Taliban Peace Talks: U.S. Eyes Options To Restart Negotiations

By Missy Ryan

WASHINGTON, April 24 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama's administration, seeking to revive stalled Afghan peace talks, may alter plans to transfer Taliban detainees from Guantanamo Bay prison after its initial proposal fell foul of political opponents at home and the insurgents themselves.

As foreign forces prepare to exit Afghanistan, the White House had hoped to lay the groundwork for peace talks by sending five Taliban prisoners, some seen as among the most threatening detainees at Guantanamo, to Qatar to rejoin other Taliban members opening a political office there.

In return, the Taliban would make its own good-faith gestures, denouncing terrorism and supporting the hoped-for talks with the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

While that plan has not been scotched entirely, several sources familiar with preliminary discussions within the U.S. government said the United States may instead, as an initial gesture meant to revive diplomacy, send one of those detainees directly to Afghan government custody.

The sources identified the detainee as a former Taliban regional governor named Khairullah Khairkhwa, who is seen by American officials as less dangerous than other senior Taliban detainees now held at the U.S. military prison in Cuba.

No final decision appears to have been made on Khairkhwa's fate.

A senior Obama administration official, while not disputing that Khairkhwa's unilateral transfer had been suggested, cautioned that it was still at a "brainstorming" level. The onus was still on the Taliban to show it is interested in Afghan reconciliation, he said.

"It's most definitely not policy," said the senior official, speaking on condition of anonymity. "At the moment we've made clear what we expect from reconciliation ... and the Taliban understand that, full stop."

More than a year ago, the White House launched what began as a secretive diplomatic bid to coax the Taliban, the Islamist group that ruled Afghanistan until 2001, into peace talks. That campaign has become central to U.S. strategy as officials conclude the Afghan war will not end on the battlefield alone.

It remains far from clear whether the Taliban would embrace sharing power in Afghanistan and whether the militants are cohesive enough to agree on a joint diplomatic approach.

But Washington's strategy, before a May summit of NATO leaders in Chicago, is to build on what officials see as military progress against the Taliban, and encouraging signs from the Afghan and Pakistani governments, to heap pressure on the Islamist group.

"As we head into Chicago obviously we'll continue to highlight each of those (areas) and we'll continue to work with Congress," the U.S. official said.

The Chicago summit is expected to further detail plans for the withdrawal of most of NATO's 130,000 troops there by the end of 2014 and set the course for future ties between Afghanistan and the West.


A LONG SHOT, BUT FEW ALTERNATIVES

U.S. efforts to broker the talks were dealt a blow last month when the Taliban suspended its participation and appeared to reject even minimal restrictions for prisoners transferred to Qatar.

From the beginning, a transfer of Taliban prisoners has posed major political risks for Obama in an election year.

U.S. lawmakers from both parties, but particularly Republicans, have warned that prisoners such as Mullah Mohammed Fazl, a "high-risk" detainee and former Taliban military commander alleged to be responsible for the killing of thousands of minority Shi'ite Muslims, might rejoin militant operations.

The transfer proposal has also been divisive within the Obama administration. Because Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, under U.S. law, must personally approve the transfer, Pentagon officials worry their agency will be deemed responsible for any future actions by those detainees.

Partly for those reasons, U.S. negotiators are now focusing on Khairkhwa. Once the Taliban's governor of western Herat province, he was also a Taliban spokesman and interior minister.

The senior U.S. official said Karzai has been asking the United States for years to send Khairkhwa, imprisoned since 2002 at Guantanamo Bay, back to Afghanistan. The Taliban has long demanded release of its prisoners, in part as a good-faith move.

U.S. military assessments that have been made public characterize Khairkhwa as a 'high-risk' detainee and a 'direct' associate of the late al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and Taliban leader Mullah Omar.

But they also describe him as more of a civilian than a military figure, and he is said to be a friend of Karzai.

Khairkhwa was captured in Pakistan in early 2002, allegedly while seeking to negotiate surrender and integration into the new Afghan government.

"If you were to take all the senior leaders associated with the Taliban since the start of the movement, and try to find the inclusive figures, acceptable to fellow Afghans and competent to work for a political agreement, Khairkhwa would definitely be in the top five," said Michael Semple, a former U.N. official with more than 20 years experience in Afghanistan.

SETBACKS

Afghanistan's High Peace Council, under the leadership of the late former President Burhanuddin Rabbani, had advocated for Khairkhwa's release, saying he might play a positive role in the peace process.

"The cause of Mullah Khairullah Khairkhwa is good for peace, and totally acceptable to Karzai," Semple said, in part because Karzai and Khairkhwa both come from the Popalzai tribe.

