US signs an agreement with the Taliban to remove its troops from Afghanistan before 14 months | International

The United States and the Taliban, the guerrillas that the superpower has fought for 19 years, have signed an agreement on Saturday for the total withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan before 14 months. The step, which does not guarantee the end of the war, tries to launch a process of internal reconciliation and has the commitment of the insurgents to initiate an inter-organ dialogue in the coming days. After four decades of conflict, the population has received the gesture with as many expectations as caution. No one dares to predict what will be the result of talks with Islamic extremists who dispute control of the country to the Government of Kabul.

“The military victory was impossible,” said US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who has also asked the Taliban to “not sing victory” because the agreement will mean nothing if they do not do their part. Pompeo intervened before the signing in Qatar, where contacts between the representatives of Washington and the Taliban have taken place. It was not, however, he who signed the commitment but the respective negotiating chiefs, the US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and Abdul Ghani Baradar, co-founder of the Taliban militia. Then they have shaken hands with applause and invocations of “God is the greatest.”

The limited scope of the pact is evident in its name. It is not a peace agreement, but “to bring peace to Afghanistan.” Even so, the presence of Pompeo with the Afghan president, Ashraf Ghani, sought both to stage the United States’ commitment to the Asian country, and to engage the Taliban in the inter-agency dialogue with the international community. Significantly, Defense Secretary Mark Esper arrived at Kabul almost at the same time on a visit with a similar goal. “We will not hesitate to cancel the agreement” in case of Taliban breach, Esper warned.

The agreement, negotiated over the past year and a half, provides for an initial reduction of US troops from 12,000 to 14,000 current soldiers to 8,600 within 135 days of signing. In return, the Taliban are obliged not to allow the territory they control to serve as a base for terrorist groups such as Al Qaeda or the Islamic State. In addition, the guerrillas will free a thousand Afghan prisoners and expect the Kabul government to do the same with 5,000 of its militiamen.

“The Coalition will complete the exit of the rest of its forces in Afghanistan within 14 months following the announcement of this declaration … as long as the Taliban fulfill their commitments,” says a joint statement issued shortly before the signing by the Governments of United States and Afghanistan. In addition to the Americans there are another 8,500 soldiers from 37 countries that are part of the NATO mission to train, advise and assist the Afghan armed forces.

Since the beginning of the talks, some analysts have interpreted the Trump Administration’s interest in the pact as the search for a foreign policy triumph for re-election. The most caustic see it as a mere concealment of defeat: after 19 years, the radical Islamists that the United States threw out of power in 2001 after 9/11 for housing Osama Bin Laden have regained control of almost half from Afghanistan (insurgents boast of dominating up to two thirds). The war, the longest waged by the superpower, has left 2,500 US soldiers dead and supposed to its taxpayers a billion dollars (875,000 million euros).

For Afghans, the human cost and concerns are much greater. After the 1979 Soviet invasion unleashed an endless civil war, it was very frustrating to note that American intervention also did not bring peace. Immediately they saw that their goal was not so much to help them rebuild their battered state as to take revenge on Bin Laden, his followers and his godparents. And not always with you. Although politically Washington promoted the establishment of a liberal democracy, widespread insecurity and corruption eclipsed its benefits.

Now they fear paying the price of American peace again. Many, especially in urban areas and among those who have accessed education, fear that the Taliban are only faking interest in the agreement with the United States and that they seize power as soon as foreign troops have left. Although 70% of Afghans are under 30 and therefore have no direct memory of the Taliban regime, everyone has heard about their brutal form of Islamic government that banned television, music, wedding celebrations and even Flying kites, one of the few hobbies in the poorest country in Asia.

Will the Taliban accept the current democratic system, freedom of the press or the advances of women (see attached story)? Will they be able to reintegrate into society when most of them have only known weapons and, if anything, a rudimentary religious education?

