Connect with us

South Asia

Nepal: A Victim of Legacy of British Colonial Times

Published

on

India has recently moved to divide Indian occupied part of Kashmir into two federally administered territories of Ladakh and J&K despite protests from within as well outside India. Soon after stripping the IoK’s special status and splitting the Himalayan region in August, the Indian Ministry of Home Affairs published an updated map of India in November 2019 which created disturbance not only in Pakistan (because of obvious Kashmir issue) but in China and Nepal as well.

India’s new political map has stirred a massive controversy in Nepal, with both New Delhi and Kathmandu laying claim to a region, known as Kalapani – a 35 square-kilometers (13.5 square-miles) area in Nepal’s far-western region, as part of their countries’ territory. Interestingly, Kalapani, which borders the Indian state of Uttarakhand, is appearing in Nepal’s official map supporting its own claim. Uttarakhand shares an 80.5 km long porous border with Nepal and a 344 km border with China.

Retaliating to the Indian hegemonic designs students from the opposition Nepali Congress party led the protest outside the Indian embassy in Kathmandu as well as other parts of the country, carrying signs that read: “Back Off India”, to protest against the map, bringing back the memory of anti-India protests in the wake of the 2015 border blockade imposed by India. The hashtags #BackoffIndia and #Kalapani trended on Twitter for quite some time.It has been more than a month since the dispute erupted and it continues to remain on Nepal’s domestic political agenda. India, however, appears to be downplaying the issue since its initiation.

In Nepal, there is an all-party consensus that India occupied Nepali land. The spokesperson from Indian MEA, Mr.Raveesh Kumar however insist that their map accurately depicts the sovereign territory of India and the new map in no manner has revised their boundary with Nepal. In contrast, former DG of Nepal’s Survey Department Buddhi Narayan Shrestha confirms that the strategic area which once served as a trade route between India and what is now southwestern China, was occupied by India after New Delhi withdrew its border forces following its war with China in 1962.

India shares border with Nepal from three sides. Many Nepali media have reported cases of border encroachments on the part of Indian parties in multiple border regions. Nepal claims that among 27 districts that share their border with Nepal, 72 places in 23 districts have been encroached. The Indian border encroachment and Nepal government’s lack of concern has impacted the lives of people living in borders. The people of Susta have been denied from building bridges or access to transportation while many report that the land they’ve been farming has now been taken by India.

Sandwiched between India and China, the Himalayan kingdom, with a total surface area of 147,181 square kilometers, has served admirably as a buffer between the two vast countries. India and China even went to war in 1962 over border disputes. Defining Nepal’s own territorial borders with its immense neighbors has often been a troublesome issue for the country of just 28.8 million, a very small number compared with China’s 1.4 billion and India’s 1.3 billion. 

Apparently, border issues between Nepal and China ended when the late leader Mao Zedong agreed to respect Nepalese maps and their delineations, conceding the southern half of Mt. Everest to Nepal as a goodwill gesture. The boundary was scientifically delineated in 1983, with Chinese equipment and know-how and manpower from Nepal. Delineation work, however, remains incomplete at the tri-country junctions to the northwest and northeast where Nepal’s boundaries are supposed to meet those of India and China.

Sources now suggest that Nepal has informed India that any boundary dialogue on Kalapani will also concern China since it is the same unfinished area of demarcation on tri-junction where Indian, Nepalese and Tibetan (Chinese) borders meet. That’s the reason Nepal further suggests that talks to resolve this dispute must include China as well.

With release of new political map India seems to interfere in neighbor’s territory by overlooking the Sugauli Treaty signed between Nepal and the British East India Company in 1816.The treaty which indicated the Kali River as Nepal’s western boundary with India however made no mention of a ridgeline and subsequent maps of the areas drawn by British surveyors which showed the source of the Kali River at different places. This discrepancy has led to the boundary disputes between India and Nepal, with each country producing maps including the territory in their own area to support their claims. The exact size of the Kalapani territory also varies in different sources.

