E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSBy Ali Arouzi, NBC News Correspondent
KABUL, Afghanistan – Talks aimed at ending the nine-year-old war in Afghanistan may be accelerating for the first time.
In recent weeks, Afghanistan’s President Hamid Karzai has stepped up efforts aimed at forging reconciliation between the Taliban insurgency and his government and U.S.-led NATO troops, forming a 70-member peace council to oversee formal negotiations. During a speech on Sept. 28, Karzai broke into tears about the future of his country, and urged his Taliban “compatriots” to lay down their arms.
His speech was one of the clearest signs yet that his government is willing to make a deal with the Taliban to end conflict here and start to rebuild the country.
According to NATO and Afghan officials, senior Taliban members have been granted safe passage to travel from remote areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan to Kabul for talks.
But can the longtime foes really work together?
Strange bedfellows
Abdul Hakim Mujahid, a former Taliban envoy who is a member of the newly formed peace council, expressed concern over the challenges of the unlikely alliance. If all parties stick to prior terms, including blacklists and sanctions, a compromise may not be possible, he said.
Karzai and U.S officials demand that the Taliban renounce violence, cut ties to the al-Qaida network, and respect the Afghan constitution. Taliban commanders in turn demand all foreign troops leave Afghanistan before any negotiations even begin.
“In my personal view, with these kinds of preconditions it is not workable. It will create more obstacles,” Mujahid told Reuters.
Even getting Taliban leaders into a meeting seems like an insurmountable issue.
During a press conference Thursday, Qiyamul-deen Kashaf, the spokesman for Afghanistan’s High Peace and Reconciliation Committee, was asked to confirm whether NATO was helping transport Taliban leaders in and out of Pakistan.
Neither confirming nor denying the reports, Kashaf said disclosing any information about the complicated issue could jeopardize the process, and added that he couldn’t speak about it before Karzai does.
However, he did say, “It is important that we guarantee their safety . . . that all armed groups should feel safe to sit at a meeting” and partake in negotiations.
He also pointed out that during the Soviet invasion, all Afghans – including the Taliban – fought together against the U.S.S.R., and called the Taliban “our brothers.”
Top Taliban there?
But the level of participation by top Taliban officials is up for debate.
Mullah Abdul Gani Baradar Baradar, the Taliban’s second-in-command, was the Taliban's overall military commander until he was arrested in Karachi last February by Pakistani security forces, where many believed he was still under custody. On Thursday, Britain’s Daily Telegraph reported that Baradar and three senior lieutenants were released from Pakistan custody and had traveled to Afghanistan under NATO guard for the talks.
Gen. David Petraeus, the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan, did say during a recent talk at a defense think tank in London that there were "several ongoing initiatives" to try to get the Taliban to the negotiating table.
“In certain respects we do facilitate that, given that, needless to say, it would not be the easiest of tasks for a senior Taliban commander to enter Afghanistan and make his way to Kabul,” Petraeus said, adding, “if ISAF [NATO's International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan] were not willing and aware of it.”
Not so fast
But as with all things here in Afghanistan, there are conflicting reports.
The Afghan Taliban has denied that any discussions are taking place. In a message posted on their web site, the group said that the notion of talks with the enemy was baseless and that negotiations were a waste of time.
As for Baradar, the Taliban’s No. 2, there has been so much speculation on his whereabouts that no one is truly sure where he is.
“He is still in Pakistan but being treated very well and as a guest,” one senior Pakistani security official told NBC News.
Yet some Taliban sources have said that there were rumors of his release, and his family was waiting for him, but that he never showed up anywhere. Other NBC sources have said he was released from Pakistan custody, but had been told not to contact anyone. The Taliban Shura, the organization’s leadership, has been told not to contact him because he is wearing a chip and is spying for the U.S.
A few years ago, negotiations would have been unthinkable. The idea that talks may be on the horizon and that the Afghan government has made statements that they are willing to negotiate with the Taliban is a major milestone.