“The Taliban are already part of Afghan society,” says Barnett Rubin in a message exchange. This academic, who participated in the first diplomatic contact between the US and the Taliban in 2010 as an advisor to the Obama Administration, has always defended the political-diplomatic path and supports the agreement. In a recent article, in which he remembered how the military imposed his line, he made it clear that Washington could not win the war with the available means.

The signing has been possible after the “reduction of violence” (not even called a truce) last week that Afghans have lived with as much hope as skepticism. “I worry that the fighting will resume when foreigners leave,” Abdul Rahim Faqirpur, 55-year-old school principal in Ghazni Province, told the Afghanistan Analysts Network (AAN). Others interviewed by that independent political research and analysis center mentioned as risks the interference of neighboring countries or the internal divisions of the Taliban. They do not quite believe that peace is near.

The cold figures barely help to understand the suffering of Afghans. Last year the war killed 3,403 civilians, it’s roughly the average since the UN began collecting statistics in 2009. Before, they weren’t even counted. But as much or more serious are the wounded, almost double, many of whom are disabled for life. “There is hardly any civilian in Afghanistan who has not been personally affected in any way by the violence,” said UN special representative Tadamichi Yamamoto, presenting the latest data last week.

Violence has also slowed the construction of infrastructures that contribute to the development of the country and give work to its young population. As a result, Afghanistan has once again become the largest issuer of refugees in the world, despite the return of nearly six million of them from Pakistan and Iran since 2002.

No government

The Taliban do not recognize the Government of Kabul, but also at this time their presidency is again in dispute. As happened in 2014, the triumph of Ashraf Ghani in the elections last September is answered by his main rival, Abdullah Abdullah, who threatens to form his own parallel government.

Although both support the opening of a dialogue with the Taliban, their confrontation can undermine the Government’s capacity with one voice. Abdullah has attended in the front row the signing ceremony of the agreement between the United States and the guerrillas, which opened with an intervention by Ghani. “We hope that this pact will be a permanent ceasefire … It is the desire of our nation,” he said.


The peace agreement with the Talibn contemplates the total withdrawal of international troops

Thepeace agreement with the Talibancontemplates an initial reduction of US troops within four months with a view to atotal withdrawalof international forces in 14 months, according to a draft of the agreement collected by the Afghan network Tolo News.

“The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, the United States and the international coalition have concluded that current levels of military forces are no longer necessary to achieve security objectives. Therefore,The United States will reduce its force contingent to 8,600 troopswithin 135 days of the announcement of this joint declaration, “according to the agreement.

“The United States and the international coalition will complete the withdrawal of the remaining forces from Afghanistan within 14 months, andthey will withdraw all their forces from the remaining bases, on condition that the Taliban comply with the commitments made in the agreement, “the text adds.

Also, the United States “reaffirms its commitment to pursue aannual financingfor training, equipping and maintaining Afghan security forces, so that Afghanistan can defend itself, independently, from internal and external threats. “

In addition, the agreement stipulates that the Afghan Government will open a period of discussions with theUnited Nations Security Councilto withdraw members of the Taliban from their sanctions list before May 29, 2020.

Historic Peace Agreement

The United States and the Taliban signed a historic peace agreement in the capital of Qatar on Saturdayin the presence of international observersand dignitaries from various countries, including the foreign ministers of Turkey and Pakistan, as well as a large insurgent delegation. The pact was signed by the United States special representative for peace,Zalmay Khalilzad, and the Taliban leader, mullahAbdul Ghani Baradar.

Both representatives subsequently merged into a handshake and the ceremony hall in a luxurious hotel in Qatar, with a large presence of Taliban, shouted ‘Allah is great’.

Before the signing, a speech was given by the head of the Qatari diplomacy, Mohamed bin Abdulrahman al Zani, the US secretary of state,Mike Pompeo, and Ghani Baradar.

