Should the US Negotiate with the Taliban?

[billvon 3,120]

>So who would you recommend I take with me?

You and Andrea would be unstoppable. You'd be the brains, she'd be the enforcer.

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Quote

... Or, two women from Atlanta.

So who would you recommend I take with me?

I'm sure you'll know better than me. I'd assume anyone from Peachtree Road / Buckhead Ave area. The women in the Havana club are frankly scary... You can actually feel their predatory stares into your back, as they think; MMMmmm... Fresh DNA.



Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

What if they don't agree to put down their arms or refuse to acknowledge the central or pronvincial authorities?

Maybe I'm naive, but I look at negotiations in this regard as cold-call sales. You listen, you get creative and you sell them. It's up to the seller (negotiator) representing the company (country) to decide where we're willing to give or not. If done right--contrary to popular belief--the sellee does most of the talking and ultimately buys what the seller is selling believing it was sellee's idea and sellee got the better deal.

Quote

Or from a perspective of them being threatened?

Sure. Problems in the business relationship sometimes arise. Something happens and the client is offended because--afterall they thought they had the upper-hand--suddenly it feels like they're not being paid proper respect or attention.

You save the client much in the same way you sold them initially. That's why the commission is residual.

Sometimes you loose the client.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[PLFXpert 0]

Quote

although imagining Clint Eastwood saying, "Go ahead, melon head, make my day," gives me a smile.

Me, too.

Paint me in a corner, but my color comes back.

[jimmytavino 16]

good points

in sales it helps alot to sell the 'benefits'.. even moreso, than the product, itself...

How will the 'buyer' BENEFIT from the related transaction???.. the past administration,,,,has always been about how THEY would benefit,,, and sadly they even got THAT wrong,,
, Example,,," we'll smoke out OBL, wild west wanted posters Etc...,,
Not to mention,,, the iraq fiasco where "WE'll be greeted as Liberators"...and 'Mission accomplished'...

What's in it for the OTHER side..??? if we can satisfy Their needs, at far less cost and loss of life, than satisfiying OUR Own needs... then foreign policy blunders can be turned into foreign policy wonders.....
'You don't sell the steak, you sell the SiZZZLe "

good thread ,,, ( as always , marg)

jmy in rochester

[vortexring 0]

I'm sure most are aware negotiations have already happened and are happening now.

So what would be your solution Marg?

Negotiations are unavoidable.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

I'm sure most are aware negotiations have already happened and are happening now.

What do you mean by negotiations?

Do you mean day to day interactions with individuals outside of Kabul who may identify with/align with Taliban or with Mullah Omar, et al?

Currently, the US does not have diplomatic relations with the Taliban.

Quote

So what would be your solution Marg?

Before one can devise a plan for a solution, one needs to identify clearly and communicate the mission. What are we negotiating for? Is the mission in Afghanistan part of the GWOT, the main thrust of the GWOT? Is the mission solely limited to capturing the leaders of al Qa’eda? Is it wider? And does it include nation building? And who is responsible for SSTR? Currently it has largely fallen to the military due to lack of institutional capability as the US foreign service/USAID was decimated capacity-wise since the 1980s, as my favorite PhD historian noted in Kansas last fall.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[stitch 0]

Sure. As soon as they hand over Bin Laden and agree on being exiled as a group to say, Gitmo or Elba.

"No cookies for you"- GFD
"I don't think I like the sound of that" ~ MB65
Don't be a "Racer Hater"

[billvon 3,120]

>As soon as they hand over Bin Laden and agree on being exiled as a
>group to say, Gitmo or Elba.

Or until we need them again. Then they get billions of dollars, lots o weapons and get the title "freedom fighter" again.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Sure. As soon as they hand over Bin Laden and agree on being exiled as a group to say, Gitmo or Elba.

You expect people to volunteer for that?

[vortexring 0]

The US not having official diplomatic relations with the Taliban doesn't necessarily mean there aren't any negotiations.

I'd imagine the ultimate strategic goal of the negotiations would be to enable stabiltity to prevail in the country in order to build gas pipelines.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Gas pipeline links:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2608713.stm

And especially:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1644813.stm

Or am I just being cynical. . .?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Quote

Sure. As soon as they hand over Bin Laden and agree on being exiled as a group to say, Gitmo or Elba.

You expect people to volunteer for that?

Why not. I like Elba. Nice people, good bars, small airport. Very tourist-friendly.