Now, in this situation where former has disregarded the Sugauli Treaty, the Nepalese experts claim that Nepal has every right as per the Nepal-India friendship Treaty of 1950 (Article 8) to demand the territories occupied by Nepal prior to signing of the Sugauli Treaty which goes as far as Kumaon and Gadhwal up to Sutlej in the West and River Teesta in the East which approaches territories up to almost Bhutan. Even some parts of present day Bangladesh was also a Nepali territory which will further disturb another neighboring country Bangladesh. Ignoring the 1816 Treaty will automatically bring back almost half of the present day Utter Pradesh (UP, India) to the legal jurisdiction of Nepal. Some portions of Bihar State too automatically come to the fold of Nepal. Historian also claim Nepal had approached and occupied lands up to the Sutlej River.

By far, India has border disputes with all her neighboring countries. Bangladesh under the government of Sheikh Hasina functions as her satellite state. China and Pakistan giver her an equal fight on different grounds but Nepal being the smaller and poor country is regularly bullied by India through continuously disregarding Nepal’s territorial sovereignty. International community must put her weight on Nepali side to protect her sovereignty. Moreover, this dispute, like Kashmir,is a legacy of British colonial times hence becomes the responsibility of Her Highness the Queen of Britain to solve the unfinished agenda of partition for once and all by getting all the countries party to the dispute on board and mark the international borders under UN supervision.

Continue Reading
Comments

South Asia

Interplay of Power Politics in Afghanistan- A Tussle for Regional Solidarity and Security

Published

on

Afghanistan has been a battle ground for the dissimilar ideologies corresponding to communists and capitalists for the past many years. They always face a robust antagonism in the aspect of local Afghans, jihadist Taliban’s and the other terrorist groups like Al-Qaeda. But now the scenario of Afghanistan’s conflict is the in different and potential phase. Opportunities for peace are more often expected in the future but disintegration remains enthusiastic. A liable and lucid usual’s of U.S. actions may perhaps significantly intensify the gambles of a peaceful resolution to the unwinnable battle-ground for the America that has been taking place since last forty years. A hasty slant could accelerate the probabilities of a collapse and disruption of peaceful initiatives being taken in Afghanistan as well as getting worse of this long and tragic war with undesirable consequences for the regional solidarity and security. It may heighten huge threats to South Asian countries, the US its allies and, Afghanistan itself in the future if peace talks remain faltering.

After the drastic events of 9/11 engagements of great powers in Afghanistan seems likely more significant especially the United States of America and China’s involvement in Afghanistan that has portrayed a competitive manifestation in the milieu of great powers politics in the south Asian region. Tailed in complexes of interdependence and neo-structural realism paradigms. Sino- US involvements in Afghanistan hold negative imprints like polarization as well as drawn regional implications for stability and security predominantly affecting the relations between India – Pakistan and, Afghanistan into deteriorated and fragile environs. Furthermore, Sino-US rivalry devours a poorly lit prognosis of the regional economic interconnections and cohesions. Which are essential in reestablishing the strength and solidity in Afghanistan and also in the entire south Asian countries. Considering the first tier states like the United States of America, Russia, and china and the second tier states like Pakistan, Iran, India, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the Arab Emirates having enormous significance in the development of peace negotiation and dialogues between the Taliban and America.

Nevertheless in the post 9/11, the China-US foreign policy tracks documented and noticed under the egis of neo-structuralist realism paradigms shifts. Global security has molded the delineations of US and china’s amity on unwavering Afghanistan and theirs aim for regional security can be viewed under the complexes of interdependence. Both the nation-states have mutually mentored the capabilities and aptitudes for building diplomatic opportunities and evolving prospects in Kabul. On the other hand, it has alleged exhaustively, global power’s interests’ renders immense uncertain footprints for the South Asian security, an enlightening array of offense-defense balancing in Afghanistan. Although the US and China was successful in bringing the Mullah Brother to the negotiation table in Doha and succeeding round of Taliban-US talks. But the power competition among both the states has somehow ruined the opportunities for peace and security in the south Asian region unleashing the negatives for the bilateral relations among stakeholders. More decisively India’s role as a spoiler in Afghan peace dialogues, playing politico-strategic games with Karzai government through investments in infrastructures and several other ventures in Afghanistan.

