Differences over role of Zahir Shah, power-sharing

By Vaiju Naravane

KOENIGSWINTER (Germany), NOV. 28. Four Afghan delegations, representing the Northern Alliance, the former King, Zahir Shah, the Iran-backed Cyprus group and the Pakistan-backed Peshawar group, are meeting in a secluded castle near this German spa town for talks, brokered by the U.N. Special Envoy for Afghanistan, Mr. Lakhdar Brahimi. There are 17 observer nations, which include Afghanistan's frontline states, permanent members of the U.N. Security Council, Germany, Turkey and India.

The U.N. officials had indicated on Tuesday - at the end of the first plenary session - that an agreement on an ``interim administration'' could be wrapped up in three to five days. The tone today was distinctly different. Observers say differences between the four Afghan delegations attending these talks in Bonn have begun to surface. Mr. Brahimi is scheduled to meet the delegations later in the day. ``We will have to decide whether to help them to move along and to prod them in the direction in which we think they should move,'' the U.N. Deputy Special Envoy on Afghanistan, Mr. Frencesc Vendrell, told a press conference today.

The role of Mr. Zahir Shah, questions of power-sharing and the deployment of U.N. troops in Afghanistan are at the heart of the differences. Though the King enjoyed ``undisputed, almost unanimous respect and unmatched popularity, it does not mean everyone agrees to give him a role,'' Mr. Vendrell said. Most people would like to see a role for the King - for the moment, the issue was ``in the background.''

Asked about the number of seats in the transitional administration and power-sharing, Mr. Vendrell said ``we are not talking numbers yet.'' While the National Front had indicated that it would not favour the deployment of United Nations' or other international troops in Afghanistan, the other three groups favoured such a deployment. As for the U.N., ``we think such a force would be highly desirable. It would assist us in our work,'' he said. The U.N. was not ruling out discussions on this issue but it would be unrealistic to expect any agreement on the question of security at these talks.

However, the Northern Alliance's Interior Minister, Mr. Yunus Qanooni, heading the United Front delegation, dismissed the need for a multinational force, saying: ``We do not feel the need for an outside force to run the country. There is adequate security right now.'' He denounced Pakistan which had not only ``interfered but also aggressed us through the Taliban.''

The Alliance is expected to hold out for at least 50 per cent of the seats in the interim council. However, when asked about numbers, Mr. Qanooni refused to comment and said numbers would be very important and form the subject of lengthy discussions.

Dismissing allegations of the massacre of the Taliban forces and foreign fighters in Mazar-e-Sharif, he said ``I do not agree that there have been any rights violation in Mazar-e- Sharif.''

The United Nations has been using the carrot of reconstruction aid to push the various factions towards agreement. Both Mr. Vandrell, today, and the U.N. spokesman, Mr. Ahmed Fowzi, on Tuesday, underlined that the talks in Bonn would send an important message to major donor conferences to be held in Berlin next month and in Japan in January. Some $ 80 billion for Afghanistan's reconstruction would depend on the outcome of these talks.

Diplomatic sources close to the talks also described the issue of a foreign military presence as a major sticking point, and on Tuesday, Iran - a key player in the Afghan civil war - also voiced its fierce opposition to a foreign security force in Afghanistan.

Mr. Michael Griffin, author of `Reaping the Whirlwind,' which discusses the rise of the Taliban, told The Hindu: ``U.N. is tending to rush this conference. It is saying it will take between three to five days and I don't think Afghan diplomacy works in this way. Kandahar is still held by the rump of the Taliban, the situation is not resolved in any way. There are no Pashtuns here. I am not even sure the Shias have actually a correct representation, given their count. The U.N. is jollying everything along as if the Alliance and the King are totally happy with each other. It seems over-optimistic. I think if they gave it much more time and weren't in such a hurry to catch up with the military progress in Afghanistan, there could be a much more serious peacekeeping agreement. Or a more broadbased agreement. At the moment it seems a little bit slipshod.''

The leader of India's two-member delegation, Mr. S. K. Lambha said: ``In the last 12 days, this is the third conference in which India has participated on Afghanistan. The first was the G- 21 meeting on November 16; on November 20, we attended a conference in the U.S. on the reconstruction of Afghanistan and now here we are in Bonn. India has a knowledge of what has been happening, we know all the delegations and are consulting with them and we have been the first to announce aid. Everybody hopes the deliberations here will lead to the formation of a broadbased Government.''

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Previous : Jaffna yearns for elusive peace