NBC News’ Carol Grisanti contributed to this report from Islamabad, Pakistan and Mushtaq Yusufzai from Peshawar, Pakistan.
Leave a Comment:
you can`t negotiate with terrorists ..it`s been tried many times and they use it to regroup and rest..when they were in power.. they showed their spots and the leopard never changes these.. they must be defeated or reduced to a small criminal gang ..they won`t surrender.. Isalmic terrorists never do and the Talebans are archtypical terroists.. keep up the fight coalition forces!! ..all winter long!!..as part of the global fight against Isalimc terrorism ..not pleasant facts..but many Muslims are also joining the fight against jihad terrorism as well.. ..they realize too the enemy is within.
The Catholic terrorists in Northern Ireland laid down their arms permanently. Do you remember the 1980s when the Irish Republican Army was blowing up busloads of Protestant second graders? All that is now in the past.
almost, but not quite. the "real IRA" (radical splinter group)is still engaging in the occasional terrorist attaxk.
Define terrorist. You're the invaders.
Mike-2235392
Since you seem to think that we are the "bad guys" in this scenario……. can you tell you tell us all just why "we invaded" Afghanistan?
gdi, because we wouldn't supply them with evidence against bin laden, or allow them to try him in their court system.(such as it was)
Carpet bomb them all.
No negotiations. Complete surrender.
Taliban being serious about peace talks? Never trust them. Never.
then we will be there throwing away taxpayer money for a very, very long time
I agree.
One section of Taliban is doing the soap opera of talking. No one knows, how many groups/sections of Islamic militants like Taliban, al-Qaeda are there. If one section (A) agrees for peace (agreement will be shred to pieces at the first opportunity as in the history of Islam and its followers), the same section (A) many will break away into A1, A2 and so on.
So it is total waste of time to give a timeout to even a section of the enemy and permit them to fool us further!
Don’t trust a word of Islamic radicals, militants and their supporters operating under different labels!
I'M going to yelled at for this, but it is important that we make peace with the taliban after the war for the hostility to truely end and the healing begin. Japan is a fine example. After they were defeated in WW2, the united states actually help them rebuild their country, and now we are actually friends. I'm not saying we will ever be friends with the taliban, but if we are still enemies even after the war is over, what's to stop this from repeating?
Lo mejor que podrian hacer negociar ,entre su misma mentalidad ,y que terminen de una vez con la guerra ,lo unico que sirve es para hacernos sufrir alas madres que tenemos ,nuestros hijos alla en Afganistan,yo tengo mi unico hijo en ese pais ,y yo no tengo paz todos los dias de mi vida ,
No habla espanol.
Evolutionary
No habla espanol.----- Then don't comment on that post.
GO for it .End this War and send back are troops home and save $$$$$ too. We will never win their. so let,s them all kill them selfs it,s their country, we can,t save the whole world .
Peter ..yes but one problem Afghanistan under the talebans was a global base for international terrorism and still is in the parts they control.. so they will bring the war to other places like they did for 9-11 but many other places too. y Carmen, estoy de acuerdo.. .pero no podemos negociar.. es imposible con terroristas.. si su hijo es un soldado tiene que saber esto...(.if English speaking people want a translation I can give it..)....
I think alot of troops don't want to end the war for fear of the unemployment lines. I was reminded of the Vietnam War and how it was said the Congress wouldn't let the miliotary win. I think we may have been all wrong and it is the military that doesn't want to win and pack it up. Fifteen per cent of the total soldiers there are combat. The rest are rear echelon.
@ Peter: You are probably a nice guy, but you are so typical of many Americans. We, we, we, we -- bulletin you weren't there fighting them alone nor the war against terrorism. For 'Pete' sakes (pun intended) WAKE UP!
