U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

The Obama administration will start formal peace talks with the Taliban on Thursday in the Persian Gulf state of Qatar, the first direct political contact between them since early last year and the initial step in what the administration hopes will lead to a negotiated end to the protracted war in Afghanistan.

Afghan government representatives are not expected to attend the meeting. But U.S. officials said the United States wants to eventually hand over the process to Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his appointed peace council.

In a statement read live on television in Doha, the Qatari capital, a Taliban spokesman said that the militant group “never wants to pose harm to other countries from its soil” and that it was open to talking with other Afghans. Those pledges met U.S. conditions for opening a Taliban political office in Qatar.

President Obama called the agreement “a very early step,” describing it as a parallel process to “the transition that is taking place militarily in Afghanistan” as the U.S.-led international coalition hands over security control to the Afghan military and prepares to withdraw all combat troops by the end of next year.

“We anticipate there will be a lot of bumps in the road,” Obama said in remarks at the Group of Eight summit in Northern Ireland.
The U.S. delegation to the Taliban talks will be led by Douglas Lute, Obama’s chief adviser on Afghanistan, and James Dobbins, the State Department’s new special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.

U.S. officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe the sensitive dialogue, expect the Taliban delegation to be led by Mohammed Tayeb al-Agha, a senior aide to Pakistan-based group leader Mohammad Omar, and representatives of the Taliban’s political council.

**Far apart on final goals

**

For the moment, the opening of the office and the start of formal U.S.-Taliban talks appeared more symbolic than substantive, and the two sides remain far apart on their final objectives.

The U.S. goal is for the Taliban to publicly and substantively renounce ties with al-Qaeda, end violence in Afghanistan, recognize the Afghan constitution — including rights for minorities and women — and participate in the democratic process there.

The Taliban has demanded the withdrawal of all foreign troops from Afghanistan — including any residual forces the United States and NATO plan to leave after the 2014 withdrawal — and the release of all Taliban detainees. The detainees include five militants being held at the prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, whose release the Taliban has previously sought. The United States has turned over the bulk of its battlefield prisoners in Afghanistan to the Karzai government.

Under a tentative agreement reached in late 2011 before informal talks were abandoned, the United States had agreed to transfer the five Afghan Taliban prisoners from Guantanamo to supervised custody in Qatar in exchange for the release of Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, the only known U.S. service member being held by the militants.

(http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-to-relaunch-peace-talks-with-taliban/2013/06/18/bd8c7f38-d81e-11e2-a016-92547bf094cc_story.html)

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

Awwww.

Are these good Taliban or bad Taliban? You see America made friends with bad Taliban back in the 80s and called them good Taliban but the world is still not sure whether their new Taliban friends in 2013 are good or bad. As the all righty and mighty US has told us that they need the good Taliban to fight the evil of bad Taliban. With only America's trust and support, Taliban would be able to bring true democracy, equality, freedom and the age of enlightenment in Afghanistan. Yes the same cause, the poor old Yanks fought for long 12 years at the expense of killing tens of thousands of innocent people and billions and billions of dollars. In a way its kind of heartening to see America finally finding a trusted ally in Taliban, Lord knows they worked hard to bring peace and prosperity in the region. Somewhere in this world, the Russians are laughing hard.

Anyway...

So boys, who wants to be the first idiot to call Obama an "Islamist" and terrorist sympathizer or a terrorist in fact?

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

If you look at Tea Party web forums, they've been calling Obama an Islamist, secret-Muslim, and terrorist sympathiser/leader ever since he got elected.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

Since America starts it, it will make a lot of sense to those who were calling Nawaz Sharif a Taliban supporter because he talked about negotiation with Taliban.
For the same people first Iran gas pipeline was feasible but Nawaz Sharif being Taliban and hater of Shia Iran didn’t want to continue with this project in order make Saudi Arabia happy . But it made sense to them same way as America's made it clear to Pakistan that this project is not feasible for Pakistan.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

Talibans in Afghanistan & Pakistan have to be treated differently, no?

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

Oh the Irony!

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

Apparently Karzai is having a huge hissy fit over this. At a formal press conference in Doha on the peace talks, the Taliban referred to themselves by the name of their former government, the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. Karzai is freaking out that they are making themselves sound like a government-in-exile and is hilariously reacting by cancelling talks on the future of US troops in Afghanistan - troops who were going to be based there to ensure that his government was not overthrown by the Taliban.

It's like protesting about something by slitting your own wrists!