Pompeo, who arrived in Doha on Saturday to participate in the historic event, said that what has been achieved so far “Is not perfect, but the Taliban have shown that they can be peaceful when they want to. “This Friday concluded a week of reducing the Taliban’s violence in Afghanistan, one of Washington’s conditions for signing the agreement and proof of goodwill by The insurgents

“There will be temptations to declare victory,” Pompeo warned, but “the victory for the US will be when its citizensno longer have to fear any threat of attackfrom Afghanistan. “

For his part, the Taliban signer highlighted this “historic” event and praised the “successful negotiations” between his group and the US, ensuring that “the agreement alsoIt is good for the international community“The Taliban began the process to get here in February 2018, when their political office in Doha urged Washington to take part in a” direct “dialogue after years of refusal.

In October of that same year, Khalilzad and leaders of the insurgents held the first of more than a dozen rounds of dialogue in Qatar. Last September, the president of the United States,Donald Trump, abruptly canceled the meetings in response to an attack in Kabul in which an American died, although the process was resumed at the end of November after a visit by the leader to Afghanistan.

Finally, on February 22, 2020, the Taliban implemented a reduction in violence for seven days, which has occurred without serious incidents.


US and Taliban sign agreement – troop withdrawal planned

The American Afghanistan Special Representative Zalmay Khalilzad and one of the Taliban co-founders Mullah Abdul Ghani Bardar

In a first step, a good half of the US troops should leave Afghanistan.

(Photo: AFP)

Doha, Washington, Kabul Representatives of the United States and the Taliban signed a corresponding agreement in the Gulf Emirate of Qatar in Doha this Saturday – more than 18 years after the US invasion of Afghanistan.

The US special envoy for reconciliation in Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, and the head of the Taliban political office in Doha, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, signed the agreement in front of around 300 invited guests. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was also present at the ceremony.

The United States plans to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan within 14 months, according to a statement published shortly before the agreement was signed. The prerequisite is that the militant Islamist Taliban keep to their commitments to prevent terrorism. In a first step, the American military presence is to be reduced from between 12,000 and 13,000 to 8,600 forces.

US President Donald Trump said in Washington on Friday that US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo would attend the ceremony. Defense Secretary Mark Esper will also make a joint statement with the Afghan government.

As a prerequisite for an agreement, the US had asked the Taliban for seven days of “violence reduction” in Afghanistan. The deadline expired at midnight – shortly before Trump’s message was sent out by the White House. According to local information, the phase was not non-violent, but was considerably quieter than usual. The week was seen as a test of whether the Taliban could control their ranks.

The agreement between the United States and the Taliban is intended to trigger the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan. In return, the Taliban are supposed to provide guarantees that the country will not become a safe haven for terrorists and that they will start peace talks with the government in Kabul. The Taliban had been militarily aggressive in recent years and had built up a strong negotiating position. They overran more and more areas.

Afghan government outside

In the negotiations between representatives of the Taliban and the USA, the government in Kabul was only a guest of the fence. The Taliban insisted that they speak to Kabul at the earliest when the withdrawal of international troops is regulated. With the signing of the US-Taliban agreement, inter-Afghan talks may begin within two weeks.

Trump said the progress made since the end of 2001 had made great strides – but at high costs for US troops, for American taxpayers and for the Afghan people. In the election campaign, he promised “that I would start taking our troops home and trying to end this war. We are making considerable progress in fulfilling this promise. ”Ultimately, however, it will be up to the Afghans to determine their future.

Mullah Abdul Salam Hanafi of the Taliban political office in Doha was confident that the agreement would bring “a brighter day for Afghanistan”. The brother of the senior Taliban commander Siradschuddin Hakkani, Anas Hakkani, said: “We came here with an open heart.” Siradschuddin Hakkani had recently written in a guest post for the “New York Times”: “I am convinced that the killing and have to stop the mutilation. “

The agreement brings the Taliban a significant step closer to their long-term goal: the end of what they call the “foreign occupation,” that is, the withdrawal of US and international troops. The Taliban were ousted from power by a U.S.-led military coalition in 2001 after hosting the terrorist Osama bin Laden. The United States blamed El Qaeda chief, who was killed in May 2011, for the September 11, 2001 attacks.

