There are no serious talks with Taliban

Iranian Diplomacy: Francesc Vendrell has a long resume of diplomatic posts. He has been the former Special Representative of the European Union for Afghanistan and the former Personal Representative of the Secretary-General and Head of the United Nations Special Mission for Afghanistan. In an Interview we talked about the current situation in Afghanistan, the strategic partnership with the U.S., Taliban and the next presidential election:

IRD: Let's start with the situation in Afghanistan. You have recently visited Afghanistan. First of all, I want to know about your assessment of the situation in Afghanistan. After 10 years since the US attack on Afghanistan, what is your evaluation of the political and security situation in this country?

My own evaluation is that things are not looking positive, and that there is still danger. After the departure of most of the international forces in another couple of years, and also because of the different sides in the presidential elections in Afghanistan, there is danger that the situation could unravel; perhaps not immediately, but that would be a serious problem. Now, this is not necessarily the perception of many Afghans I’ve met. In fact, when I was in Afghanistan in May, most of the people I met, or most of the Afghan people involved in politics, were relatively reassured, I wouldn't say optimistic, but they were somewhat reassured because they thought that with the strategic partnership that they had just signed with the US, or that the government had signed with the US, that this would lead to or ensure that the Taliban would not take over the country or at least would not take over the main cities, particularly Kabul. I think they laid an enormous stress on it, perhaps excessive stress, because, as you know, the strategic partnership agreement is only a broad agreement which needs to be specified in detail in negotiations next year. So it's a bit premature to say what will evolve. I also found that the majority of the political people were focusing on the presidential elections in another two years. They're looking at the international community, which I think they meant the West, to ensure that elections would not be fraudulent. Again, I'm not sure that the international community is going to do anything of this kind and that it will be very much up to the Afghans, I think it is the Afghans who need to realize that it's their responsibility to ensure both credible and hopefully free elections, and also to ensure that they have the capacity to defend themselves.

You referred to the strategic partnership with the US. It has two sides, the local impact and the foreign impact. You talked about the local impact. I want to know about the impact on the neighbors. What do you think about the influence of this strategic partnership on relations between Afghanistan and its neighbors?

I think that this is a problem. I can understand the concerns of some of the neighbors, particularly Iran, but also to some degree Pakistan and maybe others, about the fact that the US will maintain presumably bases in Afghanistan; either hopefully for a relatively short period, but nonetheless that they will stay on. What has really been missing in the last couple of years has been the appointment of an international facilitator or mediator who would do two or three things; one would be to encourage dialogue between the government of Afghanistan and the political opposition in Afghanistan, as you know, they are far from united, because of the mutual mistrust between the various political groups in Afghanistan. The second task in my view should have been trying to see if it was possible to have talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban in a third country and see if there was the possibility of a political settlement, that of course meaning not only talks with the government of Afghanistan, but also with the Afghan opposition involved. Thirdly, this person would need to be at the same time talking to the neighbors to first of all take into account the national interests of the various regional countries and ensure that any agreement arrived at amongst the Afghans would also be compatible and acceptable to the neighbors. But the US has not been willing to have a third party mediator. The Afghan government itself is not very keen and the outcome of this is that the Americans have gone ahead with the Afghan government in reaching this strategic partnership which of course may reassure, at least temporarily, a lot of Afghans, but at the same time it might lead to and create bigger problems with the neighbors.

You talked about negotiations with the Taliban. What is your last evaluation of these negotiations? Do you think at last the Taliban will take power in Afghanistan?

Firstly, could the Taliban take over Afghanistan? I don’t think so. From what I can gather, the Taliban themselves realize that they could take over large parts of the south and east of the country. I don’t see how they could take over the north and parts of the west and certainly I don’t think they could take over Kabul and probably other major cities like Herat or Mazar-e-Sharif. But of course they could become much more of a factor in terms of creating problems for the government and I personally think that it would be worth trying to see if one could reach an understanding with the Taliban. Now the point is that I don’t think that until now there have been genuine negotiations between the Taliban and either the Afghan government or the US. I think there have been contacts, there have been some discussions of confidence-building measures between the US and the Taliban but nothing has actually happened because one of the confidence-building measures they were discussing was the transfer of 5 Guantanamo prisoners from Guantanamo to Qatar and the US Congress appears to be opposed to this and we are now in the midst of presidential elections in America and I don’t think the talks will resume, if they resume at all, until probably early 2013. As for the government of Afghanistan, the Taliban have until now refused to speak to the Afghan government because they consider the government as a puppet of the international community or of the Americans. Now whether this will remain their position remains to be seen, but so far I don’t see serious talks happening and when I was in Kabul, I didn’t find most of the Afghans I spoke to terribly interested in reaching an accommodation or settlement with the Taliban.

What about Iran? What do you think about Iran’s role in Afghanistan? Do you think Iran has a positive role in Afghanistan?