St Helena doesn't look half bad for relaxation either.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Sure. As soon as they hand over Bin Laden and agree on being exiled as a group to say, Gitmo or Elba.

You expect people to volunteer for that?

Why not. I like Elba. Nice people, good bars, small airport. Very tourist-friendly.

St Helena doesn't look half bad for relaxation either.

Mike.

But St. Helena doesn't lend itself to palindromes.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[miked10270 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Sure. As soon as they hand over Bin Laden and agree on being exiled as a group to say, Gitmo or Elba.

You expect people to volunteer for that?

Why not. I like Elba. Nice people, good bars, small airport. Very tourist-friendly.

St Helena doesn't look half bad for relaxation either.

Mike.

But St. Helena doesn't lend itself to palindromes.

Is Elba able to qualify as a true palindrome in the way; "A man, a plan, a canal, Panama" does?

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[nerdgirl 0]

I don't consider consideration of geopolitical impact of resources and instability in southwest Asia (& other states) to be cynical (e.g., see the latest NIC Global Trends Report ... or the 2020 one ... or the 2015 one). So, no I don't think you're being cynical.

The BBC articles to which you linked are from 2001 & 2002. During 2000 & early 2001, the US govt was one of a small number of governments in the world that acknowledge the Taliban as the official government of Afganistan. An action driven largely by realpolitik/realist foreign policy, btw. That was the context and included in the content of this parapgraph from my original post to the thread:

Quote

I’m very skeptical for a number of reasons, largely driven by historical experience. Through June 2001 the US negotiated with Taliban representatives, including at very high levels on counter-drug inititiatives and gas pipeline proposal, e.g., Sec State Colin Powell and the US gave the Taliban $113M in 2000 and $43M in 2001 as part of counter-drug activities. Clearly those efforts did not do anything to limit the Taliban’s support of the al Qa’eda – both explicit and tacit (hiding) support. I haven’t seen anything substantive to suggest that the Taliban movement has significantly changed. What I wrote/cited here (especially the lower half on “What Petraeus Understands).”

I don't see anything to suggest that the current proposals/discussions/notions on negotiating w/the Taliban are directly tied to re-establishing/re-initiating pipeline efforts. Have you seen something to suggest otherwise recently (last 6 months)?

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[kallend 2,150]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Sure. As soon as they hand over Bin Laden and agree on being exiled as a group to say, Gitmo or Elba.

You expect people to volunteer for that?

Why not. I like Elba. Nice people, good bars, small airport. Very tourist-friendly.

St Helena doesn't look half bad for relaxation either.

Mike.

But St. Helena doesn't lend itself to palindromes.

Is Elba able to qualify as a true palindrome in the way; "A man, a plan, a canal, Panama" does?

Mike.

Able was I ere I saw Elba (Napoleon's palindrome)

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[vortexring 0]

What I've seen/not seen is neither here nor there regarding this topic; but do you now think the gas pipelines are no longer a/the priority? Perhaps more importantly, do you think they ever were a priority in some form or other post 9/11? One could easily believe the gas pipelines to be a non-issue. Haven't heard much about them from official channels have we? Perhaps that's what's making me feel cynical.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

Quote

I don't see anything to suggest that the current proposals/discussions/notions on negotiating w/the Taliban are directly tied to re-establishing/re-initiating pipeline efforts. Have you seen something to suggest otherwise recently (last 6 months)?

What I've seen/not seen is neither here nor there regarding this topic;

Yes, it is relevant. We can all speculate. All speculation is not equal. And perhaps 'seen' was not the best word choice. Rather than suggesting direct observations by you or anyone (seeing), are you aware of publically available information that supports the link between the recent suggestion of negotiations with the Taliban and the proposed gas pipeline from Turkmenistan?

I was aware of/previousy cited the 2000-2001 negotiations and asked for newer evidence to support (or dispute) that as a factor. Since my psychic powers still aren't working [] & we're not on JWICS, one needs a common point of reference. Or it's just notional speculation.

Quote

… but do you now think the gas pipelines are no longer a/the priority?

I have seen nothing to suggest that the gas pipelines are an operational priority nor have I seen or heard anything to suggest that they are a driver to pursue negotiations with the Taliban.

In a general sense, geopolitics and energy resource issues come into play. Are they significant policy drivers now (last 6 months) as they were in 2000 & early 2001? I don't see any evidence ... hence my request.

