Afghan President, Taliban At Impasse Over Prisoner Release

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty

The Afghan government has offered to release 1,500 Taliban prisoners, saying it is "impossible" to release more, as demanded by the Taliban to start peace talks envisaged under a deal with the United States.

Sediq Sediqqi, the spokesman for Afghan President Ashraf Ghani, told a news conference on March 11 that another 3,500 would be set free as certain conditions are met.

"The Taliban want all 5,000 prisoners released at once, which is impossible," Sediqqi said, adding the release could begin on March 14.

The prisoner release is intended to build trust between the Western-backed government in Kabul and kick off direct talks to end the 18-year war in the country.

But Suhail Shaheen, spokesman for the Taliban in Doha, said the peace accord signed with Washington last month stipulated that "first 5,000 prisoners would be freed and then the Afghan dialogue would be initiated."

Shaheen said in a tweet that the Taliban would only accept an agreement for all prisoners named on a list it gave to the Afghan government.

"Our very condition is that the detainees are acceptable if verified by our team," he tweeted.

"Also, they must be those detainees whose names are included in the list," he wrote in a separate tweet.

Further muddling the path toward talks, the Tolo News agency reported on March 11 that the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC) considered it illegal to release inmates who are accused of being involved in war crimes or crimes against humanity.

"According to the national and international laws, the president does not have the authority to release those individuals who are accused of being involved in war crimes and crimes against humanity," Tolo quoted Naeem Nazari, the deputy head of the AIHRC, as saying.

Under its deal with the United States, endorsed by the UN Security Council on March 10, the Taliban must continue its reduction in violence and bar extremist groups from operating in areas under their control.

Despite the agreement, fighting has continued in various parts of the country.

"The Taliban will be responsible, not the Afghan government, if this process fails," Sediqqi said.

The United States also agreed to reduce its troops from about 12,000 to 8,600 within 135 days.

The long-term plan is for the United States and its NATO allies to withdraw all troops within 14 months.

The United States early this week began pulling out troops, but the U.S. State Department on March 10 said the current level of violence by the Taliban is “unacceptable” to advancing the peace process.

"We acknowledge the Taliban have taken steps to stop attacks against the coalition and in cities. But they are killing too many Afghans in the countryside. This must change," spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said in a statement.

Fresh political instability has also threatened the prospect of talks between all sides.

Two separate swearing-in ceremonies took place in Kabul on March 9 for Ghani and his main rival, former Chief Executive Officer Abdullah Abdullah, after a disputed presidential election in September.

Afghanistan's Independent Election Commission says Ghani narrowly won the vote, but Abdullah alleges the result is fraudulent.

In an apparent show of support for Ghani's presidency, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on March 9 said that Washington opposes "any action to establish a parallel government."

U.S. Congress Votes To Limit Trump Military Action Against Iran; Veto A Certainty

Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty

In a sharp rebuke to President Donald Trump, the U.S. Congress has given final approval to a measure to limit Trump’s authority to order a military attack on Iran -- a resolution sure to be vetoed by the U.S. leader.

The House of Representatives on March 11 voted 227-186 on the so-called war powers legislative, with six Republicans joining in with Democrats to pass the resolution that had already cleared the Republican-led Senate.

The measure forbids any military action against Iran without an explicit vote from Congress. Such a law would not prevent Trump or future presidents from taking military action if they determine there is an imminent threat from Iran.

Trump previously promised to veto the war, saying that if his “hands were tied, Iran would have a field day.” Supporters of the resolution do not have enough votes to override the veto, meaning it would not take effect.

Senator Tim Kaine, the Virginia Democrat who led the move in Congress, said that "if President Trump is serious about his promise to stop endless wars, he will sign this resolution into law."

Other Democrats said the resolution was in line with the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress the authority to declare war.

The White House had urged that the resolution be rejected “because it attempts to hinder the president’s ability to protect” U.S. diplomats, forces, allies, and partners, including Israel, from the continued threat posed by Iran and its proxies, including militia groups and foreign fighters in Syria.”

“Iran has a long history of attacking United States and coalition forces both directly and through its proxies,” the White House said.

Texas Representative Michael McCaul, the top Republican on the Foreign Affairs Committee, called the measure “divisive and irresponsible.”

"The enemies of our country are watching this debate right now. They need to know darn well that if you kill Americans, you will pay the price," McCaul said to loud cheers from Republicans on the House floor.

Trump has taken a hard line on Iran since taking office in January 2017. Tensions flared after he pulled the United States out of a landmark 2015 nuclear deal that Tehran signed with world powers and began reimposing crippling sanctions.

On the same day as the House vote, a series of missiles hit a military base in Iraq housing Western forces, with media quoting U.S. officials as saying two American and one British personnel were killed and several people were wounded.

The Pentagon has in the past blamed such attacks on Iran-backed militia in Iraq. One attack in December killed a U.S. contractor and led to a series of retaliatory military moves by the United States and Iran.