Talking to the Taliban

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Talking to the Taliban​

Chris Sands

Published 28 August 2008

For Afghan insurgents every death, no matter from which side, is a step closer to victory

I didn't recognise Ghafar at first. His beard was longer than it had been a year ago and this time he wore a yellow turban instead of a black one. But the small tattoo on his forehead remained and he still spoke with the quiet confidence of a man who doesn't fear death.

"In the daytime we are farmers. At night we are Taliban," Ghafar said, smiling.

Throughout the summer, politicians as well as journalists have told the British public that the insurgency in Afghanistan is being defeated. Even as the number of UK soldiers who have been killed passed the hundred mark, the war was being touted as a success - particularly in the southern province of Helmand, where most of the 8,500 UK troops are based.

Gordon Brown used a brief stopover here on 21 August to suggest that the insurgents were on the back foot and to talk about the "substantial progress" made. But when I recently interviewed two Taliban commanders, they told a different story.

I originally met Ghafar and his colleague Zahir Jan in Kandahar in the spring of 2007. They had travelled from their homes in Helmand, bringing with them descriptions of women and children buried under the rubble left behind by air strikes. Both said that they were fighting to defend their religion, their country and their family.

Since then, the violence has continued. The Taliban and the foreign soldiers have taken heavy casualties. Thousands of Afghan civilians have fled.

Given the intensity of the combat, two men who live through it every day should look weary. Yet Ghafar and Zahir Jan appeared more relaxed and determined than ever.

Speaking on condition that the location of the interview be kept secret, they came across as happy and optimistic. For them, every death, no matter from which side, means that they are a step closer to victory.

"The Taliban and the Americans are as different as fire and water. Maybe the water will kill the fire or the fire will kill the water, but one of these things has to happen," Zahir Jan said.

Helmand is one of Afghanistan's most dangerous provinces. Over the past two years, it has become notorious for gun battles, roadside bombings, suicide attacks, assassinations and air strikes. At its worst, the fighting has been fiercer than anything British soldiers have experienced for decades. Yet the situation is meant to have improved in the past few months, especially in the district of Garmsir.

The top British commander in Helmand has claimed that "the Taliban are much weaker" and "the tide is clearly ebbing not flowing for them". The Defence Secretary, Des Browne, has repeatedly called the war a "noble cause".

Although such claims were rubbished by Ghafar and Zahir Jan, it was their demeanour rather than their words which suggested that they were far from being crushed.

Offhandedly, they said the Americans deserve to be attacked on their own soil and warned that the Taliban could eventually send suicide bombers to the US. They added that they were a "thousand times more confident" of victory in Afghanistan than they had been before, thanks largely to growing support from the population and to improved weaponry.

"We have very advanced rockets. You can split them into three parts and carry them on donkeys. Then you just walk along and when you see a convoy of troops you can fix them together and fire them very quickly," said Zahir Jan.

Now, the rebels are again showing their strength and taking the fight to new areas. Ten French soldiers were killed near Kabul, the Afghan capital, on 18-19 August, and rockets have been fired into the city itself.

"If the foreigners did not have their planes, then within five days I guarantee we would be in the avenues of Kabul," Zahir Jan said.

Following our previous meeting, he had been arrested by a group of Taliban while returning to his home in Garmsir. The movement was fragmented then, he told me, and not everyone knew each other. After being beaten and threatened with execution, he was released when a senior insurgent intervened on his behalf.

He claimed, however, that the militants have a clearer command structure now and have become more moderate. "The areas controlled by the Taliban are very secure, and in most of them they don't bother anyone. It's OK if people shave and listen to music, and in the markets you can even buy TVs. In some parts, you are not allowed to watch TV, but they still let you shave and listen to music."

Despite this, there does not seem to be any chance of a peaceful solution to the war. Claims that former Northern Alliance leaders have held negotiations with the insurgents simply provoked laughter from Zahir Jan.

"If the Taliban get hold of them they will be finished," he said.

It's hard to know their exact ages. Zahir Jan gave his as 20 last time, but he could easily be younger or older. Ghafar is probably in his early thirties. They fight not only in Helmand, but also in Kandahar and Uruzgan.

Ghafar stayed quiet for most of the interview, speaking only occasionally. When I asked if any of his relatives had been killed during the past year, he said: "I have not lost anyone from my own family, just my best friends who I used to meet up with."

To Ghafar, however, the dead are always martyrs. They are not to be mourned.