The United States of America’s realist balancing on the land of hard-hitting populaces of Afghanistan devises from emerging South Asian states as a hub of global interconnectivity due to the importance of the immense development projects like belt Road initiative (BRI) and China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Which are threatening Washington’s interests and influence over the South Asian nations, so their aims to hold on the china’s geo-strategic underpinning reflects the divergence of strategic, political, and economic interests of America and China  in arrears to the Offensive- defensive realist balancing between these super – powers in southwest Asia. Strategically the US presence in Afghanistan has peeved Beijing. US politically gaming with Pakistan and Afghanistan by showing a huge furthest back support to India’s paly in Afghanistan generates a clash with Chinese intents of dominancy over south Asia. Moreover, in the economic interests of both the states have contended; including access to opium, natural gas, oil, and mineral resources in Afghanistan.

China emergence in dome of regional power have a lot more security apprehensions over the regional solidarity and security. How the internal and external dynamic swings owing to the politico- strategic influence of china in Afghanistan. China and Afghanistan both are the close neighbors sharing the short border of 76kilometers from Wakhan to Kashgahar linking with the mainland Xinxiang region of china. The geostrategic proximity in Afghanistan makes it more important for china to intervene and play its role for their own national interests. The whys and wherefores Chinese intervention is unblemished, Beijing wanted to portray like a regional and global aspiration based on offensive balancing in cessation of US and India’s hegemony in the south Asian region. The china’s interests in maximizing its power and security have assured the maintenance of the country’s status especially in Xinxiang region and accomplishing its goals of development plans and opportunities in silhouette of CPEC and BRI by 2025.

China has not militarily intervened in Afghanistan because of traditionally being guided policy of Beijing to avoid any forecasts like US and Soviet had already faced in Afghanistan. The foremost reason of no direct intervention of china could be because china feared from repercussion of militant or insurgent expected in the region of Xinjiang, in the name of jihad like Pakistan had faced in its northern sides. The extremists and Washington would have urges for the Uighurs Muslims separatists’ movements or to avoid any kind of extremism in contour of East Turkmenistan Islamic movement (ETIM) and intimidations to its grand vision of BRI and CPEC. However china play a lip service “operation enduring freedom” and evade in fitting together with the NATO alliances in Afghanistan.

Despite having clashes the US and china holds a collective strategies on anti-terrorism moves in Afghanistan vigor in the favor of regional peace and solidarity. Their collaboration in institutions buildings and development in Afghanistan, although their security objectives contradicts in the region. But Beijing’s imprints in deterrence and any kind of spillover in Xinxiang delineates the notion of china’s security in Afghanistan. China assist in building a mountain based brigade to counter ETIM in north eastern Afghanistan, having a huge political value for Beijing in context of building brigade probabilities to exceed the US economy by 2032.and china attempts through different projects strengthening the underdeveloped countries by creating a win-win situation at both ends promising Afghanistan for trade and developments. 

 The Interconnectivity of national security of Pakistan with stability and instability in Afghanistan has its own importance for the progress of Pakistan. No doubt Pakistan had played a fundamental role in the brawl of Afghanistan. Initially, an ally to US in War on Terror, Pakistan confronted a huge military and financial loss in war against terror. The phenomena of terrorism has effected Pakistan very much as in the shape of death of thousands of citizens and army personnel. Western media had always tried to portray Pakistan’s facade as in context of terrorist’s state. Pakistan has faced much more like drug trafficking, human trafficking, target killing, bomb blast on hospitals, industries, schools, colleges, mosques consequences in human suffering just after US invaded in Afghanistan, US drone attacks on Pakistan’s territory intensifying the grievances of tribal men. However in the contemporary era Pakistan has buildup its fence at Afghanistan boarder to avoid any bedlam from the organizations being funded by the extremists Al-Qaeda, Pakistan’s  government have banned the different organizations who were being funded by the Al-Qaeda whose persistence to make distress in Pakistan like they did in 2011 and onwards

A struggle for stable peace in Afghanistan will remain deformed to an inclusive approaches centered on the best possible consensus for solidarity and security including the role of all indigoes stakeholders in Afghanistan. As stability in Afghanistan directly links with the stability of region as well as long heart-rending relations of India and Pakistan to have mutual consensus over Kashmir resolution. International community and great powers prerequisites to play its role in Kashmir resolution, reconciliation of Durand line and encouraging Afghan- Pakistan concerns over their internal matters and trying to promote the trilateral dialogues between India-Pakistan and Afghanistan. Adhering the power sharing agreements put up with the Afghanistan’s independence and sovereignty and freedom for Kashmiris.     