Last year, a U.S. federal court rejected a challenge to Khairkhwa's detention by his lawyers, and an appeal is now pending.

If a unilateral transfer were approved, Khairkhwa would be moved to Afghan custody in a country other than Qatar, without involvement of the Taliban. It was not immediately clear whether this might mean a transfer directly back to Afghanistan.

The transfer would still require the Obama administration to notify Congress 30 days ahead of time. But the hope is that Khairkhwa's transfer would avoid the furor in Congress that moving the other prisoners might bring.

Efforts to salvage the peace process follow a series of U.S. setbacks in Afghanistan: bloody riots caused by soldiers' burning of the Koran; a staff sergeant's alleged massacre of 17 villagers; and an 18-hour militant assault of Kabul last week.

Still, officials point to statistics charting a drop in 'enemy-initiated attacks' this spring. They were encouraged by recent steps to finalize a deal outlining the U.S.-Afghan relationship, along with statements of support for the peace process by Pakistani Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani.

U.S. officials hope to use all these developments to coax the Taliban's leadership, under pressure from less senior fighters who oppose negotiations, to formally resume talks. (Additional reporting by Hamid Shalizi and Rob Taylor in KABUL; Editing by Warren Strobel and David Storey)

live blog

Oldest Newest

Police Take Position

Police take their position alongside a giant picture of Afghan national hero Ahmad Shah Massoud, on the roof of police headquarters in Kabul on May 7, 2012. The United States has freed up to 20 detainees from a military prison in Afghanistan over the past two years in an effort to promote reconciliation with insurgent groups, the US embassy said. (BAY ISMOYO/AFP/GettyImages)

Share this:

A Mining Future On Hold

@ AbasDaiyar : Dreams Of A Mining Future On Hold In #Afghanistan : NPR http://t.co/uN1C2TP3?

Share this:

Checkpoint Lookout

An Afghan youth looks out from an intricately carved truck window at a police checkpoint in Kabul on May 7, 2012. Afghan forces are ready to take responsibility for security in 2013, the defence ministry said on May 7, reacting to a pledge to withdraw French troops early by president-elect Francois Hollande. Hollande made a campaign promise to pull French soldiers out of Afghanistan this year, ending his country's combat role two years earlier than NATO's carefully crafted plan to hand security control to Afghans by 2014. (SHAH MARAI/AFP/GettyImages)

Share this:

Government Vows

@ ISAFmedia : AP reports: Afghan Govt forces will thwart any attacks mounted by Taliban. http://t.co/qDEtWRsI #ANSFCanDo

Share this:

What French Election Means For Afghanistan

@ headlinenews : Fox: What French presidential vote means for European debt crisis, Afghan war, global diplomacy: French voters c... http://t.co/E6fcgbiH

Share this:

Afghanistan At NATO Summit

@ AfghanNews24 : Afghanistan a major focus of NATO summit - Chicago Sun-Times http://t.co/a7lk2KGT

Share this:

Inside A Plane

U.S. servicemen inside of a plane before their departure to Afghanistan from the U.S. transit center Manas, 30 km outside the Kyrgyzstan's capital Bishkek, on March 27, 2012. A planned withdrawal of US and coalition forces by the end of 2014 hinges on building up Afghan army and police, but the surge in 'fratricidal' attacks threatens to undermine that strategy, with strained relations between NATO troops and Afghan forces marked by distrust and cultural clashes. (VYACHESLAV OSELEDKO/AFP/GettyImages)

Share this:

Sunset

An Afghan boy walks with his cow at sunset in Mazar-i Sharif, capital of the Balkh province on April 9, 2012. Agriculture has traditionally driven the Central Asian nation's economy, with wheat and cereal production being mainstays and quality fruits, especially pomegranates, apricots, grapes, melons, and mullberries being exported to many countries. (QAIS USYAN/AFP/GettyImages)

Share this:

The Next Decade Of War

@ JoeNBC : Looking Ahead to the Afghan War's Next Decade - Global - The Atlantic Wire: http://t.co/CWSrDjih

Share this:

US Soldier Dies Of Rabies From Dog Bite

@ NewYorkPost : US soldier dies of rabies after dog bite in Afghanistan http://t.co/NudcMgyu

Share this:

Closed Factory, Lost Dreams

Gazing glumly over millions of dollars worth of machinery which used to churn out thousands of police and army boots each day but now sits wreathed in plastic sheeting, Farhad Saffi fears he is seeing the death of an Afghan dream.

Read the entire story here.

