Cordesman explains how foreign fighters are playing a role in the conflict and the obstacles blocking success for the Pakistani military.

Al Jazeera English’s Kamal Hyder reports from South Waziristan on the Pakistani army’s claims of progress against the Taliban — only one month after the offensive began.

Young girls at the Gudwara Panja Sahib. Photo: Flickr user AlJazeeraEnglish

Worldfocus partner World Pulse is a media enterprise covering global issues through the eyes of women. This post is excerpted from their PulseWire project, an international online forum for women. In it, Nukhbat Malik writes about meeting children scarred by war in the town of Hasan Abdal in northern Punjab, Pakistan, at one of Sikhism’s holiest places.

He is a 13-year-old boy with big green eyes, following me everywhere while I wander around the Gurdwara Panja Sahib, taking pictures. The place is bustling with people of all ages, children running around, old men and women lying in the corridors. This boy appears in front of me when I move towards a quieter corner and looking straight into my eyes, he almost whispers and makes a sign which makes leaves me standing still.

Satish Singh is from Mingora, the largest city in the Swat district of Pakistan’s Northwest Frontier Province. He moved to Gurdwara on April 28th with his parents, three sisters and two brothers. He is the eldest among his siblings. I take his hand and lead him to the stairs. He looks around to make sure that no one is noticing him.

And then he says, ‘Maulana Fazlullah looks like a true hero of a movie. He comes there on a horse, and there are always three other people on horses with him, one at his back and two on each side. I wonder how he became such a dashing person. Though I have never seen his face but his personality is very impressive.’

I am stunned, and I ask him to explain the sign which he made earlier.

He looks around to see if anyone is watching and then with widened eyes says, ‘I saw there were three of them, wearing shalwar kameez. Their faces were wrapped in black cloth, excluding the eyes and they had guns. It was about 2:30 pm and I was coming back from school. It’s the Green Chowk where there are different shops and lots of people. They stopped in front of a shop, grabbed a man, knocked him down and beheaded him.’

‘He was an ordinary man, perhaps some government officer, I still think of him and wonder what his fault was?’

It’s hard for me to keep looking at Satish. Just when I try to move the conversation to a lighter tangent, he says, ‘That was the first time in my life when I ran as fast as I could. I entered my house, went straight to the washroom, threw up and fainted. For next three days I was not able to talk to any one. My mother still asks me what went wrong that day, but I am unable to explain, I am speechless when I think of that day, I am scared.’

‘So you never talked about this with any one?’ I finally asked.

He gives me a false smile and said, ‘What should I say? You know our Veer Ji (teacher) and our parents have strictly prohibited us to say a word about Taliban. If my father finds out about this conversation, he will lock me up or send me to India.’

It’s not just the story of Satish. I have met several children over the past week, all those who have a new identity now known as ‘Internally Displaced Persons’.

These children, regardless of their ages and religion have similar things to talk about: bombings, war, shelling, Taliban, blood, killings and the army.

Shehrbano is a 12-year-old girl. She can’t speak Urdu, but I know she wants to tell me something. I request a man standing beside me in the Jalala Camp of Mardan to ask her in Pashto what it is. Shehrbano looks at me for a second, puts her head down, and says, ‘There was a beheaded man, whose head was placed on his body with a note on it saying, whoever will do something wrong, will get the same punishment, I don’t know what wrongdoings they were talking about.’

Seven-year-old Atif has seen people killed in a suicide bombing, 11-year-old Daud Khan has no idea who is killing whom and 13-year-old Salman wonders when all of this will finish.

I have no answers to these questions. I am unable to imagine what sort of a generation this will be. Fear, terror and anger are written all over these children. They don’t laugh or smile anymore. I smile at them and get back an inquisitive look in return.

- Nukhbat Malik

In this week’s New Yorker, Seymour Hersh, the well-known national security correspondent, writes about a secret plan by the Obama administration to use American troops, if necessary, to protect Pakistan’s nuclear assets.

Daljit Dhaliwal talks to Hersh about why the Taliban overrunning Islamabad is not the only — or even the greatest — concern. Hersh contents that the principal fear is mutiny: extremists inside the Pakistani military could stage a coup and take control of some of the country’s nuclear assets.

In a country where a woman is confined to her home, Joya is breaking all kinds of cultural, social and religious stereotypes. In May 2007, she was suspended after referring to the parliament as a stable, she said at least in “in a stable we have animals like a cow which is useful in that it provides milk and a donkey that carry a load.”

