http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/06/u-s-to-begin-peace-negotiations-with-taliban/
QuoteU.S. To Begin Peace Negotiations With Taliban
The Taliban said today that they are prepared to sit down for direct peace talks with Afghan and U.S. officials over the future of Afghanistan.
The news comes as Afghan President Hamid Karzai announced today that Afghan security forces have taken over the country's security lead from the U.S.-led NATO coalition.
Both developments were major milestones in the 12 year war that began shortly after al Qaeda, protected by the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, launched the 9/11 terror attacks against the U.S.
Taliban officials today released a statement opposing the use of Afghan soil to threaten other countries, a critical step to breaking ties with Al Qaeda, and supporting the Afghan peace process.
These statements fulfill the requirements for the Taliban to open a political office in Doha, Qatar, for the purpose of negotiating with the Afghan government.
President Obama said today, "This is an important step towards reconciliation, although its an early step, we anticipate there will be lots of bumps in road. But the fact that the parties have talked and discussed Afghan future that is very important."
"One thing we do believe is any insurgent group including the Taliban will need to accept an Afghan constitution that renounces ties to al Qaeda, ends violence, and is committed to protections [for] women and minorities in the country," the president said.
A senior Obama administration official said, "We welcome this. These statements represent an important first step towards reconciliation — a process that, after 30 years of armed conflict in Afghanistan, will certainly promise to be complex, long and messy, but nonetheless, this is an important first step."
While the U.S. will have its first direct talks with the Taliban in the coming days, administration officials stressed that the peace negotiating process must be Afghan-led.
"The core of this process is not going to be the U.S.- Taliban talks. Those can help advance the process, but the core of it is going to be negotiations among Afghans, and the level of trust on both sides is extremely low, as one would expect. So it's going to be a long, hard process if indeed it advances significantly at all," the official said.
In addition to encouraging the Taliban to sever ties with Al Qaeda, detainee exchanges are also expected to be on the U.S-Taliban agenda, including the return of U.S. Army Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl.
"Yes. Clearly, we do want to get our soldier, Sergeant Bergdahl, back. And I would expect that detainee exchanges would be an item on the U.S.-Taliban agenda," an official said.
"That will be a discussion item. It's not something that is agreed to at this point, so it's a topic for the types of discussions that the U.S. will have with the Taliban," added another official. Senior administration officials hailed today as a "milestone on the path toward peace" but also tried to temper expectations. "We need to be realistic. This is a new development, a potentially significant development. But peace is not at hand," an official said.
This will not be the first time that U.S. and Taliban officials have engaged in talks. They have done so, albeit quietly, in the past.
Peace with honor.
It would be a tad bit inconsistent for the US to tell Israel it should talk to the Palestinians and then have the US refuse to talk to the Taliban.
QuoteOne thing we do believe is any insurgent group including the Taliban will need to accept an Afghan constitution that renounces ties to al Qaeda, ends violence, and is committed to protections [for] women and minorities in the country
Hrmmm...those do not seem like very concrete terms. It would be like Stalin agreeing to democracy in Poland.
Quote from: The Brain on June 18, 2013, 01:31:49 PM
Peace with honor.
Afghanization of the war effort seems complete :P
http://abcnews.go.com/International/us-hands-afghan-war-afghan-troops-12-years/story?id=19425730#Afghanistan
QuoteU.S. Hands Over Afghan War to Afghan Troops 12 Years After Invasion
It's arguably the biggest milestone since the war began as Afghan forces officially took over the country's security responsibilities from NATO forces today.
"This is a historic moment for our country and from tomorrow all of the security operations will be in the hands of the Afghan security forces," Afghan President Hamid Karzai said at the ceremony, held at the new National Defense University built to train Afghanistan's future military officers.
As the transition ceremony was taking place in Kabul, however, a large bomb exploded, killing at least three people and injuring dozens more, according to the Ministry of Interior. The blast was in the Pul-e-Surkh area of the western part of the city, which is miles away from the site of the handover ceremony attended by NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen.
The blast was the latest in a particularly fierce Taliban summer offensive this year.
With Afghans now in charge with their own security, it marks a major step in the almost 12 year war. In political jargon, they call it "taking the lead." In practical terms, here's what it means:
American and coalition troops will no longer plan, execute, or lead any missions. All combat decisions will be made by Afghan leaders. Afghans will be conducting all missions, requesting American assistance on the ground only when required. There will still be U.S. air support,, but jets will only be scrambled if Afghans specifically ask for it.
In a very literal sense, Americans will no longer be "on the front lines." In most cases, U.S. troops will pull back to bigger bases, where they will "advise" Afghan missions over the radio in real-time, rather than physically going out on patrol. In cases where Americans do go out on joint missions, they are under orders to let the Afghans engage the Taliban directly.
After more than a decade, American troops are no longer looking to pick a fight with the Taliban. That's now the job of the Afghan army.