Share this:

Hamid Karzai Speaks

Afghan President Hamid Karzai speaks during a press conference at the presidential palace in Kabul on May 3, 2012. Karzai hailed a new pact with the United States but warned that tough negotiations on Washington's military presence in his war-torn country after 2014 still lay ahead. (BAY ISMOYO/AFP/GettyImages)

Share this:

Gen. John R. Allen Explains The Handover

U.S. Marine Corps Gen. John R. Allen, the commander of the ISAF forces in Afghanistan, explains to Al Jazeera English why the handover in the turbulent country is "like building an airplane in midflight."

Share this:

Honoring Troops Lost In Afghanistan

@ cbrangel : As we begin our withdrawal from Afghanistan, we honor the 1,828 heroic Americans who paid the ultimate sacrifice.http://1.usa.gov/IywJn3

Share this:

Agreement Short On Specifics

@ csmonitor : Obama's agreement with Karzai in Afghanistan short on specifics http://t.co/Kb4iI5d1

Share this:

More

Comments

[ilove98199]

12:24 PM on 04/27/2012

Pakistan is the real one causing problems, not the taliban. This is a way for Pakistan to keep collecting money. http://voices.yahoo.com/article/9501526/pakistans-failed-war-terror-11262676.html?cat=9

[luv70music]

06:39 PM on 04/25/2012

If President Obama was smart, he'd think of the Taliban as the tea party.Once he's in the mind frame of dealing with extremists, the negotiations should go smoothly.

[ConnieDr]

12:58 PM on 04/25/2012

So obama thinks that handing over 5 terrorist to the terrorists will make them want to start talking to him again? lol lol lol........Here he goes again making deals with the devil! Maybe he should look at how that worked out for him with N. Korea or iran or ???? fill in the blank! But I'm sure it will work this time, right? lol lol lol...........Does everyone feel safe now?

[Jan Harper]

05:30 PM on 04/25/2012

No, I don't live my life scared like a little conservative girl.

[Mcleod13]

10:55 PM on 04/25/2012

Perhaps if you had family or friends who had been blown up by terrorist, you would be scared as well. Fear is not a bad thing; actually, someone has to have fear in order to make a nation secure. Perhaps the wiser have more caution...?

[antiprop1]

10:12 PM on 04/25/2012

Watch more Fox News right wing foreign policy analysis and you can sleep under your bed in sheer terror, booo! I'm so afraid of Iran and Afghanistan, I'm sure they will kill us all tonight, what a joke!

[California Beach Bum]

12:42 PM on 04/25/2012

This is Obama's international form of diplomacy? That's why he should not be reelected in November 2012.

[Stavo]

10:10 AM on 04/25/2012

Gee.....Afghanistan is such an interesting and vibrant country.....I think I'll take the wife and all 9 of my children and all the immediate inlaws to visit the vast opium field and the bomb making factories they have there, on this summers vacation. Yes....yes indeed. Then maybe visit all of the US private sectors there, drawing your tax dollars, for doing absolutely nothing, except the occasional road to nowhere. Once we are finished with that.....we'll take in the millions of goat herds and donkey caravans!!! Can't hardly wait until vacation time. Griswalds.....look out!!!! Pretty funny stuff....

[BG-back]

09:58 AM on 04/25/2012

2/2
According to the BBC, the Taliban later even warned the U.S. that bin Laden was going to launch an attack on American soil. Former Taliban foreign minister Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil said his warnings, issued because of concerns that the U.S. would react by waging war against Afghanistan, had been ignored. A U.S. official did not deny that such warnings were issued, but told BBC rather that it was dismissed because “We were hearing a lot of that kind of stuff”."

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/09/20/newly-disclosed-documents-shed-more-light-on-early-taliban-offers-pakistan-role/

It's all a facade... There is no humanitarian reason and 9// was simply used as an excuse (some would suggest it was something the U$ admin wanted to happen, may have even looked the other way or, as unbelievable as it might sound to some, done it themselves)

It's about strategic depth, the pipeline and the trillions in Lithium reserves there. Or at least was, till before defeat wasn't inevitable..

[omobob]

09:48 AM on 04/25/2012

> In return, the Taliban would make its own good-faith gestures, denouncing terrorism and supporting the hoped-for talks with the government of Afghan President Hamid Karzai.

The Taliban really have little incentive tio talk to Karzai. They know the US Military is leaving and they can wait. It’s not like they are leaving. Who will fight for the corrupt Karzai Government once the US Military pulls out? The Afghan Army? Instead of  a pay check for standing behing US soldiers, They soon will have to face the battle hardened Afghan Insurgency. The same Afghan Insurgency that has fought the best and most experienced Military Force on the planet to a stand still after 11 long years. What chance does the under trained and less motivated Afghan Security forces have? The own ranks filled with spies and turn coats, how long will they last before Karzai capitulates? Weeks? Months? All for nothing. fubar

[antiprop1]

10:14 PM on 04/25/2012

How long did our US trained South Vietnamese Army last after we pulled out? Not long, I see the same thing happening. The Taliban control billions of dollars of poppy production. Believe me, they already have won, we are just throwing more borrowed money away every day.