She speaks candidly about the challenges facing Afghanistan. She says that the low turnout in the presidential election is proof that the Afghan people are dissatisfied with the current government. She attributes the rise of Taliban to the failed policy of the U.S. in Afghanistan. She is also a staunch opponent of increasing U.S. troop levels in her country. Joya wants the U.S. and NATO to keep in mind that no foreign military has ever succeeded in controlling Afghanistan.

For her, the status of women now is no different than under the Taliban. She says that it may even be worse because the rate of suicide and abduction is high, and many rapists go untouched.

Because she is unabashedly outspoken, her life is under constant threat and she must be accompanied by bodyguards. But nothing so far seems to succeed in slowing her down. For sure not the many failed assassination attempts on her life, or the awful treatment she gets from her male colleagues in parliament.

Joya spent her childhood at a refugee camp in Iran and Pakistan, and returned to the Taliban-controlled Afghanistan in the late 1990s and worked for an underground organization helping women. She is now on a book tour in the U.S.  promoting her memoir, A Woman Among Warlords: The Extraordinary Story of an Afghan Woman Who Dared to Speak Out, co-written by Derrick O’Keefe.

- Mohammad Al Kassim

But we don’t hear much about the toll on average Pakistanis and how they cope with the menace of militant attacks every day.

Daljit Dhaliwal talks about everyday life in Lahore with Saeed Shafqat, adjunct professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs.

But as Google has gained a foothold in markets around the world, adapting its versions to different countries and languages, an inevitable problem has emerged: how do you delineate international boundaries when they are disputed by multiple countries?

This caused problems for the tech giant earlier this year, when its Chinese characters mislabeled an area called Arunachal Pradesh, which is under Indian administration.

While a simple solution to border disputes would be to stick to internationally recognized demarcations, Google has taken things a step further. Rather than risk antagonizing disputes among its partner countries– each with its own market potential– Google has customized its maps according to different countries’ official positions on their versions of its Google Maps application.

“This does not in any way endorse or affirm the position taken by any side,” according to a Google spokesperson, “but merely provides complete information on the prevailing geo-political situation to our users of global properties in a dispassionate and accurate manner.”

Take, for example, the Chinese version of Google Maps:

The disputed boundaries between India and Pakistan are indicated by dotted lines. But the border with China (to the northeast of India) is nevertheless solid.

Consider, then, the Indian version of the same region:

Here, it appears the only disputed area lies between Tajikistan and China, to the north of India. Indian territory itself, including the western part of Kashmir which is often attributed to Pakistan, is not in question. Furthermore, the area between China and India, which in China’s version belong to China, now lies within Indian territory.

Finally, compare these two version to the standard version of Google Maps:

Here, all disputed boundaries are indicated by a dotted line.

These border disputes predate the Internet — and are unlikely to go away any time soon.  Google has at least managed a temporary diplomatic resolution in cyberspace.

Google has customized their Maps application to reflect border disputes around the world. While border disputes predate the Internet — and are unlikely to go away any time soon — Google has at least managed a temporary diplomatic resolution in cyberspace. http://worldfocus.org/files/2009/11/th_china_map.jpg http://worldfocus.org/files/2009/11/th_china_map.jpg ]]> http://worldfocus.org/blog/2009/11/03/for-google-maps-diplomacy-trumps-geography/8021/feed/ http://worldfocus.org/blog/2009/11/02/hillary-clintons-message-to-pakistan/8113/ http://worldfocus.org/blog/2009/11/02/hillary-clintons-message-to-pakistan/8113/#comments Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:20:38 +0000 Worldfocus http://worldfocus.org/?p=8113

Hillary Clinton meets with Pakistan’s Prime Minister. Photo: Flickr user americagov

S. Azmat Hassan, a former Pakistani diplomat, is now a professor at Seton Hall University. He blogs about the U.S. Secretary of State’s recent trip to South Asia.

U.S.-Pakistan relations have witnessed many ups and downs in the past decades. This is not an infrequent phenomenon in bilateral relations. A perfect congruence of interests between any two states even neighbors — say, the US and Mexico — is well-nigh impossible. So the Pakistanis appreciated the fact that Hillary Clinton was spending three days in their midst. In the past weeks, they have been at the receiving end of horrific suicide attacks from the Pakistani Taliban, which have claimed the lives of more than 200 army and police personnel, as well as innocent men, women and children. These attacks even included a foray into the heavily guarded Army General Headquarters in Rawalpindi, which shook the Pakistani army. The Pakistani Taliban had hoped to forestall the Army’s long awaited assault on their bases in the tribal areas of South Waziristan, but their efforts failed. The Army launched the assault a few weeks ago.