New Statesman - Talking to the Taliban

------------------------------------------------------------------

On one level, when you look at this side of the Taliban, it is not hard to understand why they manage to get support/sympathy for their actions against the US, from local Tribes, from so many Pakistanis (Pakhtun and non-Pakhtun) and perhaps even some of the Pakistani SF's.

Heck, I was feeling sympathy for their cause while reading that - they are ethnic kin to Pakistanis in the north, which creates a sort of attachment that is hard to define, even though I am not a Pakhtun.

I have to wonder, once again, whether it is time to redefine the mission in Afghanistan, from a US led one that excludes all Taliban (admittedly some factions will be irreconcilable) to one that is perhaps under the aegis of the UN or even OIC perhaps?

I can't articulate definitively how the mission could be restructured, but I am not convinced that the current way is the right way.

Your thoughts?

 

[fatman17]

1. we need to seperate the moderates from the militants. the militants need to be marginalized.
2.the moderate populus needs to be given a say in the GoA (which is nil at this time). they want to live in peace like everyone else. the present set-up in afghanistan under the aegis of the US/NATO needs to be under a UN flag. we need UN peacekeepers who will seperate the "warring" factions until a peace which is acceptable to all parties is achieved.
3. any militant elements on our side of the border will have difficulty continuing their militancy as there will be no takers on the afghan side who will support them.
4. a massive development plan for the FATA would be required to provide for the needs of the people of this area. they will have to be brought in the main-stream of our society. their culture and values must be preserved. the political agent system should be abolished.
5. same goes for the other side.

 

[Kasrkin]

I have to wonder, once again, whether it is time to redefine the mission in Afghanistan, from a US led one that excludes all Taliban (admittedly some factions will be irreconcilable) to one that is perhaps under the aegis of the UN or even OIC perhaps?

Its not as simple as that I'm afriad. NATO and US forces have tried, and we can assume are still trying, to create cracks within the Taliban. I mean even if you look at the Pakistani Taliban and the Afghan Taliban, they are almost worlds apart; Mullah Omar has basicly said that Betullah Mehsud is some upstart and not in the ranks of the Taliban. Mehsud has said that he doesn't give a damn about what Mullah Omar thinks. Pakistani Taliban tend to be more extreme and closer to Al-Qaeda and other foreigners. Heck Pakistani Taliban fight each other more than occasionally.
What I'm trying to say is that the Americans and Nato are not that stupid, ofcourse they will try to reconcile with those who they think wont be a threat. They have no problems befriending warlords and drug lords, so why not moderate Taliban? The Taliban are perhaps just more united, in Afghanistan atleast, than you give them credit.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The US won't let the Taliban take over, the Taliban won't give up until the US ends it 'occupation', Al Qaeda steps into the chaos and spreads and strengthens its ideology

This doesn't seem to be going anywhere ...

 

[Flintlock]

There is hope:

Could Osama Bin Laden's erstwhile comrades be responsible for bringing about the collapse of al-Qaeda?

The BBC's security correspondent, Frank Gardner OBE, talks to former allies of Bin Laden, who are now working to turn Islamist sentiment against al-Qaeda, and examines how the war of ideas within the Jihadi movement is becoming as important as the military frontline.

As a leader of a jihadist organisation committed to overthrowing the Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi, Noman Benotman was regarded by Osama Bin Laden as an ally.

However, shortly before 9/11, Benotman cautioned Bin Laden against targeting the United States.

In the programme, he explains why he now publicly criticises al-Qaeda's strategy and lack of theological justification.

Others to whom Bin Laden might have looked for support have turned against him too.

Dr Fadl, one of the architects of the most extreme jihadist ideology, now calls al-Qaeda's leadership "extremely immoral".

Sheikh Salman al-Oudah, a Saudi religious scholar, once credited by Bin Laden with inspiring him to take up "my duty of enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong", has recently denounced the al-Qaeda leader.

Furthermore, the targeting of Muslim civilians by al-Qaeda affiliates in Iraq and elsewhere is undermining popular support.

All this provides some cause for optimism.

But, with a resilient Taliban in Afghanistan and the Pakistani tribal areas sheltering al-Qaeda, is it too early to talk about the unravelling of the global jihad network?

Listen to Frank Gardner examining how the war of ideas within the Jihadi movement is becoming as important as the military frontline.
First broadcast Wednesday 27th August 2008.

