A new Afghanistan policy is needed. The current NATO effort in Afghanistan, primarily military, has failed after nine years of effort and a tripling of foreign military and civilian personnel. America now has 1,000 soldiers deployed for every one of the estimated 100 al Qaeda operatives now believed to be based in Afghanistan and is hemorrhaging $100 billion a year on the conflict. Unarmed government employees can no longer travel safely in 30 percent of the country’s 368 districts, according to published United Nations estimates, and there are districts deemed too dangerous to visit in all but one of the country’s 34 provinces. US leaders agree that there will be no military solution in Afghanistan.
The US military is hurt badly, if not broken. At Fort Hood Texas, according to a recent news report in the Army Times, "about every fourth soldier here, where 48,000 troops and their families are based, has been in counseling during the past year, according to the service’s medical statistics. And the number of soldiers seeking help for combat stress, substance abuse, broken marriages or other emotional problems keeps increasing. Counselors are booked. The 12-bed inpatient psychiatric ward is full more often than not. Overflow patient-soldiers are sent to private local clinics that stay open for 10 hours a day, six days a week to meet the demand." And overall, soldier and Marine suicides are increasing. We need to stop taking advantage of brave young people.
Personal progress in Afghanistan? Tom Engelhardt: "In the near-decade since Kabul fell in November 2001, a sizeable majority of Afghans have continued to live in poverty and privation. Measuring such misery may be impossible, but the United Nations has tried to find a comprehensive way to do so nonetheless. Using a Human Poverty Index which 'focuses on the proportion of people below certain threshold[s] in regard to a long and healthy life, having access to education, and a decent standard of living,' the U.N. found that, comparatively speaking, it doesn't get worse than life in Afghanistan. The nation ranks dead last in its listing, number 135 out of 135 countries. This is what 'success' means today in Afghanistan.
Anatol Lieven: "Thus the desire to bring democracy, freedom, 'good governance' and an improvement in the status of women to Afghanistan were laudable goals in themselves, but the result has been a ghastly masquerade, involving descriptions of the present Afghan government and political system not one of which corresponds to reality. Meanwhile the equally laudable desire to bring development to Afghanistan has ensnared us in calculations of 'progress' which are virtually Soviet in their misrepresentation of the facts and the experience of ordinary Afghans."
The current US political strategy is reconciliation and reintegration of the Taliban. Decoded, this amounts to little more than amnesty and surrender. It hasn't been effective. A recent $250 million program to lure low-level Taliban fighters away from the insurgency has stalled, with Afghans bickering over who should run it, and international donors slow to put up the money they had promised. The flow of Taliban fighters seeking to reintegrate has slowed to a trickle — by the most optimistic estimates, a few hundred in the last six months.
What is needed instead is a new US policy of genuine accommodation with the Taliban to include understanding and addressing their positions and grievances with the goal of forming a power-sharing Afghan government. Recent reports suggest that most Afghans, tired of the all-pervasive insecurity, want negotiations with the Taliban.
Other factions would also have to be accommodated. Afghanistan's three largest ethnic minorities oppose Karzai's outreach to the Taliban, which they said could pave the way for the fundamentalist group's return to power and reignite the civil war.
British Foreign Secretary David Miliband has urged the Afghanistan government to consider bringing Taliban supporters into its political system. “Afghanistan will never achieve a sustainable peace unless many more Afghans are inside the political system, and the neighbors [nearby countries] are onside with the political settlement,” said Miliband,
President Karzai has not needed urging to talk to the Taliban. Karzai hosted a June 2010 peace conference where he called insurgents "brothers" and "dear Talibs," He asked the United Nations to remove Taliban leaders from the international sanctions black list and ordering the freeing of Taliban suspects from government custody. Richard Holbrooke, the U.S. envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, told reporters in Washington on July 14 that the Obama administration has agreed only to delist Taliban and al-Qaeda on “case-by-case basis.”
There are signs that because of a lack of progress such a diplomatic policy is currently under consideration in Washington. The Guardian has reported that "feelers had been put out to the Taliban. Negotiations would be conducted largely in secret, through a web of contacts, possibly involving Pakistan and Saudi Arabia or organisations with back-channel links to the Taliban." Another recent report indicates that the US has already initiated talks with the Taliban. According to the Asia Times report, the Pakistan military and Saudi Arabia are acting as go-betweens to facilitate the negotiation process. The initial talks have covered two main areas - the issue of about 60 Pakistanis in the US's Guantanamo detention facility, and al-Qaeda. Another element touched on in the talks is the American demand that it maintain a military presence in northern Afghanistan, while agreeing to give control of the south to the Taliban. The Taliban do not agree with this - they want a complete US withdrawal. This remains a point of major disagreement.
