ISLAMABAD: Afghan Taliban latest announcement fuels yet another controversyover historic peace deal with US.
The Taliban say its peace pact with the United States does not alter thestatus of their supreme leader as the “lawful rulers” of Afghanistan,saying he is duty-bound by religion to establish an “Islamic government”after foreign “occupation” troops exit the country.
The latest Taliban pronouncement fuels the uncertainty plaguing theUS-Taliban deal signed a week ago in Qatar. It also comes a day after anAmerican media outlet reported the US government had intelligence that theTaliban did not intend to abide by promises they made in the Feb. 29 peaceagreement, reported foreign media.
A Taliban statement on Saturday insisted, while referring to its reclusivechief Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada, that in the presence of a “legal Emir”there cannot be another ruler of Afghanistan.
“As this 19-year jihad (holy war) against the (foreign) occupation waswaged under the command of a legal Emir, the termination of occupationagreement does not mean that his rule is absolved,” it said, referring tothe deal with Washington.
The Taliban explained in its Saturday statement that the departure ofinternational troops alone would not serve the purpose of the insurgency,saying it is also seeking to keep “corrupt (Afghan) elements that supportedthe (foreign) invaders” from becoming a part of the future government.
Read Top Stories
“Until the occupation is completely severed from its roots and an Islamicgovernment formed, the mujahidin (insurgents) shall continue waging armedjihad and exerting efforts for the implementation of Islamic rule,” saidthe insurgent statement.
The Taliban reject as American puppets the current and previous Afghangovernments since thy were ousted from power by the US-led invasion.
Taliban political spokesman Suhail Shaheen announced Friday theirnegotiating team is ready with an agenda to engage with Afghanstakeholders, provided insurgent prisoners are released by Tuesday.Otherwise, he said, the responsibility for any delay in the proposednegotiations would rest with the other side.
