Afghan Talks Stalled Over 2 Main Issues

Four days before the target date set by Moscow for reaching a settlement in the Afghan crisis, negotiations were stuck Friday on two important issues.

On one of the issues, the Soviet Union contends that it has the right to continue military aid to the pro-Soviet government in Kabul after a settlement is reached, even though that settlement might require the United States and other countries to stop supplying arms to Afghan resistance groups.

The United States, along with Pakistan, the base for the Afghan resistance groups fighting to overthrow the Kabul regime, maintains that military aid to both sides must be stopped simultaneously.

There has been little movement on the other main issue, the question of an interim government in Kabul to help implement the four-point plan under negotiation here.

6 Years of Talks

The negotiations, now nearing the end of their sixth year, are indirect talks between Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan, conducted under U.N. auspices.

On the periphery are the United States and the Soviet Union, which are committed to act as guarantors of a settlement, although the United States appeared Friday to hedge on that pledge. In addition to the withdrawal of Soviet troops, the plan calls for free elections and the return of about 4.5 million Afghan refugees from Pakistan and Iran.

The Afghan resistance is not formally represented in the talks.

Last month, Soviet leader Mikhail S. Gorbachev said Moscow was willing to begin the withdrawal of the estimated 115,000 Soviet troops on May 15 if a settlement could be reached in Geneva by March 15.

While it now seems virtually certain that this date will pass without an agreement--the talks are scheduled to be resumed Monday--negotiators believe that a mid-May start to the Soviet pullout is still possible if a settlement is reached in the next few weeks.

Despite the lack of movement in recent days, sources close to the talks insist that there is no impasse.

“We haven’t made significant progress (this week), but we’re not deadlocked either,” said one participant, who asked not to be identified by name or nationality.

The Soviets have sidestepped the issue of an interim government. They say it is an internal Afghan matter and therefore should not be brought up in the Geneva talks.

The Soviet position would effectively leave the Kabul regime in place, at least temporarily, a move that would allow Moscow to continue supporting it militarily.

But others believe that the absence of an agreed caretaker government could precipitate a blood bath as the present regime and the numerous deeply divided resistance factions struggle for power.

Washington believes that a transition government is desirable, but it is reluctant to press the issue and risk having Gorbachev backtrack on his commitment to a troop withdrawal.

Only Pakistan, fearful that the 3 million Afghan refugees there would not go home in the midst of turmoil, has pressed the interim government issue.

On the question of a simultaneous halt to military aid, Soviet Ambassador Nikolai Kozyrev on Thursday described Moscow’s military assistance to the Kabul government as part of a 70-year tradition of aid to Afghanistan. He said this is beyond the scope of the negotiations.