Edit : The peace talks are now over because of this. To mollify Karzai, the US will not attend.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

Karzai wants to be a part of the negotiations.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

Who is Karzai or US trying to fool here? These peace negotiations were being planned (and actually being carried being the closed doors) since a long long time, Karzai knew about it all along. This had been part of US' exit strategy and she isn't bothered to abandon it because Karazi decided to throw a last minute tantrum. At most, expect a little delay here and there but US handing everything back to Talibans will the final outcome of this lost and unwinnable war.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

taliban trying to trade a captured US soldier for five gitmo prisoners. karzai and qatar walay demand taliban take down their emirate of afghanistan flag from the office. its a bunch of drama, and more and more reasons on why these idiots can never ever be reasoned with.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

taliban strategy is clear. they will continue fighting until their country is clean of foreign invaders. same time they are joining the political process because they know how the world works. its not hard to reason with them. america is the one u cant reason with.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

The Taliban prisoner exchange was actually worded in a workable way - they were suggesting it as a confidence building measure for further negotiation.

The Karzai demand is a more serious and fundamental issue on why peace talk will not progress. Karzai wants the Taliban to recognise him as the legitimate government of Afghanistan, whereas they view themselves as the legitimate government (hence flying their old flag, and trying to act like a government embassy).

The two are mutually not compatible.

Karzai knows that the US knows that without NATO backing, his government will collapse, and the Taliban will win total victory, undermining the US vision for Afghanistan and giving the Taliban a better outcome than they could get through negotiation. Hence his tactic of threatening to end talks on the future of NATO troops in Afghanistan after 2014 is very effective.

As a result I don't see negotiations being possible or fruitful. However, given that NATO countries have strong domestic pressure to reduce involvement (in manpower and cost) in Afghanistan, I think that the post-2014 future looks clear.

1) NATO troops removed from all major bases in Afghanistan, except for special forces, training forces, and combat advisors.
2) NATO air power (including drones) relocated to Central Asian Republics that are opposed to a Taliban takeover of Afghanistan.
3) A repeat of the successful 2001 strategy of using overwhelming air support to enable the Taliban's opponents to win ground victories will be applied as the long-term strategy. This would enable to goal of preventing a Taliban takeover to be achieved, without the cost in lives or money of maintaining troops in country.
4) Preventing a Taliban takeover in this way would enable the US to save political face by arguing that it was not defeated and withdrew on its own terms that enabled its own goals to be achieved.
5) This would be disastrous for the Pakhtun areas of Afghanistan in general, because it would condemn them to a state of perpetual conflict. It would probably also push the Taliban to gather all available allies including Al-Qaeda once more to try and win, but judicious use of air and drone strikes would be applied to disrupt any militant activity once more.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

foreign invaders? you mean foreign invaders and locals that have a different idea of life than their cruel version of the shariah. because they clearly have no problems with arabs and chechens and other foreign invaders that are part of their brutal team. if they oppose democracy they only come to power via jiski lathi uski bhains system. the negotiations are for how they can be democratically represented in afghan leadership, but anyone reasonable would bet on a snowball in hell than over these animals permitting equality of citizens.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

foreigners killing your people vs foreigners helping u fight them off ..who the invaders?

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

afghanistan's history didnt begin the day US invaded. you would have to be very naive to think the taliban aided by their foreigner crew from the arab world and pakistan havent killed afghans to enforce their ruthless regime's writ. but given the kind of logic i have seen in play from "muslims" on the syria thread, you guys just believe whatever fits your narrow viewpoints..

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

yes they killed afghans. ur point is? invasion is justified?

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

my point is, they are bad news for afghanistan, they are only being negotiated with because the US is done using afghanistan and want the easiest way out.

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

Which idiot are you talking about? The idiots who did not want to hold negotiations in first place? or the idiots whose pants are wet because of name of the country? or The idiots who were once here and now zero?

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

You forgot about the idiots who invested billions in 'infrastructure' and established 'consulates'; sure would hate to see their investments go down the tube with withdrawal of U.S. Troops. It's funny all around. US does a full 180 degrees, and daydreamers are having a fit. Damn the reality; who would've thought these days would have come this soon. Maybe the idiots should start to feed their own poor and not worry about Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan and its' future Government.

I repeat: Oh the Irony!

Re: U.S. to launch formal peace talks with Taliban

if this world lasts till next century, students of politics & history will read over the events of past history with utmost amusement & confusion.