What I have seen and have provided evidence for (e.g., GEN Petraeus’ remarks at the Heritage Foundation) is operational motivation that is much nearer term and directed towards defeating an insurgency (the Taliban).

More evidence from a briefing Friday by COL John P. Johnson, USA Commander, 4th Brigade Combat Team, 101st Airborne, who has been deployed in eastern Afghanistan since April 2008 and who “provide(s) some insight from the perspective of a brigade-level task force that has actually been in the fight for the past eight months.”

“As I said, the focus of everything we do is the Afghan people, and our intent is to separate the people from the enemy physically, but more important, psychologically. The enemy we face is very complex, but can be broadly defined as any actor the draws the population away from the vision of legitimate government of Afghanistan. This could range from criminals to ideological Taliban led by Mullah Omar to power-based groups such as those led by Jallaludin Haqqani and Hekmatyar Gulbuddin, alliance groups such as the Taliban of Pakistan, led by Baitullah Mehsud, as well as to a variety of foreign fighter elements -- some organized, such as the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan or the Islamic Jihad Union -- to ultimately al Qaeda.

“As we separate the Afghan people from this complex enemy, we also strive to connect them with the legitimate government of Afghanistan and also connect them with their Afghan national security forces. We do all of this from behind, ensuring that our number-one priority is the capacity-building of the institutions, so vital to convincing the people to reject any alternate vision.

“We recognize that we do all of this in an overarching information engagement environment [strategic communications – nerdgirl], where sometimes the enemy has the upper hand, because he doesn't have to tell the truth, such as the fact that these terrorists cause a huge majority of civilian casualties and have instructions from their leadership to create situations likely to cause collateral, innocent loss of life. [i.e., just shooting terrorists/insurgents is not the solution to terrorism or insurgencies, which connects more to comments from this thread on Iraq.-nerdgirl]

“Broadly speaking, our purpose here is to transform the environment in a way that increases the legitimacy of the Afghan government, at the provincial and the district level, an influences the people of Afghanistan to reject the ultimate vision offered by the anti-Afghan forces.”

The entire transcript is surprising forthright w/r/t foreign fighters, infiltrators across the “Pak” border, working with the “Pak mil,”Agribusiness development teams, PRTs, HTTs, intelligence sharing, and the critical importance of water and water politics. (Heck, water is one issue that rarely gets acknowledged w/r/t the Pakistan-India Kashmir dispute … water not oil or gas as a critical natural resource.)

Another recent discussion that speaks to the operational imperatives for stabilization rather than a gas pipeline, imo. It also connects to prior discussion on the intention of GEN McKiernan's comments regarding not wanting a "surge" in Afghanistan (& what "surge" means in the context of Aghanistan vis-a-vis Iraq).

Quote

Perhaps more importantly, do you think they ever were a priority in some form or other post 9/11?

No, I don’t the proposed gas pipelines were a priority w/r/t US and NATO operations in Afghanistan.

Quote

One could easily believe the gas pipelines to be a non-issue. Haven't heard much about them from official channels have we? Perhaps that's what's making me feel cynical.

Yes & no. In some circles there’s been a lot of discussion w/r/t to the proposed gas pipeline from Iran to India [Iran-Pakistan-India]. One of the principal drivers for the India-US nuclear agreement was to facilitate an alternative for India to overcome its energy deficit that did not tie it to Iran. (Other drivers include desire to strengthen ties with India as an ally/friend in the GWOT and lifting the US ban on imported mangos from India, i.e., “atoms for mangos”.) Negotiations on that agreement began (officially) in early 2005; in October 2008, the US Congress approved amending the Atomic Energy Act to allow the deal to go forward.

Until there is stability in Afghanistan, the Trans Afghanistan Pipeline (TAP) [Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India] is effectively a paper-deal, imo.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[vortexring 0]

C'mon Marg, your regurgitation of official policy is unbecoming.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[nerdgirl 0]

From the International Council on Security and Development report released 8 December 2008: “Struggle For Kabul: The Taliban Advance ”

“The Taliban now holds a permanent presence in 72% of Afghanistan, up from 54% a year ago. Taliban forces have advanced from their southern heartlands, where they are now the de facto governing power in a number of towns and villages, to Afghanistan’s western and north-western provinces, as well as provinces north of Kabul. Within a year, the Taliban's permanent presence in the country has increased by a startling 18%.

“Three out of the four main highways into Kabul are now compromised by Taliban activity. The capital city has plummeted to minimum levels of control, with the Taliban and other criminal elements infiltrating the city at will.”