BBC World Service - Documentaries - Al-Qaeda's Internal Debate

 

[Munir]

I don not think that Osama still exists or has the power to produce anyting valuable. Maybe some "patriots" or better said "lunatics" wil copy hate nad attack westeners but as far as I can say the source is more the wealthy unfriendly arabs and not the poor farmers in Afghanistan. The comment that they defend their family and nation is more realistic then the war on terror logic. Most info we had was wrong. Is there a good reason to go on with this war? The only advantage is that it is good for military and the factories that produce hate/weapons. Making environment this dangerous wil not lead to prosperity for the common man.

 

[the saint]

I think that the only solution to this deadlock would be for NATO to start talks with the Afgan Taliban ( Mullah Umar ) , we have to accept the fact that Al Qaeeda and Taliban are seperate entities. As long as peace in Afghanistan is amongst any of the US pri , however Pakistan must continue with operations against TTP. The background check on Baitullah Meshud like his brother Abdullah Meshud, their absurd voilent acts clearly indicate that the org is deeply penetrated by either CIA ,Mosad or RAW or maybe even all of them . Pakistan will soon have to adopt a proactive approach and rethink a strategy which it can actively pursue to avert this looming danger.

 

[Spring Onion]

I think that the only solution to this deadlock would be for NATO to start talks with the Afgan Taliban ( Mullah Umar ) , we have to accept the fact that Al Qaeeda and Taliban are seperate entities. As long as peace in Afghanistan is amongst any of the US pri , however Pakistan must continue with operations against TTP. The background check on Baitullah Meshud like his brother Abdullah Meshud, their absurd voilent acts clearly indicate that the org is deeply penetrated by either CIA ,Mosad or RAW or maybe even all of them . Pakistan will soon have to adopt a proactive approach and rethink a strategy which it can actively pursue to avert this looming danger.

Agreed.

That is the point the world need to understand.

Al-Qaeda should be the target group. There is big difference between Taliban and Al-qaeda and Taliban and Proxy-Taliban like Baitullah Mehsud who are being funded and supported by CIA, India and Karzai

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Talks are fine, as they are in Pakistan, but the pre-conditions the current GoP is imposing are also extremely important - The militant groups have to lay down their arms, and only non-violent actors will be engaged in talks.

Once cannot expect the US to demand any less as a precondition for talks, and that is where the problem arises, since the Taliban consider the US an 'occupying force, and want its withdrawal'.

I think the dynamics of the conflict in Pakistan and Afghanistan are different in this sense - an outsider (NATO) in Afghanistan complicates the efforts to find a 'negotiated' end to violence.

 

[Munir]

In a country where mr10% can become a legal president and elected people are the biggest thieves I do not expect from those that have atleast some visions (I do not agree with those but still) lay down there arms.

 

[Imran Khan]

The dogs pens used for talban

THESE are the dog pens used by Australian troops to detain four prisoners in Afghanistan and which the Defence Minister, Joel Fitzgibbon, described yesterday as legal and necessary.

The photographs, released by the Defence Force last night, show the enclosures used by Australian troops to hold four suspected Taliban militants overnight in April. A defence inquiry, released last Friday, found the men had not been mistreated.

Mr Fitzgibbon said yesterday he believed it had not involved a breach of international law. "We are at war in Afghanistan with people who will employ any tactic, including the use of children as shields and as a means of propaganda, and it is a tough battle," Mr Fitzgibbon told ABC Radio. "But we always endeavour to comply on all occasions with international law and I am confident that our people have done so.

"Australian soldiers are well known as the best fighters in the world and the fairest fighters in the world, always complying with their rules of engagement and always consistent with international law."

But the use of the dog pens was criticised by Muslim leaders and the Greens. The Greens leader, Bob Brown, said: "For Australia to find itself keeping prisoners in dog kennels, dog pens, even overnight, is a big mistake."

Ikebal Patel, president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, told the ABC: "I'm appalled that the Australian soldiers have been in any way implicated with such disgusting treatment of human beings."

An internal inquiry by Colonel David Connery cleared the soldiers. It found there was no evidence to support allegations that the prisoners were "stripped naked, beaten and mistreated".

Colonel Connery said in his report: "The accommodations used for the prisoners … which had previously been used for dogs may have also increased their anger."

Mr Fitzgibbon said: "They were in a compound I've had described to me as a walled compound, which I'm sure is used for a variety of purposes.

"Our people were patrolling far away from our main base in Tarin Kowt, near one of our forward operating bases. They did detain people suspected of the worst and most atrocious acts. And they detained them in the most practical way available to them at the time."

 

[Minhas]

Whatever the heck, Taliban should better go fight their fathers and leave Pakistan.

