President Obama is expected to lay out his broader approach to the problems in Afghanistan and Pakistan this week, following a strategic review he ordered upon taking office. Whatever approach he takes, one critical piece must be an attempt to bring in more moderate elements of the Taliban.
"Wait, what?! That Taliban," you ask?
Yes. Let me explain. Violence continues to increase in Afghanistan, and the government there slowly loses control of areas that had previously been secured. Further, those areas that never were secured in the border region with Pakistan continue to be safe havens for al Qaeda. And so, a hard truth has become even more apparent - there is no military solution to Afghanistan, as there was no military solution in Iraq.
That isn't to say that military force isn't a component of a solution, as VoteVets.org's Vice Chair Brandon Friedman has argued on here before. Our military, and the militaries of our allies, are crucial in protecting infrastructure that we've helped build in Afghanistan, and providing security and stability in areas we need to be able to close in on al Qaeda.
But that can only be one ingredient, like eggs or flour are only one ingredient when baking a cake. Humanitarian aid, economic help, political negotiating, and diplomacy are the other elements that have to be present. Otherwise, you end up with a pile of burned flour, or a pre-9/11-like haven for al Qaeda, whichever the case may be.
And so, when it comes to stabilizing the region as much as possible, and denying al Qaeda free ground, bringing in a wide range of players is a good idea, as long as they're willing to make concessions to have a seat at the table. There is precedent here for this kind of tactic - whether it was Sinn Fein / IRA being brought into a power sharing agreement in Northern Ireland, or the FMLN negotiating a truce in El Salvador's Civil War, and transforming itself from a bunch of guerrillas into a political party (which recently won the nation's elections). And, of course, there was the Sunni Awakening in Iraq, where former insurgents flipped against the group that called itself "al Qaeda in Iraq," and joined the government.
In Afghanistan, there's evidence that there could be elements of the Taliban who would sit down and enter into an agreement. They would be brought into the halls of government, and be given some kind of amnesty, while they would aid us in strangling al Qaeda.
Indeed it's an idea that seems to be gaining steam. In a March 7th interview with the New York Times, President Obama said while he didn't want to prejudge the strategic review, he was open to the idea, and felt General Petraeus was open to the idea as well. The very next day, General Petraeus expressed support for the idea at the Heritage Foundation, saying, "If there are people who are willing to reconcile (with the government), then that would be a positive step in some of these areas that have actually been spiraling downward."
"The key there is making sure that all of that is done in complete coordination, with complete support of the Afghan government," he added.
As if on cue, President Karzai of Afghanistan opened the doors to negotiations. "As I have called upon Mullah Omar Taliban leader many times, I call upon the others, Taliban members too, that they should come back to their country, rebuild their country, they are welcome," President Karzai said.
All the pieces are there for the president to propose this as a major part of his approach to Afghanistan and Pakistan; now he must do so. It would finally shift much of the burden off of our troops in the region, who have been asked to do so much with so little. And, along with reopening the dialogue with Iran and other regional players, it would give us the best shot at finally doing what we should have done when the previous president decided to take a five-plus-year detour in Iraq.
Crossposted at VetVoice.com
Follow Jon Soltz on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jonsoltz
The Taliban is not a central authoritative body representing a body of people. It is an almost entirely Pashtun group of bandits whose central tenets are rooted more in tribal warrior identity than in actual political goals.
They follow in the time honored Afghan tradition of shooting foreign invaders. Follow a warrior/religious ethic that is rooted in pre modern times and have the governing skills of a band of ninth grade delinquents. Their idea of proper society when they were in charge of the country was to destroy their own cultural heritage ( blowing up the Buddhas of Bamiyan) throwing women out of schools, assassinating their opponents and extending protection to terrorists with cash to pay for it.
I do not believe we should be in that god forsaken country. Best to read Kipling and leave now.
I am no fan of this war, it is part of the larger Bush Disaster. But the only proper thing to do with the Taliban is drop large incendiary devices on their heads. Preferably in the form of cruise missiles fired from Florida.
