Karzai: "We don't want to undermine the Taliban... We want to undermine the terrorists."

[bigtree]

Karzai says he doesn't need 'favour' of foreign powers


"I have to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, I have to be legitimate and have the trust of the Afghan people if I am to be a good president," Karzai said.

"With the international community, I don't have to have their favour. They are here for a purpose, which is the fight on terror, and we are working with them for a purpose, which is the stability and safety of Afghanistan, so we have a common purpose."

"If these forces are coming only to chase the Taliban at the cost of Afghan civilians, of course that's not going to produce any good consequences for us," he said.

___ A distinction must be drawn, he said, between what he called "mainstream Taliban" -- unemployed youths who fight for cash -- and "terrorists".

"We don't want to undermine the Taliban, we want them to come and live a peaceful life in their own country. We want to undermine the terrorists."


read: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Karzai+says+doesn+need+favour+foreign+powers/2419687/story.html

[SmileyRose]

1. IMHO he's right on this.

I have a lot of mixed opinions on Karzai - and Afghanistan in general. The culture is so completely different than my own that it's difficult for me to much relate to what might be best - It would seem the best course of action would be to stop butting in to the affairs of various other countries and mind our own damn business.

In my very humble opinion, this attitude we have that Afghanistan "needs" us or Iraq "needs" us is just asinine. The people and culture that live there have been figuring out how to provide food, shelter and order for eons, and will continue to do so long after the US of A is but a distant memory. Karsai is correct, Afghanistan should have complete autonomy on what visitors do or do not do while in Afghanistan, including the US military, intelligence agencies and private contractors.

[bigtree]

2. It's a curious defense of his

. . . of his country and regime's sovereignty, given that he's acquiesced to every military move we've made there - mostly in direct defense of his own U.S. military-enabled office.

Yet, he's absolutely correct that mere identification of individuals with the Taliban doesn't automatically conflate them with our 'al-Qaeda' nemesis. The posture and activity of our escalated forces, however, can not effectively distinguish between Taliban fighting to secure their own place in the country and the 'enemies' and 'militants' the U.S. insists they're acting to defend against. That discrimination in our forces' favor will always overshadow any needs, concerns, or ambitions Karzai may (correctly) argue for.

[bigtree]

3. kick