Continue Reading

South Asia

TLP vs Pakistan: A major conundrum

Published

on

A few days back we have experienced a violent anti-French protest by Tehreek-e-Labaik Pakistan (TLP) that has paralyzed the country. This party which has recently emerged as a powerful force to be reckoned with in Pakistani politics is principally fighting against the Blasphemy case that was reported in France when a school teacher, Smaeul Paty showed caricatures of Prophet (PBUH) to the class. Therefore, it is demanding the boycott of French products, expulsion of the French ambassador, and with recent crackdown the release of TLP leader Saad Rizvi-a 26 years old.

However, to achieve their motives they were seen using violent means like protest with police and supporters clashing in the major cities leading to causality counts, massive injuries, and imprisonment. Pakistani administration has now banned the Hard-line party under anti-Terror law 1997, Section 11(B) on grounds that its actions are prejudicial to the peace and security of country and were meant to imitate the public, causing huge bodily harms to law enforcement agencies and bystanders.

Nevertheless, this protest by TLP that has wreaked havoc in Pakistan has to be analyzed from a critical lens while looking up to the factors that under the shadow are playing a major role in its propagation. There is a need to connect dots because TLP’s existence is not new, it has a history, and is time and again used as a “pressure group” by different factions openly or through back channels to achieve their vested interest.

A question arises, why TLP was not taken as a terrorist organization back in the time when the current PTI government used to have engagements with it? Why not PTM and MQM that are posing an existential threat to Pakistan and having connections with the RAW agency as well? Why only TLP has to face the music? Is it for the purpose to get out of the FATF grey list by banning such violent parties to show up for peace, but if it’s the case then the move is highly mistaken because considering the image of Pakistan internationally it is more distressing than ever.

Moving further, can we say that both TLP and State are part of the same ship befooling only the public? Or there is another undercover force behind it. Was all the criticism that the PTI government came across for mishandling the protest and not acting swiftly was intentional to point towards the failure of govt and to show the relevance of a particular faction without whom Pakistan can’t even deal with a protest?

Therefore, it’s important to understand who is acting at the backend of all the chaos as in Pakistan religion is very close to heart that is one of the reasons it is most likely to be exploited by the powerful factions for their interest. For instance, the very purpose of TLP creation by Khadim Rizvi in 2015 was to protect Pakistan’s blasphemy law and the finality of the prophet. As this is one of the factors that unites Muslims across the world. It’s not for the first time that TLP has shown up in the forms of protest, we did have the same protest in 2018 when Asia Bibi, a Christian woman was involved in blasphemy. At that time TLP had three days major sit-ins in Lahore after the Supreme Court overturned the death sentence awarded to Aasia Bibi by a trial court and upheld by the Lahore High Court, and ordered her release.

Much like this, in Nov 2020 the same protest was headed by Maulana Khadim Rizvi for dismissal of the French envoy. So the problem is with the government’s poor handling of the situation. Why it even agreed to remove the French ambassador in the first place, why it pledged to have a resolution sent to National Assemble on 20th April, if that was meant to be broken. Why not it was resolved properly through negotiations at its very beginning and even when they got sight of TLP planning to go for protests across Pakistan, or can we say that it was a deliberate move.

No matter what, it’s at the end the image of Pakistan that is under threat. Struggling to deal with a number of domestic issues, TLP emergence is no less than an extra salt for Pakistan. Thus, we need to understand TLP in the context of real and non-time threats that it is and can pose nationally and internationally to Pakistan before things get completely out of hand and where no solution seems likely.

Pointing to some of the most likely threat TLP could pose to Pakistan internationally and nationally. First and foremost, Pakistan that is already struggling to have stable economy, the TLP protestors and their demands like boycotting of French products would be a major challenge for Pakistan. For instance, EU is one of Pakistan’s largest export markets worth $6.92 billion (34%) with France alone accounting for 5% of total imports from Pakistan. Not just this, but Pakistan imports from France totaled US $356.05 Million in 2020. Hence with such massive trade going on between two states, cutting ties with France would not mean losing France but the larger European Union that will impact economy. Most recently EU has call for a review on Pakistan’s GSP+ Status because of alarming increase in the use of Blasphemy accusations. So the loss of GSP+ status would again mean another loss of $3.5 billion.