Clinton’s diplomatic talents were on full display as she conducted herself among a cross section of the Pakistani nation reeling from terrorist outrages. She must have gauged that most Pakistanis support the Army’s actions to destroy the military power of the Pakistani Taliban in the forbidding wastes of South Waziristan. The U.S. leaders have pronounced themselves “impressed” by the Pakistani counter-terrorism operations in that area. The home town of Hakimullah Mehsud, the leader of the Pakistani Taliban, has been captured, and he is in hiding. He is a marked man. As I have stated before, there is much riding on this Army operation to militarily degrade the Mehsud militia.

Simultaneously, the Pakistani leadership must take effective action against violent extremists in Southern Punjab who appear to have linked up with the Pakistani Taliban and remnants of al-Qaeda in the remote regions bordering Afghanistan. What was refreshing was Clinton’s affirmation that U.S.-Pakistan relations were too important to be confined only to the counter-terrorism sphere. U.S. help and that of the Friends of Pakistan group which contains many wealthy countries, could be crucial in advancing Pakistan’s socioeconomic development.

Violent extremism will only abate through the accelerated provision of education and employment opportunities. Unemployed youth with no other means of subsistence have to be made stakeholders. They will then join civil society as productive members instead of being recruited as suicide bombers.

Clinton pointedly reminded Pakistanis in her various meetings that the economic inequality between a small rich minority and a large deprived majority is a recipe for violence and unrest. I hope that her frank advice will be heeded by the Pakistani establishment.

Clinton also reassured Pakistanis that the U.S. will not abandon Pakistan this time. Both countries have a huge stake in ridding the region of fanatical obscurantists who want to drag South Asia into the Dark Ages. Let’s hope she means what she says.

JAPAN: A Japanese navy ship intercepted a medium-ranged ballistic missile in a test off the coast of Hawaii. Japan has been investing in U.S.-developed ballistic missile defense systems since North Korea test fired a long ranged ballistic missile over northern Japan in 1998.

MALAYSIA: Malaysia’s Islamic party has called Muslim men in the country to marry single mothers as their additional wives instead of “young, virgin girls.” Men in Malaysia are allowed to marry up to four women under the approval of the Islamic courts. Government officials said this will “ease the burden” on the single mothers as they need support to take care of their kids.

INDONESIA: Authorities in Indonesia said they might expel the 78 Sri Lankan asylum-seekers if they fail to cooperate with them over identity checks. The ethnic Tamil refugees were intercepted in international waters near Indonesia 11 days ago while trying to reach Australia.

ZIMBABWE: Al Jazeera English is reporting that  UN special rapporteur on torture Manfred Nowak was denied entry to Zimbabwe.

SUDAN: African Union leaders are discussing various proposals to resolve the ongoing crisis in Darfur, reports Al-Arabiya.

IRAN: Iran’s Islamic Students News Agency is reporting that Iran’s ambassador to the IAEA Ali Asghar Soltanieh has delivered his country’s response to the IAEA. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said  the West is moving from confrontation to cooperation on the issue, and the United Nations watchdog agency says it is hopeful an agreement can be reached.

According to the Middle East online news site, more than 60 Iraqi security force members have been arrested following the two bombings in Baghdad that killed more than 150 people. The New York Times is reporting on corruption on Iraq.

PAKISTAN: Pakistan Dawn TV reported on US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s town hall meeting where she told a Pakistani audience that Pakistan was not alone in its fight against militants and reiterated strong U.S. support for its ally.

ISRAEL: In Israel today, Haaretz is covering that country’s observation of the 14th year anniversary — according to the Jewish calendar — of the assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin.

PALESTINE: Palestinian Ma’an news agency said that Hamas’s Prime Minister in Gaza Ismail Haniyeh has told an American delegates on a medical mission in Gaza that he welcomes the U.S. change of language on the Middle East conflict.

Approximately 150 miles away In the northwestern city of Peshawar, a car bomb tore through a busy market. The death toll from today’s terror attacks in Pakistan has risen to some 100 people. The bombing is thought to be the work of militants allied with the Taliban.

Ahmad Kamal, a Pakistani diplomat for 40 years - 10 of them as Pakistan’s UN ambassador - speaks with Daljit Dhaliwal about the relationship between the Taliban in Pakistan and Afghanistan and the escalation of attacks. He also examines what it will take to end the violence in both countries.

