamous circles attempting to deteriorate the instable situation and deepen the gap between Afghan government and the people and enhance public pessimist view towards the international community working here that will, of course, prove too costly for the new Afghanistan.