The problem is the NATO presence. In the most recent Jirga, President Karzai informed the delegates at the outset; “There is no mention of a key Taliban demand that NATO troops leave Afghanistan,” when in fact that was one of the Taliban’s key demands. NATO is currently conducting a military offensive against the Taliban in Kandahar province.
The NATO military presence must be removed for there to be any chance of peace in Afghanistan. The Taliban leadership’s one non-negotiable demand is the complete withdrawal of Western forces. They say that this must take place before they will negotiate any settlement with the government in Kabul, but there might be some room for compromise.
The oft-repeated objection to any Taliban control in Afghanistan is that the Taliban would establish "safe havens" for al Qaeda. Paul Pillar, deputy CIA chief of the counterterrorist center under President Clinton: "The US and other Western governments say we are in Afghanistan in order to deny terror groups like Al Qaeda a safe haven from which to plan new attacks. But that is no longer a valid assumption. Terrorists don't need a sanctuary to plan attacks from. We are investing enormously in an operation that is based on a flawed assumption. The reality is that the terror threat to the West would not significantly increase if we were to leave Afghanistan."
Would any concessions to the Taliban result in the Taliban taking total control of Afghanistan? Pillar again: "This is another assumption that is rarely questioned. But prior to the U.S. intervention in 2001, the Taliban did not have uncontested control of Afghanistan. They had the upper hand in a civil war against the Northern Alliance; they had the backing of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia while the Northern Alliance had the backing of Iran, Russia, and India. The U.S. essentially threw its weight behind the Northern Alliance to drive out the Taliban."
While the Taliban is integrated somehow into the Afghan government, which is a matter for the Afghans to decide, there needs to be support for the Afghan effort in the form of a regional effort toward diplomacy and peace. President Obama needs to implement his promise of a new strategy he stated on March 27, 2009: ". . .together with the United Nations, we will forge a new Contact Group for Afghanistan and Pakistan that brings together all who should have a stake in the security of the region -- our NATO allies and other partners, but also the Central Asian states, the Gulf nations and Iran; Russia, India and China." It was never done but it should be. We don't need a unilateral US approach we need regional negotiations which include the above listed countries and especially Afghanistan's neighbors: Pakistan, Iran and the neighboring -stans.
The main issues concern Pakistan and India, including the dispute over Kashmir, and Pakistan's concern about a growing influence of India in Afghanistan, which should be limited. George Perkovitch: "Pakistan is willing to fight until the last Taliban or coalition foot soldier falls in order to pursue its interests in Afghanistan, while India is willing to fight to the last American to keep Pakistan from exerting indirect control over a future Afghan government."
Pakistan should be included in a regional forum of ‘Friends of Afghanistan’ made up of Iran, Pakistan, India, China, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Russia: these countries would be asked to make pledges of non-interference and recognise Afghanistan as a non-aligned state with no foreign bases.
The increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan especially emphasizes the importance of negotiations. Since India and Pakistan are arch enemies, the Indian presence in Afghanistan, on Pakistan'e western flank, fuels Pakistan's support for the Taliban -- the resistance that is killing US troops. Since the US has partnered with Pakistan this situation is unacceptable. It can't be solved by more combat but by negotiations.
Miliband again: "The political settlement needs to be external as well as internal, involving all of Afghanistan's neighbours as well as those parts of the insurgency willing permanently to sever ties with al-Qaeda, give up their armed struggle and live within the Afghan constitutional framework."
Perhaps the US can succeed at reconciliation in Afghanistan although it has failed in Iraq. That was the main purpose of the Iraq surge, remember, but it didn't happen. Now we've had another surge in Afghanistan but this time with a president (Karzai) who is actually in favor of reconciliation. We need to make it work. The alternative is more hundreds of billions of dollars and many lives wasted. Who wants to be the last to die for a lack of trying to end this nine-year war? President Obama has promised another reappraisal of Afghanistan war policy in December -- it's time for econciliation and negotiations.
General Petraeus, Aug 25, 2010: "We sat down across the table in Iraq from individuals who had our blood on their hands. That's what was done in northern Ireland. It's what's done in just about any insurgency as you get to the end stages of it."
The US, acting with other countries, needs to help negotiate an Afghan reconciliation
and a return of Afghanistan back to the Afghans.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
latest news . . .
WSJ, Jan 12, 2012 - U.S. Plans New Push for Talks With Taliban - The U.S. plans a major push next week to jump-start peace talks with the Taliban, senior Obama administration officials said, amid the first concrete signs of progress toward a negotiated end to the 10-year-old war in Afghanistan.