More: Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer wants to extend the German mission in Afghanistan and has dated the decision to deploy to spring 2020. The application has been running for 18 years.


The US and the Taliban, about to sign a historic agreement

The United States and the Taliban can sign a historic agreement in Doha on Saturday that paves the way for the withdrawal of US troops, after more than 18 years of war in Afghanistan, and for peace negotiations that are announced arduous.

US President Donald Trump urged Afghans on Friday to “seize the opportunity for peace.”

“If the Taliban and the government of Afghanistan keep their commitments, we will have a way to go to end the war in Afghanistan in order to bring our troops home,” he added.

The text negotiated for a year and a half in Qatar, and that US envoys and insurgents must sign around 11:00 GMT, is not a peace agreement itself.

The Afghan authorities have been left out of these direct and unprecedented negotiations for now. In this phase alone a “reduction of violence” is expected and not a true ceasefire.

“We are at the dawn of a historic opportunity for peace,” said US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo when the signing day approached, while a Taliban chief, Sirajudin Haqani, said in the New York Times that ” everyone was “tired of war.”

“There is a lot of speculation about the content of the agreement,” says Andrew Watkins of the International Crisis Group conflict prevention organization. “We know the main lines, but we don’t even know for sure if all the terms of the agreement will be made public.”

In September the firm was imminent but was suddenly canceled by Donald Trump, who then mentioned the death of an American soldier in a nth attack in Kabul.

This time, the belligerents agreed on a one-week period of “violence reduction,” globally respected on the ground, and ending this Saturday.

Unless there is a last minute incident, the American negotiators, led by Zalmay Khalilzad, will be able to sign this pact that the American president will exhibit in the campaign for his re-election in eight months as the fulfillment of a promise: to end the longest war in the United States.

According to the UN, between 32,000 and 60,000 Afghan civilians have died in this war, in addition to 1,900 US military.


America’s Taliban deal expected in Doha

It is a first and timid success for a hypothetical peace in Afghanistan. For the past week, fighting has largely subsided between the Taliban on one side and American-backed Kabul troops on the other. The partial truce started on February 22 has therefore stood firm, which opens the way to the signing of an agreement between Washington and the Islamist rebellion on Saturday February 29 in Doha, Qatar.

Thirty countries will be represented at this event supposed to open a new era in this country ravaged by four decades of war. Pressed by their American sponsors, the Kabul authorities will finally send a six-person delegation to start the first exchanges with the insurgents who promise to be long and difficult. But neither President Ashraf Ghani, who criticized the US-Taliban talks much, nor his ministers will be on board.

The agreement, which is to be signed on Saturday, aims to gradually withdraw the 13,000 US military personnel from Afghanistan in return for insurgent security guarantees. They have promised that no terrorist group will be hosted on Afghan soil, as was Al Qaeda before the September 11, 2001 attacks.

If approved, the ongoing process will lead the Americans to withdraw from an endless conflict in which more than 100,000 Afghan civilians have been killed or injured, according to the UN. The failed American intervention has cost American taxpayers more than $ 1 trillion (about € 914 billion) in military and reconstruction costs since 2001.

→ READ. In Afghanistan, we vote then we negotiate

After the signing of the US-Taliban agreement, intra-Afghan negotiations between the Taliban, the Afghan government, its opposition and civil society are also to begin. According to most observers, these discussions, which aim to define the future of the country and in particular who will lead it, look much longer and more arduous than those between the insurgents and Washington. They are also part of a divorce within the Kabul authorities between President Ashraf Ghani and his opponent, former Vice President Abdullah Abdullah, who does not recognize his defeat in the September 2019 presidential election.