“Afghans and U.S. Plan to Recruit Local Militias”

“The plan for the militias, approved this month by President Hamid Karzai, is being pushed forward anyway, to help stem the deteriorating security situation here. The proposal to field what amounts to lightly trained gunmen reflects the sense of urgency surrounding the fight against the Taliban, who were removed from power after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, but who have staged a remarkable resurgence in recent years.

“American commanders say that while they would prefer to field Afghan Army and police forces, they are simply not available. ‘We don’t have enough police,’ said Maj. Gen. Michael S. Tucker, the deputy commander of American forces in the country. ‘We don’t have time to get the police ready.’

“In recent months, the Taliban have moved into the provinces around Kabul, including Wardak to its west. In addition to setting up the first local Afghan militias there, American commanders are sending several hundred American soldiers to the province, the first of which have already arrived. Wardak Province is bisected by the country’s national highway, which has been the scene of numerous ambushes of supply convoys by Taliban insurgents.

“The plan for the militias coincides with the arrival of Gen. David H. Petraeus, who presided over the reduction in violence in Iraq and who has since become overall commander for American forces in Afghanistan and the rest of the region. The Americans are sending 20,000 to 30,000 troops over the next year, in addition to the nearly 70,000 American and NATO troops who are already here. President-elect Barack Obama has declared that he will redouble America’s efforts to win.

“The formation of the militias is at least a partial answer to the question of how American commanders intend to wrest back the initiative from the Taliban over the next 12 months. While some elected officials in the United States have suggested that the Americans and Afghans might try to exploit fissures in the Taliban, possibly breaking off some groups that can be reconciled, the plan for the militias — coupled with the influx of fresh American forces — suggests that American commanders intend to squeeze the Taliban first.”

“American and Afghan officials say they intend to set up local militias of 100 to 200 fighters in each provincial district, with the fighters being drawn from the villages where they live. (Wardak has eight districts.)

“A Taliban commander based in Wardak Province, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear that he would become a target, predicted that the government militias would find it hard to put down roots in the area, if only because the Taliban had already done so.

“‘We are living in the districts, in the villages -- we are not living in the mountains,’ the Taliban chief said. ‘The people are with us.’”

In the context of the ICOS report and the last two paragraphs above, one wonders whether the subject line question is no longer a normative but a pragmatic inevitability… ?

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[nerdgirl 0]

Quote

C'mon Marg, your regurgitation of official policy is unbecoming.

Apologies on the delay in responding; I missed this one. Suspect it was the American Thanksgiving holiday & my being >10,000 ft up Colorado mountains. (And I'm still waiting on some pics from other peaks you promised some while ago. )

Mostly out of curiousity, what official policy am I supposed to be representing?

I've been called everything from Neo-Con to communist - the former IRL & the latter here.

VR/Marg

Act as if everything you do matters, while laughing at yourself for thinking anything you do matters.
Tibetan Buddhist saying

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

Suspect it was the American Thanksgiving holiday & my being >10,000 ft up Colorado mountains.

And you didn't even stop by to say hello.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[champu 1]

Quote

In the context of the ICOS report and the last two paragraphs above, one wonders whether the subject line question is no longer a normative but a pragmatic inevitability… ?

Negotiations require at least some semblance of common goals. The coalition wants a stable (read: democratic) government that will be willing to help us enforce our anti-terrorism policy in the region and, of course, to stop fighting and bring troops home.

According to an interview (albeit a somewhat dated one) with Mullah Wakil (one of Omar's aides), "The Sharia does not allow politics or political parties. That is why we give no salaries to officials or soldiers, just food, clothes, shoes and weapons. We want to live a life like the Prophet lived 1400 years ago and jihad is our right. We want to recreate the time of the Prophet and we are only carrying out what the Afghan people have wanted for the past 14 years."

So it sounds like a negotiator would have his or her work cut out for themselves. We might be able to work out a stable government (if not a democratic one) if they would give up their Pashtun superiority complex, but whatever one concession they offer would be in exchange for us leaving. I guess this would achieve two of our three goals, but not the one that drew us into fighting over there to begin with. If they really have such pervasive control over the country, why would they give us that final concession on our way out?

We would come to the table with nothing to gain, pragmatic as it would be.

[Amazon 7]

See what happens when those in the lead are incapable of finishing the job. This bunch of incompetents has the biggest case of Group ADHD in the history of our country.