Negotiate? Are You Kidding? What to Do About the Taliban.

One of the least popular decisions facing those engaged in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) is, how, if and when do we negotiate with the Taliban?

The idea sounds like political death. And extremely distasteful. How do you negotiate with a band of terrorists who seem to have no "off' switch, who take no account of human rights, international diplomacy, or indeed the 21st Century? And who wants to give them legitimacy by sitting round a table figuring out the way forward?

Increasingly the international community is saying that it has to be. If there is to be an end to the war in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) negotiation is inevitable.

In Nic Robertson's interview with the Afghan Taliban representative aired this week on CNN, Zabiullah Mujahid seemed to be openly courting a negotiation even though he couched in terms not usually associated with negotiation (See interview here).

"We ask them to leave the country; we are ready to talk. So if they are not ready to leave and they want to talk by the mouth of the gun, we will talk by the mouth of the gun."

But retired Pakistani General, Talat Masood, told the Washington Times this week that negotiating with the Taliban is a "waste of time."

"[Taliban leaders] do not accept constitution of Pakistan, democracy of Pakistan. How can one talk with them?" he said.

The Afghan Foreign Minister Rangin Dadfar Spanta has ruled out any sort of negotiations with insurgents without disarmament. He is also critical of current international discussions about negotiation. "If foreign countries who have come to help us want to hand over Afghanistan to armed enemies, then it's better they leave our country."

It's easy to conclude that the Taliban are incapable of negotiation and that any agreement will be shot to pieces within a short time.

But discussion and engagement is now on the agenda and after eight years of this terrible war, it might be time to drag out the negotiating table.

Comments

[fpie]

"Afganistan is where empires go to die." There is no negotiating. There is no victory. There is no point to continuing. Just pack up and leave. Leave now or leave later, we will one day just leave and they will live as they have for thousands of years.
The only good outcome that could have been achieved was lost when GWBush refused to take the deal of Binladen being handed over for trial in a neutral country. What a stupid, stuborn fool we stupid, stuborn, foolish Americans allowed ourselves to have appointed to wreck our country. If Al gore had been allowed to take the office he was elected to in 2000 how different our world would be today.

[jnah]

i disagree, i think we handed afghanistan to the taliban in the 80's as a consolation prize for fighting off the russians. WE left the people of that country in dire poverty under despotic rule by a group that imposes their own cruel and preverted interpretation of islamic law. If we walk away afghanistan will remain a haven for international violence.

[oxi]

How can you say that when the U.S. openly armed and helped KLA terrorists in the Balkans? The KLA had ties to Afghanistan also!!! What, it is ok to support terrorism when they side with you and if they do not bomb them?

You have quite a bit to learn about how this world works!

Let's not forget while the Russians were busy fighting these Islamic thugs back in the 80's, the U.S. sent weapons, intelligence and support!

Russia today will not stoop down to the U.S. level because they know all too well about these radical Islamists they were fighting while the U.S. supported them on the other side.

[jnah]

the russians were looking to invade afghanistan for its strategic location in the area. do not think they were there to fight islamic "thugs" as you call them

[oxi]

And explain to me if the U.S. is there to fight Islamic radicals?

I do not think so.

The U.S. is there for strategic purposes to establish new NATO bases to surrond Russia with and to allow a safe cooridor for oil pipelines like the TAPI one. Want evidence? Fact is why weren't 250,000 troops sent there in nthe first place? And why was Iraq attacked just a few years later pulling what little forces out of the region?

The Russians were fighting these Islamic radicals while the U.S. was supplying them with weapons and intelligence. You cannot deny that!

[mommadona]

This was always an INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL SYNDICATE problem, best left to law enforcemen­t-INTERPOL­.

They are thugs. Hiding behind a rigid male ideology based on a religion that refuses to acknowledge its role in their thuggery.

We had our KKK.

Well, we still have our KKK & now our "Onward Christian Soldier" EndTimers.

That's criminal, huh.

[lbolle]

Obama needs to keep chipping away at strengthening international relations so we can build the biggest coalition the taliban and al quaeda has ever seen. We also must give more ground to the Palestinians. That way we render moot the usual excuse that we're imperialists siding with the Israelis. Redundant, obvious but true. It's just not going to work any other way.

p.s. no way - no negotiating with the taliban.

[RoloTomassi]

Your absurd NeoCon "no negotiating with_____" [fill-in the blank] attitude will accomplish nothing. No such coalition will be forthcoming, as the rest of the world isn't that foolish.

Give it up; your policies failed, and no one with at least half a brain wants to revisit them.

[vols 47]

No coaliton huh? Looks to me that the PRESIDENTS of Afganistan and Pakistan are ONBAORD. Try watching the news sometime

Keep spouting the MSM crap. Be a good sheeple.