Then protests by TLP against France increase likelihood of Pakistan being in the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) grey list for years to come. Having already suffered a loss of almost $38 billion because of being in the Gray list since 2008, in this case when Pakistan FATF decision is scheduled on June, 2021 such violent protests added to the problems.

Moreover, TLP protest has given a clue to Pakistan’s enemies that always look up for such opportunities to create instability in Pakistan. Most importantly, India in our neighbors that has time and again used such religious factions for its interests and fund them across the border, so TLP protesters are yet another soft target for India to exploit. Reports too suggested out of 400,000 tweets, 70% were from fake accounts with around 380 Indian groups circulating fake news regarding the civil war in Pakistan.

Not just this, but a major real-time threat came to the government in its dealing with the protestors. As PTI government is already under severe criticism by the public for its poor performance, so in this state of crisis where it failed to tackle the situation timely, it just gives another hint for the current government’s incompetency which opposition parties exploited further.

Then the image of Pakistan that is projected internationally with the onset of such violent religious extremist protests by TLP is no less than a threat. Pakistan that is already under havoc for being referred to as a terrorist state, these actions by TLP again projected Pakistan’s image as an extremist state which is why France ordered its nationals to leave Pakistan at the earliest possible.

Conclusively, struggling to deal with the economic crisis, internal instability, separatist movements, and political divide, these protests only added to the problems. Therefore, it’s time Pakistan should take serious actions against such violent protestors. It has to rethink its policies, has to devise new strategies. Time demands thinking beyond self-interest towards the broader interest of Pakistan.

Continue Reading

South Asia

Possible scenarios in Afghanistan after US withdrawal

Published

on

After two decades of U.S. warfare in Afghanistan, President Joe Biden has announced the date for the withdrawal of U.S. troops and ends the longest war. According to him, the United States wills withdrawal its entire military forces from Afghanistan military bases by 9/11/2021. Many Afghanistan politicians do not believe that the U.S. withdraws all of its troops because the central government of Afghanistan does not have adequate preparation after the U.S. withdrawal situation.  However, in this article, I will explore the thinkable scenarios in Afghanistan after the U.S. troop’s withdrawal?  In this study, I will focus on some possible situations in Afghanistan.

 First, achieving peace and construction of Afghanistan National Unity Government (ANUG) is the first possible option post-exit of U.S., Now that foreigners have announced they have left the country, there is no reason for conflict. Such a situation will achieve long peace and stability in Afghanistan and the region; this option needs a comprehensive peace, including internal and external players involved in the coming peace process. I look forward to how the Afghan government maintains the balance of power between the Taliban and other political parties; this is very crucial because the imbalance drawback to the collapse of government and Afghanistan will plunge into civil war as we experienced during the Najibullah government as well. In the external arena, the most affirmative scenario is the situation for the regional country will not be worse. The U.S. will continue its support to the Kabul government in the post-exit era. The external stakeholders, particularly China and Russia, are interested in stability and durable peace in Afghanistan through cooperation with the other regional states (Pakistan, India, Iran, and Turkey). The resolution of the Afghanistan issue will guarantee the security of South and Central Asia its vital for China and Russia because of the core threats to China and Russia from Afghanistan terrorist groups activities, its danger for the U.S. as well. 

Another significant reason is that Afghanistan is the gateway to the Central Asian States with potentially untapped energy resources. The regional Actors want direct access through Afghanistan to these natural resources to meet their dire energy demands. Because of American military presence in the region, the regional countries, particularly Iran, Pakistan, China, and Russia, felt threatened. They began to oppose and protect their interests connected with Afghanistan’s peace and security. The notion is that, in the prolonged presence of the United States, these states that have economic and security interests in Afghanistan would be in danger. China and Afghanistan have several ongoing projects underway, and different transnational actors have sabotaged these projects on several occasions. Likewise, Pakistan has a direct border link with Afghanistan, has several stakes in Afghanistan, and needs access to Central Asia. Pakistan also has concerns about the presence of America. It has also made strong connections with China so that mutual interests could be met by joining hands together.