WSJ, Jan 4, 2012 - Taliban Agree to Open Office for Peace Talks. The Taliban said they tentatively agreed to open a political office in Qatar to communicate with the international community, a step that could help pave the way for direct peace talks to end a decade of war in Afghanistan. The statement on Tuesday was welcomed by the White House as a concrete signal that U.S.-led efforts to inject momentum into Afghan peace talks are gaining traction.
Reuters, Dec 26, 2011 - Afghanistan will accept a Taliban liaison office in Qatar to start peace talks but no foreign power can get involved in the process without its consent, the government's peace council said, as efforts gather pace to find a solution to the decade-long war.
Reuters, Dec 19, 2011 -- After 10 months of secret dialogue with Afghanistan's Taliban insurgents, senior U.S. officials say the talks have reached a critical juncture and they will soon know whether a breakthrough is possible, leading to peace talks whose ultimate goal is to end the Afghan war.
Indian Express, Oct 3, 2011 -- On Friday, in a statement issued in Kabul, Karzai mentioned India along with the US and Europe as future partners with whom it might “work closely” rather than trying to negotiate with Taliban groups. . .“Despite three years of talks, coming and going, good intentions and efforts made by Afghanistan for peace and the initiation of good relations with Pakistan, the Pakistani government has not taken any measures for closing down its terrorist safe havens nor prevented training and equipping of terrorists on its soil,” Karzai said.
The Guardian, October 1, 2011 -- Karzai rules out more Taliban negotiations. . .Afghan president says killing of peace envoy Burhanuddin Rabbani has convinced him to change focus
Bakhtar
News, June 28, 2011 -- The 11th summit of international group with participation
of over 50 countries and regional and international organizations was opened
at the Foreign Ministry under the joint chairmanship of Afghanistan and Germany.
. .The participants of the summit also supported the process of national reconciliation
and reintegration of Afghan opposition within the framework of the Afghan
Constitution. This group is assisting the country through seeking of regional
solutions and participation of the Islamic countries for ending war and insecurity
in Afghanistan.
NY Times, May 26, 2011 -- U.S. Has Held Meetings With Aide to Taliban Leader -- The meetings have been facilitated by Germany and Qatar, but American officials have been present each time.
SPIEGEL, May 24, 2011 -- Germany Mediates Secret US-Taliban Talks -- The German government is mediating secret talks on German soil between the US government and representatives of the Taliban. Berlin is cautiously optimistic that the negotiations will deliver progress, but observers warn that the insurgents' morale remains high.
Washington Post, May 16, 2011 -- U.S. speeds up direct talks with Taliban initiated several months ago. U.S. officials say they hope it will enable President Obama to report progress toward a settlement of the Afghanistan war when he announces troop withdrawals in July.
The Guardian, May 5, 2011 -- The real endgame in Afghanistan --Bin Laden's death will change nothing for the US until the White House engages India and Pakistan in a regional solution -- It does not matter if the US remains committed to Afghanistan with 100,000 troops or if we withdraw tomorrow; the result – the eventual implosion of Pakistan and chaos across South Asia – will be the same, unless President Obama addresses the imbalance of power and the perception of fear and threat between India and Pakistan.
Wall Street Journal, Apr 27, 2011 -- Karzai Told to Dump U.S. -- Pakistan Urges Afghanistan to Ally With Islamabad, Beijing
Pakistan
Daily Times, Apr 20, 2011 -- Pak Army strives to secure central Afghan
role -- Agreeing to include Pakistani military and intelligence officials
in peace commission gives Pakistan’s security establishment a formal
role in any talks with Afghan Taliban
Voice
Of America, Apr 14, 2011 -- Afghan Taliban to Open Office in Turkey --
The Turkish foreign minister has confirmed that preparations are underway
for opening an office in Turkey for the Afghan Taliban.
The Diplomat, Mar 24, 2011 -- Beginning of the End in Afghanistan -- the United States is now signalling openly that it wants to focus on a political and diplomatic solution, one that involves talking to the Taliban.
Christian Scienc Monitor, Mar 16, 2011 -- Who is winning Afghanistan war? US officials increasingly disagree. General Petraeus, the commander of US forces in Afghanistan, tends to point to “uneven progress” that remains “fragile and reversible," different from what Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Lt. Gen. Ronald Burgess, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, provided in their Senate testimony last week. Burgess, for his part, noted that while the Taliban is under more pressure than ever before, the insurgent group is resilient and tenacious, and that its influence remains pervasive throughout much of the country.
ABC News, Mar 15, 2011 -- Just 31 percent now say the war in Afghanistan has been worth fighting, a new low. Sixty-four percent call it not worth fighting, and 49 percent feel that way "strongly. . .73 percent of Americans say the United States should withdraw a substantial number of its combat forces from Afghanistan this summer.
