United States President Barack Obama's suggestion that the United States might
reach out to "moderate" Taliban as part of the effort to end the Afghan
insurgency has been greeted warmly by many, including the Afghan president.
In an interview published in the New York Times, Obama said flatly that the
United States was not winning the war in Afghanistan, and was ready to adapt
tactics it had learned in Iraq to the Afghan war effort.
Obama explained that if one were to speak with the US military general
responsible for the strategy in Iraq, "I think he would argue that part of the
success in Iraq involved reaching out to people that we would consider to be
Islamic fundamentalists, but who
were willing to work with us because they had been completely alienated by the
tactics of al-Qaeda in Iraq."
Afghan President Hamid Karzai, who has been urging talks with the Taliban for
some time, welcomed the comments in Kabul on March 8.
"Yesterday, the American President Obama accepted and approved the path of
peace and talks with those Afghan Taliban who he called 'moderates'," Karzai
said. "This is good news. This is an approval of our previous stance and we
accept and praise it."
However, while Karzai is not alone in his support for such negotiations, there
is much debate as to whether the strategy can be successfully exported to
Afghanistan.
Some Afghanistan observers, for example, note that Karzai may have been quick
to laud the proposal to counter the criticism with which his previous calls for
negotiations were met.
Others, such as Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, a former Taliban cabinet member and
diplomat who last year participated in an informal Saudi Arabia-sponsored
effort to initiate dialogue with the Taliban, say the US had no choice but to
adopt this strategy.
"First Obama has admitted that the Americans cannot win in Afghanistan and that
war is not the solution," Zaeef said. "So if they cannot win, what should they
do? Automatically they have to look for an alternative, which is that they have
to resolve this conflict though negotiations based on mutual respect."
While he says the initiative is a good omen for peace in Afghanistan, Zaeef
added in an interview with RFE/RL that it is up to the United States to create
an atmosphere of trust.
Choosing the right partners
Still others foresee additional roadblocks in the way of successful
negotiations.
While in Washington, the idea of "talking to the Taliban" rests on the premise
that negotiations can peel away some moderate Taliban from their extremist
comrades, there is skepticism as to whether such moderates could actually
influence hardline Taliban leaders.
And Afghan commentator Waheed Muzda, for example, warns even against making
such distinctions, saying the Taliban in Afghanistan are dangerous whatever
label is bestowed on them.
Though an Afghan government-sponsored program has "reconciled" thousands of
Taliban fighters with the government, Muzda suggests that the move has not
dented the group's capacity to launch attacks. In fact, the number and
sophistication of Taliban attacks have only increased in recent years, he says.
"Moderate Taliban is an undefined term, but it is being used a lot," he said.
"If there are moderate Taliban, they are people who are not involved in
fighting and might be hiding somewhere inside Afghanistan or outside in
[neighboring] Pakistan."
Kabul-based analyst Nasrullah Stanekzai noted that in Afghanistan itself, there
are many elements opposed to such negotiations - both within the government and
the Taliban.
Still, he tells RFE/RL's Radio Free Afghanistan, while some Taliban leaders
outside the country are compromised because of their close links with global
extremist networks, any effort that brings Afghans themselves to the
negotiating table could bear fruit.
"Afghans have this capacity to talk to each other. But there are elements
within the Afghan government who do not want to see the Taliban being included
into the political process because they think it might threaten their power,"
Stanekzai said.
He continued: "Anyway, the only option we have [to resolve the conflict in our
country] is to bring together all Afghans, on the basis of Afghanistan's
national interests, to bring peace to our country."
Other steps toward peace
After spending years in detention at the US facility in Guantanamo, Cuba,
former Taliban cabinet member Zaeef now stands among those who have left the
ranks of the Taliban and reconciled with the Afghan government.
Today a commentator on Taliban issues, Zaeef explains what steps he believes
the United States should take to help ensure that negotiations with the Taliban
end in success.
First, he says, the United States must close prisons that Taliban members
associate with abuse, in particular the facilities at Guantanamo and at the
Bagram air base north of Kabul. He also says the names of Mullah Muhammad Omar
and other Taliban leaders must be removed from United Nations and US "black
lists" and reward offers dropped.
Zaeef also believes that distinguishing between "moderate" and "extremist"
Taliban is not practical - but not because different types don't exist.
"If the Americans are thinking, and as Obama has also said, that they want to
distinguish between the hardline and moderate Taliban, it will not be
acceptable to anybody, because it is like telling two brothers that you love
one and want to play with him while you want to kill the other one," Zaeef
said. Nader Khan Katawazi, a parliamentarian representing Afghanistan's eastern
Paktika Province, believes moderate Taliban will be able to influence their
hardline brethren, as long as the talks are conducted in a spirit of openness.
"It is natural that there are elements within the Taliban who want to resolve
this issue through negotiations," he said. "If both sides agree to hold
open-hearted constructive talks, I think, it will even force what you and I
would call the extremist Taliban to accept that process." Hardline Taliban are
already taking steps to counter another new US strategy - the "surge" of 17,000
fresh troops into the theater. Pakistani and international media reports
indicate that, in an apparent attempt to answer Taliban leader Mullah Muhammad
Omar's call for unity, the three main Taliban factions in Pakistan's restive
Waziristan tribal region formed a "Council of United Holy Warriors" late last
month. Meanwhile, analysts suggest that the recent ceasefire agreements in the
Pakistani regions of Swat and Bajaur could free up fighters to battle US forces
in Afghanistan. Zaeef, noting the possibility that increased numbers on both
sides could lead to intensified fighting, says the United States is sending
mixed messages. "Sending more troops to Afghanistan is a difficult proposition
to agree to," Zaeef said. "This only creates concerns among people here and in
the region that on the one hand, Americans are talking peace, while on the
other, they are doubling and even tripling their troop numbers. And this is
contrary to the talk of peace."
(RFE/RL's Radio Free Afghanistan contributed to this report.)
Copyright (c) 2009, RFE/RL Inc. Reprinted with the permission of
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1201 Connecticut Ave NW, Washington DC
20036
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