 

[Sagar Bhai]

Who made Taliban 'USA' who gave money to Taliban in past USA who provided weapon to Taliban USA ... they all did to fight against todays Russia in past ... Anyway if yu hav to finish them now yu hav to make development in that areas hav to giv education , jobs , health centers , and all life facilities to local communities Taliban ll be automatically finished

 

[RabzonKhan]

Revealed: secret Taliban peace bid

Saudis are sponsoring a peace dialogue involving a former senior member of the hardline group

Jason Burke in Kabul
The Observer, Sunday September 28 2008

The Taliban have been engaged in secret talks about ending the conflict in Afghanistan in a wide-ranging 'peace process' sponsored by Saudi Arabia and supported by Britain, The Observer can reveal.

The unprecedented negotiations involve a senior former member of the hardline Islamist movement travelling between Kabul, the bases of the Taliban senior leadership in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and European capitals. Britain has provided logistic and diplomatic support for the talks - despite official statements that negotiations can be held only with Taliban who are ready to renounce, or have renounced, violence.

Sources in Afghanistan confirmed the controversial talks, though they said that in recent weeks they had 'lost momentum'. According to Afghan government officials in Kabul, the intensity of the fighting this summer has been one factor. Another is the inconsistency of the Taliban's demands.

'They keep changing what they are asking for. One day it is one thing, the next another,' one Afghan government adviser with knowledge of the negotiations said. One aim of the initiative is to drive a wedge between Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda and the Taliban.

Last week the French Prime Minister, François Fillon, referred indirectly to the talks during a parliamentary debate on Afghanistan. 'We must explore ways of separating the international jihadists from those who are acting more for nationalist or tribal motives. Efforts in this direction are being led by Sunni [Muslim] countries such as Saudi Arabia,' he said.

This summer's fighting season in Afghanistan has been the most violent since the invasion of 2001. The deterioration of the situation has provoked a major review of strategy among the 40-nation international coalition pitted against an increasingly confident and effective insurgency.

Although there have been low-level contacts with individual Taliban commanders at district level before, the Saudi initiative is the first attempt to talk to the Taliban leadership council based in or around the south-west Pakistan city of Quetta, known as the 'Quetta Shura'.

The talks started in the summer and have been brokered by Saudi Arabia at the invitation of the Afghan government. The go-between has spent weeks ferrying lists of demands and counter-demands between the Afghan capital, Riyadh and Quetta. He has also visited London to speak to Foreign Office and MI6 personnel. A delegation from Saudi intelligence has also visited Kabul.

The Taliban are understood to have submitted a list of 11 conditions for ending hostilities, which include demands to be allowed to run key ministries and a programmed withdrawal of western troops.

In Kabul, President Hamid Karzai's national security adviser, Zalmay Rasul, has been in charge of the negotiations. It is understood that Karzai has yet to make a formal response to the demands, leading to frustration among some western officials.

The Observer has also learnt of a separate exchange of letters in the summer between Karzai and the Taliban ally Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. The dialogue proved fruitless.

Late last year Karzai said he would welcome the chance to speak directly to Hekmatyar and to Mullah Mohammed Omar, the Taliban's leader and one of the most wanted men in the world, promising that if the Taliban demanded a 'department in this or in that ministry or ... a position as deputy minister' in exchange for ending violence, he would give them the posts.

Previously Taliban spokesmen have said that only the departure of foreign troops, the institution of a fiercely rigorous interpretation of sharia law and a share of government would be acceptable to them as the basis for any deal.

A Foreign Office spokesman said yesterday that he had no knowledge of the 'Saudi initiative', as it is known in diplomatic circles, but that the British government 'actively supported the Afghan government's reconciliation process', which was 'part and parcel of the counter-insurgency campaign'.

In another development, The Observer has learnt that the British government is considering increasing the length of tours served by troops in Afghanistan. The Ministry of Defence confirmed last week that tours for senior soldiers in key command positions are set to be extended from six months to a year.

'We are looking at increasing tour lengths for a small number of headquarters posts ... with the aim of creating greater continuity in key positions,' an MoD spokesman said.

Although the MoD denied any plans to extend other service personnel's combat tours in Afghanistan, the idea of troops deployed to the area serving nine months was raised recently by the army's director of infantry, Brigadier Richard Dennis, in a speech to senior commanders.

Washington is putting pressure on Nato allies such as Britain to match American troop increases.

 

[Al Shaheen]

Fellow forum members...

It doesn't matter how many NATO troops are deployed, or how much money Saudi throws at the problem.

The key to peace in Afghanistan, lies in Pakistan.


Dare I say - that peace may only be secured by sitting down and talking to Taliban in the NWFP.