The Times reporter conducting an interview. Photo: Tomas Munita for The New York Times

Edward Deitch is the consulting producer and head writer at Worldfocus. He looks at how one reporter describes an ordeal in Afghanistan and Pakistan — and what it may mean for U.S. policymakers.

It was unfortunate, even heartbreaking, how David Rohde gained first-hand knowledge of the Taliban. The New York Times correspondent went to Afghanistan last November to research a book, but before getting very far he was kidnapped by a Taliban commander who had invited him for an interview.

Held for more than seven months across the border in Pakistan’s lawless tribal areas, he lived to write about his experience. It’s the kind of story that no one would have wished for but that few will turn away from.

In a series of Times articles this week, Rohde recounts his experience and those of two Afghan colleagues abducted with him. You can see a related video segment from this Worldfocus partner in tonight’s broadcast.

Rohde’s perspective on the Taliban is particularly relevant. Pakistan is conducting a large-scale offensive against the insurgents in South Waziristan, one of the areas where Rohde was held. And President Obama is pondering whether to commit more troops to the effort against the Taliban in Afghanistan.

There will most certainly be a book and, inevitably, a movie. But I doubt Hollywood will do justice to the material. Rohde’s ordeal, in his own words, is the kind of story you can’t make up.

There have been countless dispatches on the fight against the Taliban from the American and British points of view. Following the troops in Afghanistan for a few days or weeks is routine for reporters, whether they are from The Times, American television news outlets, or foreign broadcasters such as Australia’s ABC or Al Jazeera English, whose reports we have featured on our program. Al Jazeera English has also provided glimpses into the Taliban side, especially in Pakistan.

By contrast, David Rohde, without a choice in the matter, experienced what might be described as the ultimate embed with the Taliban, and some of his revelations are worth noting as U.S. policymakers confront the growing dangers in Afghanistan and Pakistan:

• The group that held him “oversaw a sprawling Taliban mini-state in the tribal areas with the de facto acquiescence of the Pakistani military.”

• U.S. drone attacks on Taliban targets “killed many senior commanders and hindered their operations. Yet the Taliban were able to garner recruits in their aftermath by exaggerating the number of civilian casualties.”

• The Taliban “were more sophisticated than I expected. They browsed the Internet and listened to hourly news updates on Azadi radio, a station run by the American government. But then they dismissed whatever information did not meet their preconceptions.”

Even the surreal moments are instructive. Rohde was baffled, he tells us, by how his guards liked to sing with him, and their favorite song was none other than “She Loves You” by the Beatles. He recounts how he would sing the first verse and the guards and his fellow captives would join in for the chorus. “’She loves you – yeah, yeah, yeah,’ we sang, with Kalashnikovs lying on the floor around us.” One can only imagine it.

I’ve barely scratched the surface of Rohde’s story, with all its twists and turns. It is a thriller set in an unfolding and deepening conflict with no end in sight. It provides a rare and raw look at just what the United States and its allies are up against. It’s difficult to read but hard to put down.

- Edward Deitch

Amna Nawaz, a Pakistani-American journalist, was recently in Pakistan as part of her fellowship with the International Reporting Project of Johns Hopkins University. While in there she explored what it’s like to live or work in Islamabad and elsewhere in Pakistan, as the country becomes increasingly dangerous. She brings us a personal perspective we almost never get to see - from the streets of Islamabad.

Daljit Dhaliwal spoke with Amna Nawaz, who filed the above report from Pakistan, and recently returned home to Washington. Nawaz talks about how Islamabad, the capital, has drastically changed over the past few years. She also discusses the security differences between the capital and the border provinces and how she was treated there as an American.

Few, if any, humanitarian preparations have been made for the 150,000 civilians who have already fled the military’s campaign against 10,000 Taliban militants.

Imran Khan of Al Jazeera English reports on the humanitarian consequences of the Pakistani military’s newest campaign.

A Waziri man in Bela, Pakistan. Photo: Flickr user sahrizvi

S. Azmat Hassan is a former Pakistani diplomat.  He is now a professor at Seton Hall University.  He writes about the current Pakistani military campaign in South Waziristan and what the U.S. should do in the troubled region.

