PDA

View Full Version : Karzai willing to talk to Taliban


PedOncoDoc
12-03-2009, 11:49
I don't see anything productive coming from a discussion with the Taliban with the exception of bringing them out in the open. It'll be interesting to see how this plays out...:munchin

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091203/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_karzai

By KATHY GANNON, Associated Press Writer Kathy Gannon, Associated Press Writer – 50 mins ago

KABUL – Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Thursday he's willing to talk with the Taliban chief in a bid to bring peace to the country if the move has the backing of the United States and other international partners.

Karzai had previously offered to talk with Taliban leader Mullah Omar, but the Bush administration opposed such contacts. President Barack Obama has said the U.S. must "open the door" to Taliban members who abandon violence.

Karzai's interview, which took place in the presidential palace, was his first since Obama announced a new strategy for Afghanistan, including sending 30,000 U.S. reinforcements to combat the growing Taliban insurgency. Obama said in his Tuesday address if all went well, the U.S. could begin withdrawing troops in July 2011.

The Afghan leader said he was not upset by the July 2011 date because it would give an "impetus and a boost" for Afghans to work toward taking control of their own nation. He also said it was time to offer peace to Taliban members and end the insurgency.

"We must talk to the Taliban as an Afghan necessity. The fight against terrorism and extremism cannot be won by fighting alone," Karzai said. "Personally, I would definitely talk to Mullah Omar. Whatever it takes to bring peace to Afghanistan, I, as the Afghan president, will do it."

But Karzai said the effort must have the full backing of the United States and its international partners. He said "sections of the international community" had undermined previous peace overtures by harassing former Taliban members "even though they had quit the insurgency."

He offered no examples.

Karzai offered to negotiate directly with Omar in November 2008, promising to provide security for the Taliban leader if he was "willing to come to Afghanistan or to negotiate for peace." The Taliban said at the time they would not enter into any negotiations as long as international forces were still in Afghanistan — a stance the group has held to since.

Omar disappeared after the collapse of the Taliban regime in November 2001 and has been rumored to be living in Pakistan, a charge the Pakistani government denies.

In Washington, a senior U.S. official declined to comment on the reported offer but noted the Obama administration wanted the Afghan government to pursue reconciliation.

"Obviously, being part of the reconciliation process requires recognizing the Afghan government, renouncing violence and becoming a part of the political process," said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity because the issue is sensitive. "We have not seen him (Mullah Omar) give any indication that he is willing to join a peaceful and democratic process."

In Brussels, Belgium, U.S. special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, said reconciliation talks had been "on the backburner" but were now "moving to the frontburner.

"There's an open door for any people fighting with the Taliban to renounce al-Qaida, lay down their arms and are processed peacefully," Holbrooke said. "But let me be clear, this takes a little time. It has to be Afghan-led and it requires resources."

During the interview, Karzai appeared relaxed and confident, displaying an air of independence despite intense U.S. and international pressure to crack down on corruption and improve governance following this summer's contentious election that gave him a second term.

Karzai demanded the respect of Western leaders and defended the election, which U.N.-backed auditors said was tarnished by widespread fraud. He accused Western politicians and media of insulting him, his administration "and the Afghan people" by their repeated allegations of vote fraud.

He said the election was not fraudulent and any corruption that occurred was not the work of Afghans.

"The Afghan elections were the best under the circumstances," he said. "We had no security in the south of the country. European observers called for the elections to be canceled even before the votes were counted."

He said the prospect of a U.S. military drawdown caused him no alarm.

"For Afghans, it's good that we are facing a deadline. We must begin to stand on our own feet. Even if it is with our own meager means — whatever those means may be. And we must begin to defend our own country. And if we, the Afghan people, cannot defend our country, ourselves, against an aggressor from within or without, then no matter what the rest of the world does with us, it will not produce the desired results," he said.

__

Associated Press writers Matt Lee in Washington and Slobodan Lekic in Brussels contributed to this report.

Box
12-03-2009, 20:25
dont kid yourself...

