U.S. talking with the Taliban?

Afghanistan is fallen. The cleanup the U.S. and NATO has to do in there is immensely difficult at this point. With President Obama continuing to mull over his options, now months after General McChrystal issued his report, what are we doing about this situation? According to the Saudi al-Watan, the U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan, Karl Eikenbarry, has been discussing a ceasefire with Taliban elements as high as Foreign Minister Ahmad Mutawakil. Based on the report, the U.S. is offering Taliban control of 5 provinces (Kandahar, Helmand, Oruzgan, Kunar, and Nuristan) in return for a halt in attacks on U.S. bases.


The U.S. embassy in Riyadh has denied the claims, but sources in Afghanistan are saying that somebody is most definitely talking to the Taliban. Who can make such a call? Given the Taliban's continued threats of "absolute defeat" against the U.S. and NATO, I would venture to say that it isn't the Americans who are negotiating. Karzai has tried time and time again to make offers to the Taliban, only to end up bringing his country into escalated violence. Remember the April 2008 attack in Kabul on the Afghan Independence Day Parade that caused dignitaries and Karzai himself to flee the celebrations? That came shortly after Karzai had denounced the U.S. and NATO presence for civilian casualties.


Afghanistan remains winnable, if we start treating this like a war. We are seeking to make this a post-war situation when we have not won yet. The NATO forces need to pursue the elements creating chaos without restraint and seek to bring stability to the environment. Afghans have no confidence in their government, and just as the cartels that operated in Latin America or the gangs that operated in Chicago in the 1930s, the Taliban have risen as a parallel to a failed government. Negotiating with someone who is willing to recklessly target civilian lives simply because they do not adhere to Islam will be a failure. By allowing the possibility of the Taliban to operate in 5 provinces, or nearly 25% of the country, we only lend credibility to them and turn a blind eye to their acceptance of violence. That is just a reckless strategy.

When the enemy hates what you stand for...

Exactly one week ago, the "coalition of the just and willing" got a wake-up call. Apparently, President Karzai of Afghanistan isn't so keen on just or willing-at least not in election campaign season.

After almost 7 years of fighting Taliban elements in Afghanistan, the world got to see that the Taliban are still capable of slipping through the cracks of the fragile Afghan security forces and coordinating an elaborate attack. Karzai was celebrating the 16th anniversary of the fall of the Soviet-backed government, which gave creation to the mujahideen resistance now known as Al-Qaida. While he stood amongst dignitaries such as the NATO general and several ambassadors, an assassination attempt flew bullets from Kalashnikovs and a rocket was fired at the stand where Karzai observed the festivities. Fortunately, President Karzai survived and so did the foreign dignitaries.

What wasn't addressed is that this should be a pretty easy omen for President Karzai. On the Friday prior to the attack, Karzai told UK's The Guardian that U.S. and NATO forces were undermining his government. He called for an end to arrests of Taliban members, saying that "It has to happen. We have to make sure that when a Talib comes to Afghanistan ... he is safe from arrest by the coalition." Strong words from a man who would not be President if it had not been for the U.S.-led removal of the Taliban government. He also went on to criticize the forces for any civilian casualties in their operations.

So, I'm assuming President Karzai knows a good bit about pandering to the voters in his re-election bid, but he doesn't understand anything about his country's stability. Karzai is quite simply trying to have two dreams at one time. Just today, his government told Pakistan that they were concerned about Pakistan's negotiations with Taliban elements in the FATA and NWFP. I find Pakistan's negotiations absurd, because quite simply the ceasefires do not work. The Defense Minister of Afghanistan recalled a 2006 Pakistan-Taliban agreement which only allowed reorganization of the Taliban and an increase in violence in Afghanistan. President Karzai must fight the Taliban militants because they are the ones setting his government up for failure. Karzai should recognize as a matter of policy, he simply can not criticize someone for negotiations with a group that he seeks to grant legitimacy to.

How come the Taliban talks result in increased violence within months of their signing?

Ideally, they want their power back and want to see their hard-line Islamic law back in power. However, the Taliban realize that they can not rule Afghanistan again but do have the power to breed instability. They are not a political force, but rather a resistance movement. This acceptance has bred the Taliban's control over surrounding villages and towns through no means other than intimidation and terror. Just look at how farmers families in the provinces of Pakistan have been threatened with death by Taliban elements for violating Taliban Islamic codes.

Karzai needs to make a strategic push to achieve security inside his country before attempting to negotiate political unity. The only group that can provide that will be the Taliban, and the only way to push them into a stance of submission is to counter their militancy. He must emphasize that the Taliban will not be recognized politically until they adopt a stance that removes all elements of violence. Until then, there will be no acceptance of any political influence in the country's political system. It is in Afghanistan's best interest to keep the troops rooting out the Taliban and for Karzai to not allow any of the Taliban's quotations of "crusaders killing children and families" to not make it into any of his campaign speeches.