Dozens of bases will be handed over to the Afghans in the coming months. Other bases that cannot be sustained under Afghan control will simply be dismantled.
It doesn't mean Americans are fully out of harm's way. Insider attacks will likely still occur, and American anti-IED teams will still go on dangerous patrols to clear highways of roadside bombs. But overall, a sharp decline is expected in the numbers of Americans that are killed.
This also opens up the possibility for American troops to fully withdraw sooner than expected, especially if Afghan forces prove over the summer that they can handle the Taliban on their own.
QuoteAfter more than a decade, American troops are no longer looking to pick a fight with the Taliban. That's now the job of the Afghan army.
I predict: this will end well.
Quote from: Valmy on June 18, 2013, 01:41:52 PM
QuoteAfter more than a decade, American troops are no longer looking to pick a fight with the Taliban. That's now the job of the Afghan army.
I predict: this will end well.
Well, let's have the Chinese take their turn before we pass final judgment. :P
Let's hope they transport all of the women out before they let the Taliban take over. :(
Quote from: merithyn on June 18, 2013, 01:46:07 PM
Let's hope they transport all of the women out before they let the Taliban take over. :(
Sure. They can all stay at your house.
Quote from: derspiess on June 18, 2013, 01:47:10 PM
Quote from: merithyn on June 18, 2013, 01:46:07 PM
Let's hope they transport all of the women out before they let the Taliban take over. :(
Sure. They can all stay at your house.
Better that than to leave them to the "mercy" of the Taliban. :mellow:
Quote from: merithyn on June 18, 2013, 01:46:07 PM
Let's hope they transport all of the women out before they let the Taliban take over. :(
Where to?
Quote from: merithyn on June 18, 2013, 01:48:05 PM
Better that than to leave them to the "mercy" of the Taliban. :mellow:
Better for them. Not sure you're ready for the non-stop ululating, though.
Quote from: merithyn on June 18, 2013, 01:48:05 PM
Better that than to leave them to the "mercy" of the Taliban. :mellow:
It is not like the men and children do much better under the Taliban.
Non-Pashtuns anyway.
Anyway I say we do what we should have done back in 2001. If the Taliban makes too many gains we can support the slightly less objectionable Afghans with airpower and special forces. Never should have put boots on the ground in that place...ah well.
Probably some kind of Red Wedding situation coming up.
Quote from: Valmy on June 18, 2013, 01:41:52 PM
QuoteAfter more than a decade, American troops are no longer looking to pick a fight with the Taliban. That's now the job of the Afghan army.
I predict: this will end well.
I wonder if Kabul will break Saigon's land speed record.
Then again the Taliban may not even bother with it, satisfied with the rest of the country.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 18, 2013, 02:13:57 PM
Then again the Taliban may not even bother with it, satisfied with the rest of the country.
The Taliban will not make much headway in the north where they have zero popular support.
Quote from: Valmy on June 18, 2013, 01:53:07 PM
Anyway I say we do what we should have done back in 2001. If the Taliban makes too many gains we can support the slightly less objectionable Afghans with airpower and special forces. Never should have put boots on the ground in that place...ah well.
The problem is that is what was done at the beginning of the operation. Quick history refresher. The US and the rest of us depend on the Northern Alliance to deal with the Taliban with the exception of providing some air power and some special forces (including Canadians).
The lack of boots on the ground allows the Taliban to escape into Pakistan.
We live with the results of that decision for over a decade as the West sends increasing numbers of troops to deal with Taliban incursions from the border regions.
There were already plenty of Taliban in Pakistan, and I'm not sure we'd have been able to provide enough boots to prevent the withdrawal.
The Taliban are a renewable resource, so long as their educational infrastructure and Pakistani backing stay in place.
Quote from: crazy canuck on June 18, 2013, 02:19:55 PM
The problem is that is what was done at the beginning of the operation. Quick history refresher. The US and the rest of us depend on the Northern Alliance to deal with the Taliban with the exception of providing some air power and some special forces (including Canadians).
The lack of boots on the ground allows the Taliban to escape into Pakistan.
We live with the results of that decision for over a decade as the West sends increasing numbers of troops to deal with Taliban incursions from the border regions.
LOL. No the Taliban was already well set up in Pakistan, being where they came from and all.
Quote from: derspiess on June 18, 2013, 02:22:40 PM
There were already plenty of Taliban in Pakistan, and I'm not sure we'd have been able to provide enough boots to prevent the withdrawal.
Maybe not entirely but it would have been more effective than 100 % withdrawal.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 18, 2013, 02:13:57 PM
Quote from: Valmy on June 18, 2013, 01:41:52 PM
QuoteAfter more than a decade, American troops are no longer looking to pick a fight with the Taliban. That's now the job of the Afghan army.
I predict: this will end well.
I wonder if Kabul will break Saigon's land speed record.
Then again the Taliban may not even bother with it, satisfied with the rest of the country.
Will Karzai or the next leader end up as Najibullah? He held for three years with some Soviet support all right but ended badly.