@Peter Kotos
Your soldiers are not doing us any favor. What you really doing is cleaning after you mess which you did for more than 30 years ago, the time when you were helping these guys against Russia because of cold war. You start recogninzing alqaeda since 9/11. Afghanistan has been i war against these people for more than 30 years , when America was supporting them. Let me remind you Afghanistan was just af football between America and Russia. That is why Afghans are not sure, whether americans are seriøs about the war in afghanistan or are they just there for som geopolitical reason. And one more thing, more than 80000 people dead in civil war, before the taliban come to power, there was no sign of america at that time.
No it was congress jack, because after 1972 the US military had left Vietnam and all that remained as a massive arms package that we gave to south Vietnam every year, up until that arms package ended south Vietnam was able to hold its own against the north Vietnamese.
I don't think ur rite at all becuz we get many resources and things we need from afghanistan! It's not rite 2 start something and not finish it. So i think we all shud stand strong 4 our troops in afghanistan and let them make a diffrence!!!!!
Was it NATO who forced Taliban into the peace talk? Or was it the other way around? Either way, when the peace finally comes, NATO and Taliban should share Nobel Peace Prize in next year.Even John Lennon couldn't have possibly imagined tha
Ask the people of afghanistan and Pakistan who the terrorist are.Not the puppets the news cameras put on
Most of them point toward karzai
Until we finally start to fight this war the way we fought WWII and WWI we can never win. So either bomb them back to the stone age as we did the germans and the japanese or just get out and let them know any further acts of terrorism will be greeted with absolute retaliation. Unfortunately this is about all those muslim fanatics will ever understand. If the rest of the world can't deal with it, just tell them we don't want, or need their help anyway. Remember folks what Vince Lombardi used to say "winning isn't everything, its the only thing"
@warren FTR: World War I -- began in July, 1914 The U.S.A. only entered it in 1918.
World War II -- began in September, 1939 The U.S.A. only entered it in 1941.
Enough said by this Canadian, whose troops on both accounts were deep in the trenches well before The U.S.A. ever was. I realize Hollywood Movies, can be pretty convincing. :)
David N.-2465637, you are correct the Americans were the late comer to both wars. It was the American soldier and Marines who beat the Germans in both wars. Not the British, French, or Canadians, it was the Americans in both wars. Every one esle involved in both wars was getting their collective a$$es kicked by the Germans. As for the war in Afghanistan if congress and the President would tell our military to Kick A$$ this war would be over in 6 months. Peace would come to Afghanistan permantly then. Not because of something you suppose Canada did. Hollywood movies have nothing to do with facts. But sometimes facts make good Hollywood movies.
David, I mean no disrespect to the USA's courageous northern neighbors who did indeed fight valiantly in both world wars, but I think Warren was referring to the end of the two wars (particularly the 2nd one). Unfortunately the world has changed since then though. One country can no longer simply bomb another one back to the stone age. Things are much more complicated now.
@love sonnet: I beg to differ 'it was the American soldiers and marines who beat the Germans'. Try telling that to other British Allies as well. (Italy, France, Holland, etc.) Methink YOU'VE been watching too many Hollywood Movies, but your are forgiven for your historical ingnorance. I still love you guys regardless and am glad you are our neighbours.
@disgusted: I totally agree. Can't go around any more blowing people off the map.
Sorry David, WW1 ended in 1918. The USA entered the war in 1916. Great respect for the Canadian and British forces that fought in both World Wars and all since.
@ John and partitcularly for Lovesonnet: WWI ended in November 1918, however the United States of America only 'delcared war' on Germany -- on April 6, 1917 (a vote of 82 to 6, in the Senate and 353 to 50 in the House of Representatives) and only engaged in European combat in the summer of 1918. Up until then they were pretty neutral. The war itself ended on November 11th, 1918. That's the way 'our' History Books tell it at least. :)
With much appreciation of expressing your sentiments towards Canada and Great Britain. May your Nation keep safe and flourish.
"A stab at peace" Come on! Your not writing for your college website anymore. You can think of a less cheeky headline.
"Reconciliation with the Taliban".
Translation: Surrendering to the Taliban.