UK
Parliament Report on AfPak, Mar 2, 2011 --
"We conclude that the continuing existence of Pakistani safe havens for
Afghan insurgents makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for ISAF's
counter-insurgency campaign to succeed. . [and] that the US is facing a rapidly
closing window of opportunity to push ahead with political reconciliation
through which it can help to bring peace and stability to Afghanistan and
the wider region."
New
Yorker, February 28, 2011 -- The Obama administration is now "entered
into direct, secret talks with senior Afghan Taliban leaders."
US State Dept., February 18, 2011 -- SecState Hillary Clinton stated that the new AfPak "Ambassador Grossman and the rest of his interagency team will marshal the full range of our policy resources to support responsible, Afghan-led reconciliation that brings the conflict to a peaceful conclusion, and to actively engage with states in the region and the international community to advance that process."
NYTimes,
Feb 6, 2011 -- N.Y.U. Report Casts Doubt on Taliban’s Ties With Al Qaeda.
The Afghan Taliban have been wrongly perceived as close ideological allies
of Al Qaeda, and they could be persuaded to renounce the global terrorist
group, according to a report to be published Monday by New York University.
The report goes on to say that there was substantial friction between the
groups’ leaders before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and that hostility
has only intensified.
Los
Angeles Times, Nov 27, 2010 -- Talks are the only route in Afghanistan.
A military victory against the Taliban is elusive; a better, lasting peace
requires talks and some sort of power-sharing arrangement.
NY Times, Nov 14, 2010 -- The Obama administration has developed a plan to begin transferring security duties in select areas of Afghanistan to that country’s forces over the next 18 to 24 months, with an eye toward ending the American combat mission there by 2014.
Washington Post, Nov 14, 2010 -- President Karzai: "The time has come to reduce military operations. The time has come to reduce the presence of, you know, boots in Afghanistan . . . to reduce the intrusiveness into the daily Afghan life. . . . Make it more civilian."
AFP, Nov 6, 2010 -- Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Saturday he is making "progress" in a key peace process aimed at convincing Taliban rebels fighting his Western-backed government to lay down their arms.
AP, Nov 6, 2010 -- Saudi Arabia's foreign minister says Riyadh has halted mediation efforts between the Afghan government and the Taliban because the fundamentalist movement has refused to break ties with al-Qaida.
AFP, Oct 24, 2010 -- High-level Taliban leaders are showing interest in talks with the US-backed government in Kabul in increasing numbers, as pressure mounts from an intensifying NATO military campaign, [Richard Holbrooke] said Sunday.
New York Times, Oct 19, 2010 -- KABUL, Afghanistan — Talks to end the war in Afghanistan involve extensive, face-to-face discussions with Taliban commanders from the highest levels of the group’s leadership, who are secretly leaving their sanctuaries in Pakistan with the help of NATO troops, officials here say.
Asia Times, Oct 16, 2010 -- Pakistan has freed the supreme commander of the Taliban in Afghanistan, Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, so that he can play a pivotal role in talks.
New York Times, Oct 14, 2010 -- The head of Afghanistan’s new peace council confirmed Thursday that contacts with members of the Taliban through mediators had been made and said that the international support for direct talks added new momentum to the effort.
The Independent, Oct 7, 2010 -- Secret high-level negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban leadership aimed at ending the war have begun, diplomatic sources have revealed. Meetings which included delegates of the Quetta Shura, the Taliban's Pakistan-based governing body which is overseen by Mullah Mohammed Omar, are believed to have taken place in Dubai. The Taliban high command had previously rejected any political negotiations until Western forces had left Afghanistan.
AP, Oct 6, 2010 -- President Barack Obama supports recent attempts by the Afghan government to open peace talks with Taliban leaders, but still wants the insurgents to renounce violence and their support of al-Qaida, the White House said Wednesday. However, press secretary Robert Gibbs said the United States was not taking part in any such talks. "This is about Afghanistan," he said. "It has to be done by the Afghans."
Washington Post, Sep 18, 2010 -- Despite discouraging news from Afghanistan and growing doubts in Congress and among the American public, the Obama administration has concluded that its war strategy is sound and that a December review, once seen as a pivotal moment, is unlikely to yield any major changes.
atimes, Sep 15, 2010 - The process of bringing the Taliban to the negotiating table is gaining momentum, with the United States and its allies escalating their efforts to get America out of the Afghan quagmire. In principle, the Taliban have agreed to clearly state their position on several issues so that formal talks with Washington will be internationally acceptable. In particular, the Taliban will explain their stance on al-Qaeda. . .
comments/suggestions are welcome -- smedleybutlersociety at msn dot com