Similarly, Iran and Russia being strategic partnerships have profound political and economic interests in Afghanistan and arch-rivals of the United States. Both countries have to oppose the actions of the United States and a potential threat for both country’s interests in the Afghan mainland and Central Asia. It means the diverging interests in Afghanistan of regional and American interests, politico-military outcomes would in the long term seem not conducive for lasting peace in Afghanistan unless these could have a political consensus on the said diverging interests vis-à-vis Afghanistan internal reconciliation. If all stakeholders involving in the Istanbul negotiation, they could form an ANUG that all have so far required. Agree, this will be the best option to end the war, and such a government will be bringing peace and stability in Afghanistan and the region.

Second, maintain the status quo: U.S. President announced the date of the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, reminding that the United States continued its assistance, exceptionally provide large military and financial aid to Afghanistan. It is unclear whether such a promise will be fulfilled; if the U.S. keeps its support, particularly military and financial assistance to Kabul, the Afghan security forces have enough power to maintain the status quo after the U.S. exit. In this case, if the peace talks in the Istanbul conference fail, the Kabul government will survive. The Afghanistan national army will able to fight against the Taliban and other terrorist groups. Let us remember that Dr. Najib’s government was still strong in terms of power, defense. Still, the main reason was led to his government downfall are the imbalance between internal control and ethnic divisions. Regarding imbalance, we can see the role of General Dostum. In the beginning, he was a core ally with Najib when he turned to the North alliance because he did not see himself in the power position. The ongoing situations in Afghanistan are similar; the statement should focus on the role of warlords and political parties to maintain the inter balance this significant for the central government to survive. On the other hands, the economic and military support for the Afghanistan government crucial because without external support Afghanistan government cannot survive; if the necessary financial resources for security are not available from external donors at the same times in the government of the internal situation have many challenges such as insurgency, terrorist, ethnicity, corruption, and warlords. The current conditions Afghanistan faces the external and internal threat; the Afghanistan government need to deal with it. In this situation how the Ghani will deal with post-U.S. withdrawal, he has two choices two survive the first; he imbalance with China and Russia because china can help Afghanistan financially and play a significant role to force Pakistan and Taliban as well, this choice very dangerous if he fails cannot survive if he succeeds he will be overcome both threats. The second is to keep its alliance with the U.S. this situation will maintain the status quo but not bring durable peace and stability in Afghanistan.           

Third, the collapse of government and going to civil war:  after two decades of war, the U.S. shortcut way to bring peace in Afghanistan. Washington tries to face save from withdrawal of Afghanistan. The U.S., represent Khalilzad, has provided a draft Afghanistan Peace Agreement to the Kabul government and Taliban. The core idea is to replace the elected Afghan government with a transnational one that may occur, including Taliban and negotiation between the parties for a future permanent system. At the same time, president Ghani receives a letter from U.S. Secretary of state Blinken saying it was “urgent” to “accelerate peace talks” and move “quickly toward a settlement.” The letter also has asked Turkey to host a high-level meeting between the Afghan sides “in the coming weeks to finalize a peace agreement.” Suppose the government is to think of independent defense. The Istanbul conference is a good opportunity for the Taliban and Kabul governments to achieve peace; otherwise, the situation will be worse. The current situations are an important opportunity for all different parties, ideologies, groups, and ethnic groups have come together. The unification and arrangement of these products is a complex and arduous task and requires compassion and sacrifice. On the other hand, if the Kabul government delays the negation to remain in power and the Taliban also holds up to returning to power by force, this condition will disintegrate because the ethnic, linguistic, religious, and other divisions turn into armed conflict. In the worst-case scenario, then the 1990s, conflict and war and killing will be restarted, and Afghanistan situations will be worse than Iraq and Syria. In conclusion, this paper argues the future situations of Afghanistan after the U.S. force withdrawal from Afghanistan. During the history of Afghanistan’s statement constantly losing in the diplomatic arena in this crucial moment, how the Ghani governments deal with internal and external issues? All Afghanistan people wish the politicians can play a good role and end the forty-year war and move towards prosperity and stability. If the intra-afghan dialog fails, keep the status quo is also good, at least worse government better than no government, for the benefit of the people and the inhabitants of the big cities, as far as it is acceptable. It is like being delivered in an explosion and suicide attack in these twenty years, and so on. But if we go to the civil war and ethnic conflict and alley to alley, people will forget the previous civil war. I hope that will not happen. People are starving for peace and stability. It would be suitable for political leaders to abandon their interests, focus on the national interest, and move toward a peaceful and prosperous Afghanistan.

Continue Reading

Publications

Latest

Trending