The Talibn confirm the agreement with the US and say the end is “the departure of all troops”

Thetalibanhave confirmed in a statement that thepeace agreement with the United StatesIt will be signed on February 29 once the seven-day period of violence reduction is completed and they have made it clear that the ultimate goal of the pact is the “departure of all foreign troops” from Afghanistan.

In a statement, they explained that “after a long negotiation” now “both parties will create an adequate security situation” before the signing of the peace agreement, which is plannedinvite “representatives of numerous countries and organizations”.

The agreement reached with Washington, according to the Taliban, also provides for the release of prisoners as well as “structuring a path for negotiation between Afghans with various political parties in the country” and “ultimately,lay the foundation for peacethroughout the country, with the withdrawal of all foreign troops. “

Likewise, the compromise has been reached that “the land of Afghanistan will not be allowed to be used against the safety of others so that our people can live a prosperous and peaceful life in the shadow of an Islamic system, if Allah wants,” they have riveted the Taliban.


Bloomberg will free women who want to talk from their agreements | U.S

Michael Bloomberg He announced this Friday his decision to release the commitment not to speak to three women who signed confidentiality agreements on harassment and sexist comments at work, something to which the candidate for the nomination of the Democratic Party refused the past in the last debate carried out in Nevada.

“[La compañía] Bloomberg has identified three Confidentiality Agreements (NDA) signed in the last 30 years with women on comments that say that I [Mike Bloomberg] said. If any of them wants to be free of their commitment, they should contact the company and they will be released from the agreement, ”said the former mayor in a statement posted on his campaign website.

Founder and majority owner of Bloomberg LP, a company to which Bloomberg News belongs, the tycoon He was criticized last Wednesday by Senator Elizabeth Warren and other rivals during the last Democratic debate for her refusal to let former employees break the pact of silence signed with the Confidentiality Agreement and thus allow accusations against the politician to see the light public

Warren attacked Bloomberg hard in Las Vegas, Nevada. “The Democrats are not going to win if we have a candidate with a history of harassing women,” said the senator opening the ban against the billionaire. Warren insisted – and intended to start a mogul’s commitment on that stage – in the accusations that existed against Bloomberg for harassment and sexist comments and demanded that he “release” the women with whom he had signed confidentiality agreements so that they could speak freely about their experiences.

“We are not going to win Trump with a man who has who knows how many confidentiality agreements with women,” the senator warned. Bloomberg did not want to reveal how many such agreements exist and said the cases will continue in secret on the grounds that it was they, the women, who “decided with the agreement that they wanted to remain silent.”

“I have reflected a lot on this issue in recent days and have decided that while running the company we will not offer more Confidentiality Agreements to resolve complaints of sexual harassment or inappropriate behavior,” Bloomberg continues in the statement.

The candidate acknowledges that such agreements, specifically when used in a context of sexual harassment or assault, promote a culture of silence at work and contribute to women not feeling safe or supported. In his first debate since he jumped into the race for the nomination to opt for the White House, the billionaire explained that the women who had raised complaints against him of the only thing they could accuse him of had made jokes that they didn’t like.

Since this issue jumped into public opinion, Warren has not released the dam. During a meeting with voters on Thursday night, the senator was blunt to say that if Bloomberg did not let women speak and break their pacts of silence, the former mayor was “disqualified to be president of the United States.”


United States: Trump presents a peace plan that supports Israel’s key interests | U.S

The President of the United States, Donald Trump, presented this Tuesday at the White House the call century deal for the Middle East, a grandiose name for a peace plan that was born mortally wounded, despite the almost three years it has been in the pipeline. The proposal gives Israel much of its historic aspirations, while offering the Palestinian authorities a road map to its own state subject to so many constraints that make it unlikely. That Trump expounded the plan accompanied by only one of the parties, the exultant Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, gave a good account of the chicken flight of the project.

“Today Israel is taking a big step towards peace,” Trump has said from the East room of the White House. This is, he said, “an opportunity for both sides to win, a realistic two-state solution that solves the Palestinian state’s risk to Israel’s security,” he stressed.