1. I recently read that two boys were beheaded by the Taliban for speaking English. Add that w/ the acid attacks on young girls just for goin to school and I see no way to negotiate w/ these people. How do you negotiate w/ people who think it's ok to throw acid in the faces of little girls? How do you reason w/ them? Where in that vast difference of ideologies do you meet? Iraq was different, Saddam wanted to educate his people and pushed them into - men and women - and their country was the most advanced in the middle east for it. Due to that fact it was easy and effective to negotiate w/ them, once they finally decided to. People who throw acid in little girls faces and behead little boys can't be negotiated with.
2. You negotiate from a position of strength, not a position of weakness. You concede from a position of weakness. If the U.S. is going to negotiate it needs to wait until the Taliban are being pushed back and have no choice.
First, it's been proven time and time again that you cannot defeat a homegrown people's movement--no matter how ugly it is or how much you disagree with it. The Russians failed there, and they were much more brutal they we will ever be. Viet Nam, same thing. Unless the people there defeat their own, this will go on for another 100 years.
Second, by talking, and perhaps, by letting the Afghanis and Iraqis have their countries, we remove the target from our backs, both there and here in the US. The radicals cannot sustain a powerful movement without an enemy to indoctrinate their 10 years olds to hate. Besides, if we're really in this to liberate folks, especially women, then we should start with Saudi Arabia, but that's not gonna happen. So let's not be hypocrites. Their culture is messed up--we need to make them accountable for it.
And third, in the long run it would cost us far less to buy these countries than to wage wars in them. Most of the Middle East has a relaxed set of morals around doing business. In other words, they are all for sale and often shift alliances, especially among themselves, based on where they can get the best deal. If we talk, we find out who is most amenable to our "aid." It's easier to spread "democracy" with money than a bullet.
We must have dialogue with the mullah's and whoever are the preists there to preach directly from the koran which is peace and love and respect for women. We must work hand in hand with the aid groups in the country and show we are a friend not an occupier. Once we have stopped new people from joining then we can negotiate with the factions of the Taliban because they will be repelled by the people we are helping.
After the attacks, the Taliban asked the Bush administration for EVIDENCE that ObL was responsible for the attacks. It was never provided.
The Taliban have already answered that question: unless all troops are out of Afghanistan, no talking...obviously, not a viable option, and a completely absurd bargaining point...
The Taliban have no moderate wing, no desire to concede or work out anything with Obama...even before it was announced that Obama was considering talking to the Taliban, it was clear from the deal the Pakistani government had given the Taliban in Swat Valley, that negotiation is, and will always be, out of the question...after all, Pres. Zardari himself was one of many who helped pave the way for the Taliban to first gain a stronghold in Afghanistan...his tactics are nothing that Obama needs to emulate.
Would you be so keen on giving the Taliban credibility if they did this to boys?
Saudi Arabians and on Egyptian fly according to the official version fly into the World Trade Center and we invade Afghanistan and Iraq?
We created the Taliban with cooperation from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.
At the same time as the Saudi Arabians helped to establish the Taliban schools in Pakistan, international finance forced the Pakistani government to decrease funding for public education.
The only reasonable thing is to get out of Afghanistan and Iraq and hope that if we stop meddling this people can work out their problems.
We certainly should NOT negotiate with people as vicious as the Taliban. One of the justifications for the original invasion was the situation for women under the Taliban. This whole thing is beyond absurd and Vote Vets needs to stay out of political decisions.
It is hard for me to believe that they are taking any position other than withdrawal as It is clearly the only position that is in the interests of the US soldiers.
Because, while I totally agree that we should talk with the Taliban, Iran, and anyone else the bankers try to tell us is a threat, the biggest threat, the greatest potential for terrorism is if our own young men are turned against the people of this country under that dammed and unconstitutional Patriot Act.
Mad...and just plain insanity...as would be allowing soldiers to be used on Americans...both insane...
Why does it take embellishing the obvious to sound convincing that the Talibani mindset is the final impediment for Afghanistan to join the global village? The hiding, fighting Taliban man is the remaining stubbornness of ancient Pashtun clans, waving off the modern, attacking foreigners who bring technology, education and democracy. Originals who do not shave or respect women. The male chauvinists of Darkest Europe maybe never died, they seem to have moved to Afghanistan. Their mischievous minds are not totally inflexible as they have learned to use explosives. They need saving from themselves; a liberated country does not need them. "Let us negotiate a New Age, ancient friends-to-be."