[omobob]

12:52 AM on 04/26/2012

> How long did our US trained South Vietnamese Army last after we pulled out?

4 years. we left them the third largest air force in the world. yup, the US. the USSR and South VietNam.
They still could not win. Well noted. faved. cheers

[MsNRAGirl]

09:24 AM on 04/25/2012

Ofrauda is sending these terrorists back to join their cronies? That is just great. When will the liberals open their eyes...this guy wants to destroy the US, from the inside out.

[papapj]

07:53 PM on 04/25/2012

Yes..and they're under your bed at night..do you sleep with the lights on?...boooooo!

[Mcleod13]

09:15 AM on 04/25/2012

I don’t see the point of peace talks. The Taliban and what they stand for won’t be stopped. It’s important to understand your enemy, not treat them as if they understood us and secretly, in their hearts, longed for western ideals. Terrorists don’t kill people and themselves in the process, for anything less than 100% commitment to their beliefs; they sacrifice themselves to kill ‘infidels’ because they are completely confident in what they believe to be correct. A person with that level of commitment can’t be reasoned with. With good reason: they have a works-based salvation, and believe that one way to guarantee a place in heaven is to die ‘for Allah’ in a sacrificial way. And simply removing the ‘non-believers’ whether or not they themselves die in the process is what they think they are instructed to do.
Someone, and the culture that spawns them, can’t be reasoned with if this is what they believe and they have 100% faith and dedication to doing their god’s work. No one kills people like this unless they truly believe they are correct; therefore, they truly believe they are correct and you can’t reason with someone like that because you would both be coming from two completely different angles. They don’t want to stop, and won’t stop, until the entire world is dead or Muslim, because then their messiah or god will come back to earth. You can’t reason with them.

[cursive -hyroglyphic-s]

12:14 PM on 04/25/2012

Folks love war too much, as a forseeable end to their personl neurosis. Real or percieved. :(

[Rexter]

08:53 AM on 04/25/2012

Why would the Taliban negotiate while they witness the U.S. troop withdrawals? Seems like time is on their side and waiting is in their best interest. Further, any negotiating would be for propaganda purposes and only serve to legitamize a terrorist organization as a political body. All this is trying to put a brave face on our exit from that quagmire.

[BG-back]

10:00 AM on 04/25/2012

What's even funnier is the "We never negotiate with terrorist" U$ is now seeking the same...

Defeat has that effect on even those with much hubris i suppose...

[jfair80]

08:09 AM on 04/25/2012

Negotiated withdraw is the only reasonable way out of Afghanistan. The alternatives to this are either packing up and leaving or trying to defeat the Taliban in the field. Packing up and leaving makes our friends and allies vulnerable to the Taliban insurgency and gains us nothing after ten years or war. Defeating the Taliban in the field would require for us to invade Pakistan in order for us to take out their support network, nothing we have the will or resources for. This is an amazing development, especially in the light of recent advances in our relationship with Pakistan.

[ElCojonuo]

07:27 AM on 04/25/2012

The T' ban, the Cong, names change and years pass but the outcomes are the same.
Only difference is it's a Volunteer Army ( that's why they've been able to get away with it all these years )
Precious..

[Proud Vietnam Veteran]

09:37 AM on 04/25/2012

I agree, they have to follow no rules, I.E. cutting peoples heads off, these people you don't negotiate with, you haave to eliminate them. I have a feeling this president does not want to deal with the situation, aand it upsets me that we are losing and have lost good men and women, and for what, if you start something you are supposed to finish it. Continue with drones and if the people living around the area don't want to move, whether they choose to live with the taliban, or are forced to, you have to eliminate the enemy one way or another .

[rosiebag]

07:09 AM on 04/25/2012

Hillary should be able to deal whit this crew, she did a great job with her husband.

[AlfredE69]

07:07 AM on 04/25/2012

President Obama, let our troops go home NOW and stop giving our money to King Karzai to support his lavish lifestyle.

[strangetimes]

07:52 AM on 04/25/2012

Yep !!

[Mcleod13]

09:19 AM on 04/25/2012

I don't necessarily think the troops should leave (I haven't looked into it enough) but I hate it how America gives its money, OUR money as taxpayers, to support people who would be fine with turning on us, no obligation because of the bribes and money we give.

[AlfredE69]

07:14 PM on 04/25/2012

"I don't necessarily think the troops should leave ?"

Why don't you go over and replace them. Thank you sir.

[Liban CZ]

07:01 AM on 04/25/2012

It is all a big political joke, on America.