More

Afghanistan Agrees To Peace Talks With Taliban

Afghanistan Taliban

First Posted: 12/26/11 08:55 AM ET Updated: 12/27/11 12:12 AM ET

KABUL - Afghanistan will accept a Taliban liaison office in Qatar to start peace talks but no foreign power can get involved in the process without its consent, the government's peace council said, as efforts gather pace to find a solution to the decade-long war.

Afghanistan's High Peace Council, in a note to foreign missions, has set out ground rules for engaging the Taliban after Kabul grew concerned that the United States and Qatar, helped by Germany, had secretly agreed with the Taliban to open an office in the Qatari capital, Doha.

U.S. officials have held about half a dozen meetings with their insurgent contacts, mostly in Germany and Doha with representatives of Mullah Omar, leader of the Taliban's Quetta Shura, this year to prepare the way for face-to-face talks between the group and the Afghan government.

A representative office for the group is considered the starting point for such talks and Doha has in the past served as a meeting ground for initial contacts.

But the Afghan peace commission which has suffered a series of setbacks including the assassination of its head in September said that negotiations with the Taliban could only begin after they stopped violence against civilians, cut ties to al Qaeda, and accepted the Afghan constitution which guarantees civil rights and liberties, including rights for women.

The council, according to a copy of the 11-point note made available to Reuters, also said any peace process with the Taliban would have to have the support of Pakistan since members of the insurgent group were based there.

"The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is in agreement regarding the opening of an office for the armed opposition, but only to move forward the peace process and conduct negotiations," the council said.

The government would prefer such an office in either Saudi Arabia or Turkey, both of which it is close to, but was not averse to Doha as long as the authority of the Afghan state was not eroded and the office was only established for talks, officials said.

"We are saying Saudi or Turkey are preferable, we are not saying it has to be there only. The only condition is it should be in an Islamic country," said a government official.

President Hamid Karzai's administration recalled its ambassador from Doha last week, apparently angry that it had been kept in the dark about the latest round of contacts with the insurgent group.

Officials said Kabul was also deeply concerned about reports that the United States was considering the transfer of a small number of Afghan prisoners from Guantanamo Bay military prison to Doha as a prelude to the talks.

"We are a sovereign country, we have laws. How can you transfer our prisoners from one country to another. Already it's a violation to have them in Guantanamo Bay," the official said.

The Afghan government wanted the prisoners to be returned to its custody, the official said.

Reuters reported this month that the United States was considering the transfer of an unspecified number of Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo Bay into Afghan government custody as part of accelerating, high-stakes diplomacy.

"We have no problem with this. In fact we have been demanding this for a while. These are Afghan prisoners," said the official, who declined to be identified.

The tension between the Karzai administration and the United States over engaging the Taliban underscores the challenges of seeking a political settlement as the West prepares to withdraw most combat troops from the country by 2014.

Efforts to engage the insurgent group have faced a string of setbacks, the most recent being the assassination of the head of the peace council and former president, Burhanuddin Rabbani, in September at the hands of a suicide bomber who pretended to be a Taliban emissary.

HARDENING OF POSITIONS

It led to a hardening of positions with Karzai saying the government could not talk to suicide bombers and that there should be an address for the Taliban so that negotiators know they are talking to the right representatives.

"We are committed to the reconciliation process, the experience of the last 10 years shows no military solution is possible. Talking to the armed opposition is the key in this regard," said presidential spokesman Aimal Faizi.

The peace council, laying down the markers for engagement with the Taliban, said well known figures from both the Taliban and the government had to be involved in talks.

It said that "before any negotiations can take place, violence against Afghan people must stop and that the armed opposition must cut ties to al Qaeda and other terrorist groups."

It also said that the Taliban must accept the constitution and honor the gains made in the last 10 years since they were ousted from power, conditions that the Taliban have shown no sign of accepting.

The Taliban do not accept the constitution and have vowed to carry on fighting until all foreign troops have left the country.

The peace council said Pakistani support was necessary for talks to take place, another condition that makes the task harder because of fraught ties between the United States and Pakistan which fears it is being shut out of the process.

Opening a Taliban office in a third country is seen as a way to create distance from Pakistan which has longstanding ties to the insurgent group.

But the government official said he did not think the peace council had laid down such tough conditions that the talks would fail even before they started.

"We don't think it's a deal breaker. We are quite optimistic," he said.

(Editing by Robert Birsel and Ed Lane)

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

KABUL - Afghanistan will accept a Taliban liaison office in Qatar to start peace talks but no foreign power can get involved in the process without its consent, the government's peace council said, as...
KABUL - Afghanistan will accept a Taliban liaison office in Qatar to start peace talks but no foreign power can get involved in the process without its consent, the government's peace council said, as...
Filed by Alana Horowitz  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 558
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (16 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Peter Speight
10:40 AM on 12/27/2011
Mission Accomplished!