After months of planning, the Pakistani army has finally dispatched 38,000 troops into the Pakistani Taliban stronghold of South Waziristan. President Zardari and Army Chief Kiyani doubtlessly hope for a knockout blow to the newly anointed leader of the Pakistani Taliban, Hakimullah Mehsud. How much support Hakimullah enjoys among his fierce and warlike fellow tribesmen, the Mehsuds, is not known.

Military analysts estimate that Hakimullah commands around 10,000 fighters including 1500 battle-hardened Uzbeks from Uzbekistan. The Pakistani Taliban may be numerically outnumbered but have the advantage of terrain, tribal solidarity and extremist ideology.

It is crucial for the Pakistani army to blunt the power of the Mehsud group. A stalemate this time will be interpreted as a serious setback which could have ominous repercussions for the Zardari-led civilian government. If Hakimullah stands his ground, his stature among violent extremists in the region will grow. The ability of the Afghan Taliban to continue to use Pakistan’s lawless and ungovernable tribal areas bordering eastern Afghanistan as sanctuaries will continue unimpeded. Therefore there is much riding on the Pakistani operation. Its reverberations will be felt not only in Islamabad and Kabul but also in Washington, London and other Western capitals.

The modern history of Afghanistan is a sorry saga of continual blundering by the Afghans, the Soviets, the Americans and the Pakistanis. The Afghan leadership fell into the lap of the Soviets in the 1970’s, and the Soviets committed the original sin in 1979 of invading, occupying and brutalizing a poor neighbor which had done it no harm. The famous Soviet physicist and Nobel laureate Andrei Sakharov, said it best when he stated, “The war in Afghanistan itself was criminal, a criminal adventure taken on, undertaken by who knows who, and who knows [who] bears the responsibility for this enormous crime of our motherland.” The US turned their backs on a broken Afghanistan after the Soviets withdrew in defeat in 1989. This was a sure recipe for radicalizing the region.

The Pakistani security establishment trained and groomed the Taliban after the latter captured power in Kabul in 1996. Today the Pakistani Taliban has turned on their former mentors. For the Pakistani leadership and common people, they have become Frankensteinian monsters.

The Obama administration made a big error in coining its so-called ‘Afpak’ strategy. What was required were two different approaches for two different, albeit neighboring, countries, with not much in common between them. Conflating the two and putting them in the same basket showed both ignorance and unfamiliarity with the political dynamics of both.  I am glad Obama is reviewing Afpak. He should treat both countries as separate entities, and the U.S. should craft different approaches to them. Hopefully Richard Holbrooke after his numerous visits to both nations has been able to advise Hilary Clinton and Obama suitably.

To succeed in its campaign, the Pakistani army will have to take a crash course in counterinsurgency warfare. Conventional land wars and confronting Taliban insurgents in their mountainous bases are as different as chalk and cheese.  The Pakistanis desperately need counterinsurgency materiel such as attack helicopters, electronic surveillance devices, night vision goggles, etc. The U.S. should cut out the bureaucratic red tape and provide such assistance quickly. It is in their interest that the Pakistani army succeed in their assault on their mutual enemies.

Finally, I would advise the Pakistani planners and their American allies to locate and cut off the financial support available to the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban. This is an achievable task. The UN and Interpol can provide help, as can the European Union, the Iranians, Russians and other interested parties. Without sizable financial support, such insurgencies wither away sooner rather than later. That is how al-Qaeda has been reduced to a shadow of its former strength. This is the most effective way to defang the two Talibans.

After months of planning, the Pakistani army has finally dispatched 38,000 troops into the Pakistani Taliban stronghold of South Waziristan. S. Azmat Hassan, a former Pakistani diplomat, writes about the current Pakistani military campaign in South Waziristan and what the U.S. should do in the troubled region. http://worldfocus.org/files/2009/10/th_pakistan_waziri.jpg ]]> http://worldfocus.org/blog/2009/10/19/moving-beyond-afpak-in-us-foreign-policy/7860/feed/ http://worldfocus.org/blog/2009/10/16/week-in-review-afghanistan-pakistan-china-and-russia/7838/ http://worldfocus.org/blog/2009/10/16/week-in-review-afghanistan-pakistan-china-and-russia/7838/#comments Fri, 16 Oct 2009 21:25:19 +0000 Worldfocus http://worldfocus.org/?p=7838 Gideon Rose, managing editor of Foreign Affairs magazine, and David Andelman, editor of the World Policy Journal and a former foreign correspondent, join Martin Savidge to discuss the week’s top stories. They discuss corruption in Afghanistan, strategic opportunities in Pakistan, Iran’s relationship with Russia and China and the threat of nuclear weapons.