Thank G-d Truman didn't "reconcile" with the Germans and Japs!!!!!!! We just beat the crap out of them!!!!
All wars eventually end with some form of negotiated terms, sometimes, but not always, including surrender of one side to the other. Why do you state that a willingness to negotiate is equal to our surrendering? Do you believe that 9 more years will change the situation there substantially more than it has done so far? If the enemy Taliban are willing to agree to terms negotiated in collaboration with the existing Afgan government, then our job is done and it's time to come home.
"Peace" with Corrupt Karsai in charge??? Not likely.
Perhaps you can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can certainly fools all the progressives all of the time.
Rather an akward headline, no?
Never going to win there so just pull out. Defend this country like it should have been defended before 9/11 and demollish anyone that attacks us ever again. Besides, the real threat to americans right now is the break up of families due to drugs. How many people have died in the last thirty years due to drugs? Alot more. Attack the Mexican terrorists that are killing americans with thier drugs. Send the military into Mexico and end the war on drugs in that corner of the world.
another thing we could do is cut their money off by taking all of the poppy fields out. OOPS!!! Then their woulldn't be any heroin. Oh poopy, how would all of the drug addicts exist.
Yeah, and I bet some of the generals and such don't want to be in Washington sitting behind some desk either.
who says you can't teach an old Afghanny a new trick .this will end up being like Israel and Palistine and we will be paying for these peace talks for the next ten thousand years ,they will all have peace for 10 billion dollars and every year after another peace talk because a Taliban made a bomb or an Afghanny threw a rock what a croc just bring the troops home I don't remember in my life time anyone naming the United States care taker of the worlds problems
The Taliban is our problem, Al-Qaeda is our problem. They hate us. We are their enemy (as well as other Western countries).
By the way, the people of Afghanistan are Afghans, not Afghanis, that is their currency.
Extremists will always be a threat, to someone, somewhere. We have to deal with this threat.
Terrorism is a multi-billion dollar business...
Meetings 'n talks with the Taliban? I hope they do a 'head count' before they start. (Scarcasm intended.)
We will never totaly leave ,the oil companies want the pipeline for the oil from the Casbian Sea and and the stan countries surrounding it, also the enormous money from the opium and heroin drug trade,which is at least 93 percent of the world production. We also want the trillions of dollars of Afghanistans minerals .Yes Karzia is corrupt,as are we.
u right just check how the production of opium went up after the invasion just check the numbers almost 200%
guess what happens when you destroy the poppy fields. You destroy an entire economy. What does an economy provide? stable jobs. Stable jobs give many military age males an alternative to fighting ISAF forces. You destroy the poppy fields thus eliminating entire family incomes and you just create more Taliban soldiers. Slowly transitioning from poppy to wheat or corn is a solution but that takes time and the income isnt substantional for large families. Its a vicious circle warren, its definitely not as easy as just burning fields. thats been tried... and it failed.
Alot of these Fighters are being paid to fight us. Why? because it's the only job they can find. it's either that or work n an opium field. Destroy their fields? I definetly dont want a whole bunch of pi**ed off muslims who are jonesin for a hit to be mad at ME. Destroy their economy and what are you left with? more fighters.
and you cant just bomb an entire population back to the stone age. leave the tactics to the experts... they know what they are doing
The Taliban won't negotiate until the Americans leave, fine. We won't leave until they're all dead. "The best diplomacy comes from the barrel of a gun." The only thing Mao got right.
They hate us
One of the biggest stumbling blocks?
The MEDIA!
The Taliban leaders would be considered traitors if they met with "the enemy". The fact that every move anyone makes ends up on CNN in 10 seconds makes these meetings hard to arrange.
For the meeting to take place, they have to have a level of secrecy, so they can "save face". That's why all the denials of meetings by the Taliban... they can't be seen as negotiating with Karzai, the US, and NATO.
Here's a perfect gig for Obama -in 2012, join Taliban and rest of the Islamists gang.