oh wait...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Patrick Fogarty
10:28 AM on 12/27/2011
The definition of war is not what many used to think . It seems that at one time war was generally between countries at least the ones that have occurred in my lifetime and immediately before starting with the Spanish American and up to the War in Vietnam , That one was a little bit of a crossover in a sense . But the war in Iraq and Afghanistan at least to me share a different space on the shelf from others . There are no real lines except the ideological . There are guns and bullets , aircraft and bombs , killings , kidnappings , persecution of individuals and the general disruption of daily life from damaged infrastructure .However , we have finally found a way to make war that results in defeat for both sides and where victory belongs to those that are the providers of the machinery , security , medical needs ,food services and housing .
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jdl51
10:04 AM on 12/27/2011
If the Afghani people don't think it's worth it to fight against the Taliban, why should we put our sons and daughters' lives at risk for them. Let them deal with their differences on their own. You'd think we'd have learned not to get involved in other country's civil wars after Viet Nam. We got OBL and Al Qaeda is a shell of its former self. If we need to strike them wherever they are, we still have that capability. Out now!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Peter Speight
10:41 AM on 12/27/2011
Why did you go in there in the first place, killing thousands of civilians??
Bin Laden was in the OTHER COUNTRY.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:37 AM on 12/27/2011
What did America see in this clown?
Gaylord P Farqua
Herb Gardner Amateur Chef, Historian and Political
09:15 AM on 12/27/2011
Excellent idea. While Kazai is negotiating on how to get the rest of the fortune he made in US cash safely into Switzerland to join what he has shipped already,  it would be a really good time for us to accelerate our departure. If we play our cards right Afghanistan could become the new target for Iranian expansion  and join Iraq as the greater Iran. Then the fun would start. Already the Iraqis are blowing each other up and with the Afghanis who have proven over and over again that they don't like foreign rulers, it is quite possible that the Iranians will have their hands full for a long, long time. In any event we no longer belong in either country and never did. No WMD'd, no bin Laden.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jdl51
09:55 AM on 12/27/2011
Afghanistan is predominantly Sunni, Iran predominantly Shiite. It's like mixing oil and water. Iranians know better than to even think they could go in there and have their way. If we can get some kind of guarantee that the Taliban will not support any group that exports terrorism, it will give us an exuse to get the F out of there.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
viko
Definition of Management is to create a surplus
09:10 AM on 12/27/2011
Karzai note to self/
Check the turbans and make body scan of those invited .
PS< Make sure we are talking to the legitimate representatives..
Once bitten twice shy.
As in Iraq please check Vice President first,
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Tom Rugg
06:34 AM on 12/27/2011
So Afghanistan has agreed to negotiate with the Taliban IF the Taliban will first stop being the Taliban. Hard to be optimistic about approach to peace. So let's all pretend to be really surprised with the Taliban rejects this "reasonable" offer of reconciliation.
08:17 AM on 12/27/2011
Exactly my thoughts.
06:29 AM on 12/27/2011
What a total waste of time, money, and lives going into Afghanistan was!
04:20 AM on 12/27/2011
Hmm.. Kinda interesting that it was America in the first place that helped form the Taliban. Then come to think of it, we completely trained Bin Laden as our CIA operative who was trusted with weapons...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
eclub
яεsτяιcτєd
04:11 AM on 12/27/2011
I'm only here to ask:

Can the word Taliban and Peace go in the same sentence?
04:03 AM on 12/27/2011
Wow, this is a major victory for the U.S. and Obama. All of our guys and gals dead for peace talks with the Taliban. I remember how the allied powers defeated Germany and Japan it was those peace talks with the Nazis that were the Game changer. FAIL! Suicide bombs in Iraq kill 70 in the past week. FAIL! Our leaders should be in jail.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:31 AM on 12/27/2011
how would you end an armed conflict? with a final solution perhaps? - you can't eradicate all your opponents mostly because many of them are civilian, so at some point, peace talks are inevitable.
05:06 AM on 12/27/2011
Why are we fighting the civilians in Afghanistan again? How is achieving peace talks with the Taliban worth one young person's life? I will tell you, it is not and do not let Obama tell you any different because it is a lie.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joseph Leslie
02:38 AM on 12/27/2011
The Taliban showed their peaceful intentions by assinating the Afghan government's emissary, so things are off to an excellent start. I remember how effective the Paris Peace talks were to solving the Viet Nam war. All of the American soldiers and the Viet Namese people killed for what? Now we are treating the Taliban like a legitimate political entity. Maybe we can invite Al Fatah or the Mafia to moderate. The only way to prevent more homicide bombing is to have all of the taliban attendees show up completely naked. This is insanity. Why don't we just admit defeat and write off all of the Afgani people as a sacrifice to the muslim extremists. In a few years we will have the taliban setting up shop here in the USA. Maybe Iran will have the bomb like North Korea and we can negotiate for peace here in the USA!
02:01 AM on 12/27/2011
What took him so long to negotiate? He probably saw the US pullout of Iraq and a light went on in his head: "I'm next". We, Americans, want ALL of our troops out of there, PRONTO!
01:28 AM on 12/27/2011
Who knows? In 50 or 100 years they might sort this out. Personally I don't think we should wait around to find out.
01:17 AM on 12/27/2011
In 1939 Neville Chamberlain learned the hard way how appeasement encourages bad behavior in fanatics. Like wolves in sheeps clothing, the Taliban will agree to anything that legitimizes their re-entry in Afganistan by 2015 and re-establishment of a Islamic theocracy. By then the clock will be turned back to the 7th century, education of girls and women will be forbidden, public executions for minor religious related infractions a weekly event and schools transformed into training centers to export terror.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joseph Leslie
02:40 AM on 12/27/2011
To quote Mr. Chamberlain, "there will be no war"! We are dealing with people that make Hitler look like a "good guy"!