Declare Victory and Leave before it's too late?
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on June 18, 2013, 04:16:50 PM
Will Karzai or the next leader end up as Najibullah? He held for three years with some Soviet support all right but ended badly.
Declare Victory and Leave before it's too late?
Karzai's no fool. He & his cronies have built up a huge nest egg & will be on the first flight out of there to when things go to hell.
I think we need to negotiate a peace treaty with Taliban that will cement our victory, coat all the helicopter skids in grease, and get the fuck out.
Who are these people? Do they speak for the Taliban? Do they speak for all the Afghan Taliban? Do they speak for all the Taliban? Will Pakistan just create a new Taliban if this one realizes that we just want them to be happy, rich and peaceful? Will this end the conflict? Can this end the conflict? Will Karzai screw up the peace process just to keep pilfering the 90% of his GDP which is foreign aid? When they say peace do they mean the same thing that we mean when we say peace? What will happen to the Hazara? What will happen to women's rights? What will happen to the girls schools? What will happen to development aid projects? What will happen to the opium trade? What will happen to pre-islamic cultural artifacts? Are they any pre-islamic cultural artifacts left? How will the Tajiks react? How will the rest of the Afghans react when they realize we don't want the Tajiks screwed over? Do we care is the Tajiks are screwed over?
.. and I'm just starting.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on June 18, 2013, 02:24:07 PM
The Taliban are a renewable resource, so long as their educational infrastructure and Pakistani backing stay in place.
Yeah, and the policy of trying to bleed the North Vietnamese dry never worked either, though if I recall the casualties inflicted on them at one point were approaching half of the birth rate. :(
Quote from: Duque de Bragança on June 18, 2013, 04:16:50 PM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on June 18, 2013, 02:13:57 PM
Quote from: Valmy on June 18, 2013, 01:41:52 PM
QuoteAfter more than a decade, American troops are no longer looking to pick a fight with the Taliban. That's now the job of the Afghan army.
I predict: this will end well.
I wonder if Kabul will break Saigon's land speed record.
Then again the Taliban may not even bother with it, satisfied with the rest of the country.
Will Karzai or the next leader end up as Najibullah? He held for three years with some Soviet support all right but ended badly.
Declare Victory and Leave before it's too late?
We discussed this a year or so ago, can't find the thread, but I was of the opinion 18 months max.
I happen to think Karzai is so corrupt that he'll be one of those leaders who'll flee with a 'plane load' of gold, rather than see it out to the bitter end like say Bashir al-Assad, who seems determined to fight.
Quote from: mongers on June 18, 2013, 05:34:26 PM
Yeah, and the policy of trying to bleed the North Vietnamese dry never worked either, though if I recall the casualties inflicted on them at one point were approaching half of the birth rate. :(
This suggests that US policy in both Vietnam and in Afghanistan was "to bleed them dry," neither of which to my mind is accurate.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 18, 2013, 06:39:03 PM
Quote from: mongers on June 18, 2013, 05:34:26 PM
Yeah, and the policy of trying to bleed the North Vietnamese dry never worked either, though if I recall the casualties inflicted on them at one point were approaching half of the birth rate. :(
This suggests that US policy in both Vietnam and in Afghanistan was "to bleed them dry," neither of which to my mind is accurate.
:yes: The policy was to bleed
us dry.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on June 18, 2013, 06:39:03 PM
Quote from: mongers on June 18, 2013, 05:34:26 PM
Yeah, and the policy of trying to bleed the North Vietnamese dry never worked either, though if I recall the casualties inflicted on them at one point were approaching half of the birth rate. :(
This suggests that US policy in both Vietnam and in Afghanistan was "to bleed them dry," neither of which to my mind is accurate.
It doesn't.
:unsure:
I'm tired of these barbarians and the endless skirmishing. Fuck 'em.
Quote from: Valmy on June 18, 2013, 01:34:41 PM
QuoteOne thing we do believe is any insurgent group including the Taliban will need to accept an Afghan constitution that renounces ties to al Qaeda, ends violence, and is committed to protections [for] women and minorities in the country
Hrmmm...those do not seem like very concrete terms. It would be like Stalin agreeing to democracy in Poland.
There has apparently been quite a rift between al qaeda and the taliban for some time.
And Islamic fundamentalists they do claim to have women's rights, they just define them rather differently.
Quote from: derspiess on June 18, 2013, 01:52:28 PM
Quote from: merithyn on June 18, 2013, 01:48:05 PM
Better that than to leave them to the "mercy" of the Taliban. :mellow:
Better for them. Not sure you're ready for the non-stop ululating, though.
Xena! :wub:
Quote from: Tyr on June 18, 2013, 07:48:33 PM
And Islamic fundamentalists they do claim to have women's rights, they just define them rather differently.
Yep. Like how 'democracy' meant something very different to Stalin :P
Platitudes are not a good basis for a treaty.