The plan forged by Washington more than doubles the territory under Palestinian control, according to the White House, although this expansion is impossible to identify on the maps that the specific document projects on that future state. Under the title of The Vision (The Vision), that future Palestinian state would comprise the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, which would be connected by tunnels or elevated roads and leaves the valued Jordan Valley under Israeli military control.

Trump’s plan

for Israel and Palestine

Intended territory

to the Palestinians

according to the plan


1967 recognized

by the community


Source: and the US Government.


Trump’s plan for Israel and Palestine

Intended territory

to the Palestinians

according to the plan


1967 recognized

by the community


Source: and the US Government.


Trump’s plan for Israel and Palestine

Territory intended for Palestinians

according to the plan


1967 recognized

by the community


Source: and the US Government.


Trump presents a peace plan that supports Israel's key interests

The proposal freezes for four years the construction of new settlements in order to make possible the solution of the “two states”, but calls on the Palestinian authorities to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s sole capital, ruling out the dismantling of existing settlements and establishes the consideration of Israel as a Jewish State, three points that complicate the approval of the Palestinian president, Mahmud Abbas.

The proposal includes a rain of 50,000 million dollars (45,420 million euros) in investments over 10 years to promote prosperity, but that does not quite convince the Palestinian authorities. Half would go in principle to Gaza and the West Bank and to neighboring countries such as Jordan and Egypt.

“President Abbas, if you accept this path to peace, the United States and many other countries will be there to help you,” the US president has appealed, admitting that his Administration had been very favorable to Israel and assuring that he now wanted it to be “very good for the Palestinians too.”

Jerusalem, where cultures and beliefs intermingle, is the heart of the conflict in the Holy Land. In the original partition plan of Palestine under British mandate approved by the UN in 1947, an international status was reserved for it, regardless of the planned Jewish and Arab States. But it was divided by force of arms in 1949, with the eastern sector under Jordanian control, and entirely occupied by Israel in the Six Day War in June 1967. A third of its 900,000 inhabitants are Palestinians, with the right of residence but without nationality in his hometown. The Agreement of the century It appears to point to a return to the Palestinian Authority of several eastern and northern districts totaling some 100,000 residents, effectively separated in fact for 15 years by the separation wall erected by the Army after the explosion of violence from the Second Intifada.

Palestinians have always called for a return to the 1967 borders, which would involve establishing the capital of their future state in East Jerusalem, which includes the walled compound of the Old City with the holy sites of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. In all previous peace plans, mediators preferred to postpone the final status of the Holy City until a final agreement was reached between Israelis and Palestinians. Trump ended the international consensus in 2017 with a statement recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. Since then all bridges between the White House and the Palestinian Authority have been broken and on Tuesday the American put a new nail in the coffin.

But the Republican seeks, with the presentation of such an ambitious plan, which tries to end 70 years of conflict, a sort of culmination to his latest movements in foreign policy. Over the course of weeks, he has succeeded in getting Congress to approve the reformulation of the trade agreement with Mexico and Canada, has signed a principle of agreement with China to leave the trade war behind, and has killed a powerful Iranian general accused by Washington of collaboration with terrorism, Qasem Soleimani, without the operation having led, at least today, to a war escalation. Everything, at a more than complicated moment in national politics, in full impeachment by the scandal of pressure on Ukraine.

Netanyahu also helps, as he is accused in three corruption cases, in addition to the election he faces next month. This Tuesday, Israel’s attorney general has requested the prime minister’s prosecution for corruption. In Trump’s Washington, he has found a firm ally, starting with the fact that the person to whom the Republican has entrusted this thorny case is none other than Jared Kushner, son-in-law of the president and personal friend of Netanyahu.

