It’s a scene that wouldn’t be entirely out of place in Samuel Beckett’s Waiting for Godot. Yet in this regional adaptation, the theatre of the absurd is relocated to Muscat and the elusive Godot is recast as the Afghan Taliban. The latter, of course, didn’t show up to the Quadrilateral Coordination Group powwow in Oman, scheduled to discuss a political settlement so that the Americans can exit the Afghan quagmire. This was to be expected, perhaps. Given that the Afghan Taliban has always maintained it would have nothing to do with the US-led talks, which also include Pakistan, China and the Afghan government, while the Kabul regime remains unchanged. Also among its grievances is that it does not see any such peace process as sincere as long as American and NATO troops still enjoy a presence in the country. Which brings us to a chicken-and-egg situation of sorts. The Taliban no-show may or may not play to Pakistan’s advantage. Indeed, just the day before the talks, Islamabad is said to have sent a reminder to the insurgents that they had better prepare a team for the imminent negotiations. This certainly begs the question as to why it was this country and not, say, Afghanistan, that was issuing calls to peace. The most obvious answer would suggest an overt Pakistani move to remind everyone of who calls the shots across its western border. Yet our leadership would not be so reckless. Not when both the Army and ISI chiefs were recently in Kabul to meet President Ghani, with both sides agreeing to effectively wipe clean the slate of mutual mistrust. No, the civilians and the khakis are very much on the same page when it comes to sidelining Indian interests next door. This being the Af-Pak region, it serves to look at developments, at times, through the prism of the proverbial double bluff. Meaning that Pakistan may have issued the peace call knowing full well the Taliban wouldn’t play ball. For this would underscore to the whole world, especially the US, that we don’t hold as much sway over the group as is widely believed. This serves two purposes. Firstly, it addresses the American question of scape-goating Pakistan, implying once again that this is unwarranted. Indeed, our Foreign Minister just last week was heard musing that the Russians currently wield much more clout over the Taliban. Secondly, that the latter didn’t commit to Pakistan’s request may or may not signal a potential shift in Islamabad’s approach towards it. For political pundits are now toying with the idea of a toughened stance towards one-time proxies. This could include the threat of rounding up members of the Afghan Taliban, expelling them or, even worse, handing them over to Kabul. Seen within this context, the recent dramatic rescue of an American-Canadian couple by Pakistan’s armed forces may be more of a message to the Taliban and the Haqqani network than it is to the US. And one that says the time has come for Pakistan’s assets to come good on strengthening the hand that may or may not feed. Yet what is good news for Pakistan may not necessarily be good news for Afghanistan. Already, Trump is bombing the beleaguered country to kingdom come. According to the US’ own data, it, along with NATO, dropped a total of 751 rockets on Afghanistan. This represents not only a 50 percent increase from the previous month — but the largest weapon drop on the country in a single month since 2012. So what now for President Ghani? He should realise that his best hope of ending the insurgency in his country does not rest with Mr Trump.* Published in Daily Times, October 17th 2017.