I think, first of all, Iran is a major regional player and it is a neighbor of Afghanistan. So Iran needs to be consulted about the future of Afghanistan and it has been consulted in the past. When I was the UN special representative, I did speak, as you may have heard, I came often to Tehran to discuss Afghanistan. I think that trying to solve the Afghan issue without involving Iran or, for that matter, also Pakistan or India but particularly Iran, is a great mistake. Iran has played a very positive role in the period leading to the Bonn Conference in December 2001, and it was Iran that helped achieve the compromise in Bonn. And after that I think that Iran has played a constructive role in Afghanistan. Now, more recently, as relations between the US and Iran have deteriorated, and as the US is very much focused on the nuclear issue in Iran, I think that Iran has, of course, reacted very negatively to this partnership agreement and, to be entirely frank with you, I can understand Iran’s anger and I wish Iran made private representations to the Afghan government. But I don’t think Iran should be too open about its opposition, because many Afghans feel that Afghanistan is an independent country and the neighbors must empower Afghanistan whom they should be friends with. I personally think that an eventual settlement will require Afghanistan to become a neutral country again with no foreign bases for anybody. But I think the best approach for Iran is not to speak too loudly against this partnership to prevent ending up upsetting a series of Afghans who, on the whole, have positive feelings toward Iran. The same applies to the issue of refugees. I know that Iran has done a hell of a lot for refugees. Iran has been, together with Pakistan, hospitable over the last twenty years in terms of accepting refugees from Afghanistan. But I think, sometimes, Iran understandably wishes to see a lot of these Afghan refugees return to Afghanistan. And when this is said in a fairly harsh manner, the Afghans tend to react negatively, but apart from that I think that President Karzai himself and all the Afghans I know want to keep a friendly relationship with Iran and do not wish to have the US hostility to Iran upset their own relationship with your country.

You talked about the presidential elections in Afghanistan and Mr. Karzai. Do you think that in the next elections there would be some serious channels between groups to change the political situation in Afghanistan and what is Mr. Karzai going to do?

As you know, under the constitution of Afghanistan, President Karzai cannot run again. That will mean at least, under the constitution, a new president. Now a lot of potential candidates fear that President Karzai may find a way to delay the elections and that he might wish to stay in power.

Is it possible to delay it?

Well, the only way to delay it would be to proclaim a state of emergency, I mean legally, and say that elections are not possible in parts of the country because of the security situation and that another mechanism will need to be found to ensure the succession. And of course that would provoke probably a very serious reaction from many Afghans, but this is only a speculation. President Karzai has repeatedly said that he intends to leave office when his term ends in the spring of 2014.

Regarding the European Union’s role in Afghanistan, does the EU have any special plan or roadmap for Afghanistan?

As you know I am no longer the EU envoy, but talking to my former colleagues, from what I can see, what the EU intends to do is to continue providing economic and financial assistance to the Afghan people along various lines. One of course is humanitarian assistance, and the other of course would be easing reconstruction and development, I think also in terms of training, in terms of health and education, and it was pretty clear in Tokyo that the EU and its member states are not planning to forget about Afghanistan and leave Afghanistan to its own devices. If in two years’ time, the elections in Afghanistan either don’t happen or they happen and the result is hotly contested, what happens if there continues to be a lot of talk about corruption in the administration and what happens if other international issues crop up that lead governments to pay attention to other issues more than to Afghanistan. Well, of course, if that were to happen, there is always a danger that less assistance, less attention would be paid to Afghanistan. But for the moment I think, the EU is very clear that it will continue to be one of the main financial supporters of the country.

As the last question, what is your final anticipation after the withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan?

Well, it is a very difficult thing to say. You should ask me in two years’ time. I think western public opinion, both in the US and in Europe, is exhausted about Afghanistan. The people feel that the international military presence has been going on for far too long and that the results achieved are far less than what people had expected. And I must say on this point that I am the first one to agree. So I think there is a desire to quit and to probably leave as soon as possible. Now there are question marks about the Afghan army and the police. I think the Afghan army is not as strong and not as disciplined as desired, but I think there has been major progress in the last few years. Now, will they stay together or are there ethnic tensions within the army that could lead to it falling apart if in a fight with the Taliban? I would hope not. The police is still a problem because they haven’t been properly trained yet. The efforts are there but the results are yet to be seen. And then the Americans have been waiting to promote what I will call militia, but they call them Afghan local police. This Afghan local police are basically militias which are not necessarily fully integrated in either the police or the army. And these militias could play a very negative role in the years to come. They could either join the Taliban in some areas, in other areas they might fight the army, they might become a little bit like the warlords in the old days and so that is another reason to be concerned. So at the same time, I think the Afghans are very aware that they don’t want to return to the period between 1992 and 2001. So hopefully this will not happen. But it is a bit early at the moment to say.