This, as if intervening in an electoral rally, promised that the absorption of the strategic Jordan Valley and the settlements would affect 40% of the West Bank, in a cut that threatens the viability, due to lack of territorial continuity, of the future Palestinian State. This will be the case of the area known as E-1, between Maale Adumin and Jerusalem, whose annexation will practically divide the West Bank between north and south, like the Bantustans of South Africa in the apartheid. “This will give us a permanent eastern border to defend ourselves,” Netanyahu said.

The “realistic” two-state solution, but with less than one state, offered by Trump to the Palestinians in a letter sent to President Mahmud Abbas, is justified only by a huge injection of international funds in Gaza and the West Bank, but not guarantees a lasting political settlement to a conflict over 70 years old.

For the millions of Palestinian refugees, of whom at least five million are protected by a UN agency to subsist, the Israeli Prime Minister has only stated that his problem “must be solved outside the State of Israel”, thus excluding any perspective of the right of return to the houses and lands that they owned in 1948. Their destiny seems to remain, as until now, in the hands of the international community, neighboring countries and the economic compensation they may receive in exchange for renouncing their past. .


Talks over the Libyan truce stall in Moscow | International

Khalifa Hafter (right) greets Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigú on Monday. On video, the continuity of the truce in Libra is in danger. PHOTO: MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS OF T | Video: REUTERS

The peace talks for Libya have not yet come to fruition in Moscow. Khalifa Hafter, the Libyan strongman, left the Russian capital on Tuesday without signing the truce agreement. His departure, before dawn and almost on tiptoe, is somewhat of a slight for Vladimir Putin. Even the Russian president, who has shown his increasingly powerful influence on the political scene in the Middle East, has been angered by the man whom Russia has supported in recent months with the presence of mercenaries. However, Russia is reluctant to end the negotiation, which was to end nine months of intense fighting in Libya.

Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu said Hafter has been “positive” about the draft ceasefire and that he had only requested two days to discuss it with his allies. The countries that have been providing economic and military support to Hafter for several years are, above all, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Jordan.

Russian authorities reported Monday that Hafter would take just one day to reflect on the deal. The signature seemed imminent for this Tuesday. But it was not like that. The other party to the conflict, the head of the Unity Government, Fayed el Serraj, recognized by the international community and supported militarily by Turkey, had already signed the draft.

Russia and Turkey, which support opposing forces, had pressured the parties to accept the agreement, which included an unending truce. The ceasefire, which began fragilely over the weekend with reports of violations by both sides, is now threatening to collapse. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan declared on Tuesday after a meeting with members of his party: “If the coup leader Hafter continues to attack the people and the legitimate government, we are going to teach him the lesson he deserves.”

For his part, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov declared: “All the efforts that the Europeans are making now, including the Germans, the French and the Italians, the efforts being made by the Libyan neighbors, Algeria, Egypt, as well as the Emirates We want to unite them so that everything works in one direction, and I urge all the Libyan parties to agree, and not continue to resolve things by force. “United Arab Emirates, Turkey, Qatar and the Russian Federation. Lavrov, who has just started an official trip to Sri Lanka, concluded in statements collected by the state agency Tass: “We will continue our efforts in this regard; at the moment reached a definitive result. “

The Kremlin signed up somewhat diplomatic on Monday, gathering in Moscow, along with a high Turkish delegation, Serraj, head of the Turkey-backed and UN-recognized Unity Government in Tripoli, and Marshal Jalifa Hafter, who receives his support from Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Russia itself. But his initiative to end the battle for Tripoli has not advanced. And now it could flare up. While Hafter has Russian mercenaries, who managed to tilt the war in their favor, until they conquered the Sirte stronghold, Turkey has sent forces to support Serraj. Turkey-backed Syrian insurgents have also joined.

The signing of the ceasefire in Moscow is key to the success of the Berlin conference, organized by Chancellor Angela Merkel under the auspices of the UN, scheduled for this Sunday. Libya, a key point on migration routes to Europe, is a geostrategic place for the EU, which has tried for months to promote an agreement between the countries involved in the Libyan conflict.