guardian.co.uk,
Richard Norton-Taylor, Monday 10 September 2012
![]() |
| Three senior Taliban figures said they could imagine a long-term US military role in Afghanistan. Photograph: Tony Karumba/AFP/Getty Images |
A belief
that the war in Afghanistan is unwinnable and fear of a future civil war has
persuaded Taliban leaders of the merits of a ceasefire, power-sharing and a
political deal, according to a group of experts and academics who conducted
private talks with senior Taliban figures.
Two former
Taliban ministers, a former mujahideen commander and an Afghan mediator with
experience of negotiating with the Taliban spent between three and five hours
in individual discussions with professors Anatol Lieven, Theo Farrell and Rudra
Chaudhuri of King's College London and Michael Semple of Harvard.
Separately,
Matt Waldman, a former key UN official in Kabul involved in promoting dialogue
and reconciliation in Afghanistan, has told the Guardian: "It would be a
grave mistake to assume the Taliban would settle for nothing less than absolute
power."
At a press
briefing on Monday on their report published by the Royal United Services
Institute, Lieven and his colleagues painted a picture of a pragmatic Taliban
leadership around Mullah Omar.
Three of
his group's four interlocutors said they could imagine a "long-term US military role in Afghanistan … so long as the US military presence contributed
to Afghan security", Farrell said. But it could be used to attack Afghan's
neighbours, including Iran, the Taliban leaders insisted.
Semple said
the Taliban figures they spoke to were driven by the belief that "war was
not winnable" and by "fear of precipitating civil war". Lieven
described "real disillusionment and anger with al-Qaida" within the
Taliban leadership.
However, he
said their Taliban interlocutors were "very silent" on the question
of the Haqqani network, which has attacked US and Afghan forces from their base
in Pakistan. Originally encouraged by the CIA during the war against Soviet
forces in Afghanistan, the group has just been proscribed by the US as a
terrorist organisation.
"Pakistan's
influence would be crucial," Lieven described one of their Taliban
interlocutors as saying, because Pakistan could undermine a peace agreement.
"Taliban leaders know they stand no chance of seizing power now or in the near future," writes Waldman in the Guardian. "They know that even coming
close would reinvigorate, potentially augment, the coalition of forces ranged
against them. That could trigger a civil war, which they are anxious to
avoid."
He
continues: "Antediluvian theocracy has had its day and thinking Talibs
know it," and adds: "Most Taliban leaders deeply resent their
dependence on, and manipulation by, Pakistan's intelligence agency, the ISI …
They yearn to be taken seriously as a credible, national political force."
Related Article:

No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.