Shuja Nawaz, director of the South Asia Center at The Atlantic Council, speaks with Martin Savidge about Pakistani law enforcement strategies, recent bomb attacks and an expected offensive in South Waziristan.

After a surge in attacks targeting police officers, the Pakistani government is preparing for a ground offensive in a key Taliban stronghold. Al Jazeera English’s Imran Khan reports from the Pakistani capital of Islamabad.

Ahmad Kamal, a Pakistani diplomat for 40 years and Pakistan’s former ambassador to the United Nations, joins Martin Savidge to discuss Pakistan’s war against Islamic militants and whether the U.S. is paying enough attention to Afghanistan’s neighbor.

Kamal Hyder of Al Jazeera English reports from Pakistan on the deteriorating security situation.

Today in the Swat Valley within 100 miles of the Pakistani capital city of Islamabad, at least 41 people were killed. Today’s incident came as the Taliban claimed responsibility for a separate weekend attack on a Pakistani army facility that killed dozens more.

Should the United States send even more money to Pakistan to try to quell the violence there?

Tell us what you think in the comments section below. Please remember to be respectful and on-point in your comments. Malicious or offensive comments will be deleted and repeat offenders will be banned.

International organizations have begun to call attention to the plight of these young workers, many of whom are the children of Afghan refugees who cannot legally work in Pakistan.

In conjunction with Concern Worldwide, Worldfocus’ Yuval Lion produced this signature video.

(View full post to see video)

Ambassador Azmat Hassan

Azmat Hassan is a career diplomat and former ambassador of Pakistan, where his postings have included Ambassador of Pakistan to Malaysia, Syria and Morocco, and Deputy Permanent Representative of Pakistan to the United Nations in New York. He currently serves as an adjunct professor at Seton Hall University.

The outcome of the recent Geneva talks between the P5+1 and Iran is good news. The international community is rightly concerned at the ambiguity surrounding Iran’s nuclear program. Iran’s agreement to turn over the enriched uranium fuel from its reactors to Russia represents a significant concession. But more significantly, it is a victory for diplomacy. It staves off, at least temporarily, the hawkish option of preemptive attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities by either Israel or the United States.

The latter course would be disastrous as it almost certainly would unleash more bloodshed and uncertainty in the Middle East — and probably tilt Iran toward joining the nuclear club. Iran feels hemmed in by the only nuclear power in the Middle East, Israel; by the presence of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan; and by nuclear-armed India and Pakistan. The Geneva talks open up the possibility of diplomatic engagement between the U.S. and Iran.

The U.S. and Iran have not spoken to each other for 30 years. They have to reengage to serve their mutual interests. Normalization would enable American diplomats on the ground in Tehran to better gauge the dynamics of Iranian politics. Ditto for Iranian diplomats in Washington. If matters proceed well, it might enable Obama to have a direct channel to Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Pakistan helped the U.S. and China to reconcile forty years ago, and it would be a possible mediator between Washington and Tehran.

I vividly remember accompanying President Leghari of Pakistan in a meeting with Khamenei, when the former was on a state visit to Tehran in 1994. Khamenei sat on the floor, and so did the Pakistani delegation, on exquisite Persian carpets interspersed with cushions. Far from the West’s caricature of Iranian clergy as a bunch of scowling mullahs in black robes, Khamenei appeared both genial and worldly.

I did not detect any fire and brimstone in his remarks. Engagement almost always softens the rough edges of animosity and misperception among adversaries. Rabbi Jonathan Sacks of the U.K. said that a real hero is one who turns an enemy into a friend.

Diplomatic engagement between the U.S and Iran is imperative if we desire a more peaceful Middle East. This will be good for all actors. Iran is just too important and powerful to be intimidated or isolated. Nixon’s opening to China showed the enormous benefits of bringing China into the world’s mainstream. The same can happen with Iran. Diplomacy means putting oneself in the shoes of one’s antagonist. It means viewing intractable issues from a different prism. Ultimately, it means searching for accommodation. If the U.S. were to open up and normalize with Iran, it could open the way for a broad-based rapprochement between Israel, the Palestinians, the Arab countries and Iran. It could unlock the gridlock in Iraq and Afghanistan. It could thus be win-win all around — instead of the zero-sum game that the hawks want us to play.

- Azmat Hassan

For another perspective on the responsibilities of the P5+1, read contributor Dwight Bashir’s thoughts: Amid Iran nuclear talks, don’t forget human rights.