He has been "talking" to the Taliban all along

Dozer523
12-03-2009, 22:01
Do you know that as a fact or is that your opinion? Billy isn't often wrong and doesn't make stuff up. It's a fact. I specificly remember his coments and thefuss they caused in 2007. And this from Wiki (with cites) cite http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamid_Karzai (Seeking Peace)

"Since late 2001 Karzai has been trying desperately to bring peace in his country, even going as far as pardoning all militants that would lay down weapons and join the nation's rebuilding process. However, all of his offers have been rejected by the Taliban and other militant groups. In April 2007, Karzai acknowledged that he spoke to militants about trying to bring peace in Afghanistan.[66] He noted that the Afghan militants are always welcome in the country, although foreign insurgents are not.[67] In September 2007, Karzai again offered talks with militant fighters after a security scare forced him to end a commemoration speech.[68] Karzai left the event and was taken back to his palace, where he was due to meet visiting Latvian President Valdis Zatlers. After the meeting the pair held a joint news conference, at which Karzai called for talks with his Taliban foes. "We don't have any formal negotiations with the Taliban. They don't have an address. Who do we talk to?" Karzai told reporters. He further stated: "If I can have a place where to send somebody to talk to, an authority that publicly says it is the Taliban authority, I will do it."[68]

[66]"Afghan President Karzai Admits Seeking Peace Talks With Taliban". AP. September 24, 2007. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,297819,00.html?sPage=fnc/world/afghanistan. Retrieved 2008-05-11. "UNITED NATIONS — Afghan President Hamid Karzai said Sunday his government is working very hard on peace talks with the Taliban that would draw the insurgents and their supporters "back to the fold.""

[67] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17980166

[68] Afghanistan's Karzai urges Taliban talks after scare". reuters. September 9, 2007. http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-29427920070909. Retrieved 2007-12-11.

Guy
12-03-2009, 22:58
Do you know that as a fact or is that your opinion?You have a "corrupt" government trying to engage a population where; The literacy rate in Afghanistan is around 28%.

Written dialogue ain't going too work!:D

Stay safe.

Dozer523
12-04-2009, 07:17
Thanks for the info.

Do you or other knowledagble people here feel his talks with the Taliban isto bring about peace or do you feel he is playing both sides? I know the Afgans have a history of switching sides when the money is better or the situation changes. What is your opinion on his motives? I'll answer this as the "you" part and leave the 'knowledgeable" part to others. I doubt this is a "play both sides" ploy. If it were what would the end state be? I think the Afghans are pragmatic and historically consistent in a search for "something has GOT to be better then this". They let lots of foreigners in, in the hopes of something better coming from it, when it doesn't they unite to kick them out. After eight years the Afghans maybe getting to the point where they are ready for us to go. Willing or not.
I know at some point to bring peace we will have to talk to the opposition to some extent, do you believe this is not the correct time? Note I am talking about taliban only, not AQ. To bring peace the opposition has to talk to to some extent, in any and all cases. Karzi accepts the Taliban as Afghans first. My personal experience, working with the local security at Camp Eggers I was very amazed (at first) to talk with our guards and learn some were in the Army when the Soviets were here. Others were with the resistance. We had guys who "regretted" being with the Taliban. Some who claimed to have done nothing during that time frame. All these guys working side by side. My amazement dimmed when I tried to see it their way -- that is politics or work, what REALLY matters is family and tribe. Absolutely, about the AQ. Karzi is adamant that AQ foreigners are not included in the "ally ally outs in free".

Also what role do you folks here feel the ISI is playing in this whole mess. I am familar with their role in general terms during the soviet invasion. The ISI was the gate keeper for US involvement during the Soviet period. Read Charlie Wilson's War (skip the movie)
Someone told me their opinion is the ISI is playing both sides for several reasons one of the major ones being as long as there is a problem the west keeps giving them money. If the problem is solved then they are afraid the money will stop so they actually fund some of the insurgents they are supposed to be stopping just enough to keep them going, but not enough to let them get strong enough to be a real threat. Again this goes toward the "playing both sides ploy and my argument remains the same. To what end?. I will say Pakistan is very nervous about India and does not like to see Indians cozy-ing up to them. there are serious indications that the bombing on the Indian Embassy had less to do with the anti-Hindu leaning of the Taliban. Little is mentioned of the Iranian view of the Taliban but the Taliban is a ultra-fundamental Sunni (deliberately dumbed-down, too). The Iranians saw the Taliban as a real threat when they were fighting to take Herat and supplied the Ismail Kahn with fuel and munitions. There were Iranian Border troops vs Taliban clashes. You need to read Afghanistan by Stephen Tanner. Lord, I am NOT saying this is the truth, but want a knowledagble opinion on this keeping opsec in mind. Ahhhh, the TRUTH, Indeed. If we only knew for certain what the TRUTH is this might be simplier. Mods let me know if this is off topic or opsec.
Thanks. This is all open source. Writing about Afghanistan seems like a growth industry.