Afghanistan sees itself being taken over by foreign troops, a brew that historically forced the country’s many tribes to continue fighting.
China fears American and NATO troops seeking a permanent presence in South Asia. As well, China has made considerable investments in South Asia. At stake is a $3.5 billion investment in a cooper mine at Aynak south of Kabul, expansion of the Karakoram Highway linking China with northern Pakistan, construction of access roads in Afghanistan, a north-south energy and trade corridor that envisions oil and gas pipelines running to China’s Xinjiang Province, and up to a reported $13 billion investment in construction and operation of a deep-water port at Gwadar, Pakistan, on the Arabian Sea.
Russia’s main fear is that the United States and NATO plan a permanent military presence in Afghanistan and Central Asia. The Talks could provide mechanisms whereby Russia’s legitimate trade and investments in the region would be protected. If necessary, the Seven-Party Talks could ease Russian fears further through cooperation with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, an inter-governmental security forum founded in 2001 that includes Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
Iran fears that any American and NATO military presence in Afghanistan would be used to force regime change in Iran.
Pakistan worries greatly about a perceived U.S.-India-Afghan alliance bent on dismembering Pakistan. It is especially suspicious of the U.S.-India nuclear agreement that allows trade of nuclear fuel for peaceful use.
On-going and regular talks would provide a political mechanism that is currently lacking in the region for a host of problems, including bilateral relations. For example, the United States has pledged $750 million for Pakistan’s Federally-Administered Tribal Areas. At present, no mechanism exists for delivery of this aid.
The Seven-Party Talks could also provide a mechanism easing tensions between Pakistan and India. As well, they could lead to improved relations between all the parties and Iran, including resolution of Iran’s nuclear arms ambitions.
Some might argue the United States should not negotiate with Iran until it gives up its nuclear weapons ambitions. This was not the case with North Korea: The Six Party Talks concerning its nuclear program continue with full participation of the United States and North Korea.
Seven Party Talks in South Asia would be an ambitious undertaking, but it is a change we can believe in. Military action alone is unworkable. What can work is a road map for ongoing dialog that serves to reduce fears and anxieties among different countries and people. Only with such a real change in our foreign policy can real progress be made.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
