Obstacles to a negotiated settlement between Karzai government and Taliban

Juan Cole links to the following article by Chris Sands on his blog today (Informed Comment, 10-8-10). In the end, Cole thinks, there will be a negotiated settlement between the Karzai government and the leaders of the Taliban. Reports from other sources indicate that negotiations are already underway, despite objections by the US military.

Sands identifies some of the complex obstacles that stand in the way of an eventually successful negotiation, citing the Washington Post for some of his information. My comments are in parentheses.

See the Sands' full article at: http://www.thenational.ae/news/worldwide/south-asia/afghanistan-chance-for-a-breakthrough?pageCount=0


(1) The Taliban have ties with al Qaeda. Sands reports, however, that the Taliban leaders have expressed a willingness "to cut these ties," as part of a general agreement.

(2) The Taliban leaders demand a withdrawal of US and other foreign troop. Sands thinks that the US leadership, implicitly Obama and the generals, want to find a way out of this quagmire and have already promised to "start" pulling out US troops by next summer. (However, Obama has recently suggested that it may take longer than one year to create a "stable" Afghan government.)

(3) "The US has ruled out a deal with [the Taliban's spiritual leader, Mullah Mohammad Omar], yet he remains central to the Taliban and there are few divisions among the insurgents." (The US may not have the final say in this regard.)

(4) There are divisions among Afghans "across ethnic, religious and party lines," which complicate negotiations limited to the Taliban and Karzai government.

(5) The Taliban are known for their adherence to their fundamentalist principles and will have to compromise them in order to join a corrupt Karzai administration, which includes many of the Taliban's most hated enemies.

(6) For the Taliban to agree to a settlement, its leaders would have to be given important positions in the government. Such a settlement would generate opposition from leaders of the Tajik ethnic group and the Shite Hazara.

(7) There is concern in Washington that the Taliban would want to restrict women's rights and religious, cultural and social freedoms. (There is already such restrictions, especially on women's rights.)

(Sands finishes his article as follows.) But all the stars surely have to be aligned for this to bring a definitive end to the Afghan tragedy. If the Post's story is correct, there is some hope. But if it is simply an attempt by US officials to sow discord among the Taliban, it is unlikely to succeed. The insurgents now control a large part of rural Afghanistan and have a presence in most provinces across the country. They will not give up easily. (That is, there is no military settlement in sight.)