Can Taliban Founder’s Release Spark Afghan Peace?

Carmen Gentile, Defense One
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Carmen Gentile, Defense One
Oct. 3, 2013, 10:02 a.m.

Now that Pakistan has re­leased Mul­lah Ab­dul Gh­ani Baradar, the Taliban’s deputy com­mand­er and found­ing mem­ber spec­u­la­tion is grow­ing over wheth­er Afgh­anistan’s most not­able mil­it­ant would fi­nally come to the ne­go­ti­at­ing table for peace talks. 

Is­lamabad says it re­leased Baradar on Sept. 21 to prompt fur­ther talks between the Taliban and the Afghan gov­ern­ment. His re­lease was her­al­ded by some Afghan of­fi­cials as the key to get­ting talks back on track. Afghan Pres­id­ent Ham­id Kar­zai was a vo­cal ad­voc­ate for Barader’s re­lease for more than a year in hopes that it could end dec­ades of blood­shed. 

While Kar­zai at­tempts to re-en­gage the Taliban, however, Wash­ing­ton ap­pears to be tak­ing a wait-and-see ap­proach on wheth­er Baradar will play any role in fu­ture talks. James Dob­bins, Wash­ing­ton’s spe­cial en­voy for Afgh­anistan and Pakistan, re­cently said that fu­ture talks should take place “prin­cip­ally between the Afghan High Peace Coun­cil and the Taliban,” and that the United States would like to “see Doha be­come a for­um for ne­go­ti­ations about peace in Afgh­anistan.” Wheth­er Baradar would be in­vited to such meet­ings is still un­cer­tain. 

After be­ing cap­tured three years ago and held in Pakistan, Baradar’s clout among Taliban com­mand­ers and fight­ers has di­min­ished, ac­cord­ing to Afgh­anistan ana­lysts. The group is frac­tured, they say, among com­mand­ers like Baradar that want to ne­go­ti­ate peace and those that would rather con­tin­ue the fight. 

For now, the Taliban of­fice in Doha ap­pears more con­cerned with the re­lease of five ad­di­tion­al Taliban com­mand­ers from mil­it­ary de­ten­tion in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The group has all but writ­ten off Baradar as a play­er in fu­ture talks due to his ex­ten­ded de­tain­ment in Pakistan, es­sen­tially re­leg­at­ing him to the scrap heap of has-been com­mand­ers un­fa­mil­i­ar with the cur­rent state of af­fairs in Afgh­anistan.

But Pakistan, out­raged by Baradar’s de­cision to ne­go­ti­ate peace with Ka­bul, still fears his in­flu­ence. Is­lamabad was in­stru­ment­al in cre­at­ing the Taliban fol­low­ing the So­viet with­draw­al from Afgh­anistan as a way to pre­vent Afgh­anistan from re­form­ing its strong ties with In­dia.

“One of the prob­lems is we don’t know where he (Baradar) stands now and we don’t know where his status is in the move­ment,” said Bo­ston Uni­versity pro­fess­or Thomas Bar­field, au­thor of sev­er­al books on Afgh­anistan and whose cur­rent re­search fo­cuses on prob­lems of its polit­ic­al de­vel­op­ment. Bar­field ques­tioned wheth­er Baradar still held sway over Taliban lead­ers after his long in­car­cer­a­tion since many with­in the Taliban and the Pakistani gov­ern­ment are adam­antly op­posed to peace ne­go­ti­ations with Ka­bul, and in par­tic­u­lar with Kar­zai. 

Baradar may also have garnered the wrath of Pakistan be­cause he wanted to move ahead with talks without Is­lamabad’s dir­ect in­volve­ment, said Bar­field, a po­s­i­tion which lead to Baradar’s cap­ture and im­pris­on­ment in Pakistan. He also ques­tioned wheth­er any fu­ture talks would bear fruit con­sid­er­ing re­cent and his­tor­ic­al fail­ures to ne­go­ti­ate with Afghan mil­it­ant lead­ers. The So­vi­ets couldn’t reach a peace set­tle­ment with the Mu­ja­hadeen be­cause of the frac­tured lead­er­ship in that move­ment. Once the oc­cupy­ing forces left Afgh­anistan, civil war among the fight­ers di­vided along eth­nic and tri­bal lines and cre­ated the con­di­tions — with ample sup­port from Pakistan — for the as­cend­ency of the Taliban and the cre­ation of a to­tal­it­ari­an Is­lam­ic re­gime. 

“There has nev­er been a power-shar­ing gov­ern­ment in Afghan polit­ics,” said Bar­field. “Those people play a zero-sum game.”

Ahmad Majidy­ar, an Afgh­anistan schol­ar at the Amer­ic­an En­ter­prise In­sti­tute, is even more skep­tic­al of Baradar’s value to any fu­ture peace talks and the value of those dis­cus­sions to­ward end­ing the vi­ol­ence in Afgh­anistan. Majidy­ar noted there are “some frac­tions in the Taliban lead­er­ship coun­cil” that would make a con­sensus on peace talks ex­tremely dif­fi­cult. Even if some mem­bers like Baradar were to par­ti­cip­ate, their in­flu­ence on the move­ment would be lim­ited in terms of po­ten­tial cease­fires or a fi­nal end to hos­til­it­ies. “He has lost that power and le­git­im­acy he once had.” 

The great­er ques­tion is wheth­er fu­ture meet­ings in Doha would lead to sus­tain­able peace. Any talks would have to ad­dress polit­ic­al power shar­ing with the Taliban and hav­ing them en­ter­ing the elect­or­al pro­cess as a party, not an armed mil­it­ant move­ment. “When it comes to elec­tions, the Taliban don’t be­lieve in them,” said Majidy­ar. 

The mere men­tion of power shar­ing and peace talks is mak­ing many Afghans nervous. Afgh­anistan’s war­lords, primar­ily of Uzbek and Tajik des­cent, are already ramp­ing up for a po­ten­tial civil war against the Taliban once the U.S. mil­it­ary sends most of its U.S. forces home by the end of 2014. Afghan ci­vil­ians also are wor­ried that a civil war is in­ev­it­able once Afghan Na­tion­al Se­cur­ity Forces as­sume full re­spons­ib­il­ity for se­cur­ity, fear­ing that rank-and-file of the coun­try’s sol­diers and po­lice­men will splinter in­to their re­spect­ive tri­bal and eth­nic af­fil­i­ations, tak­ing their arms and train­ing with them. 

In that event, the Taliban will surely ab­sorb the ma­jor­ity of Pash­tun de­fect­ors, fur­ther strength­en­ing their ranks and bol­ster­ing their case for either a power-shar­ing agree­ment with Ka­bul or an out­right re­turn to lead­ing a hard­line, Is­lam­ic theo­cracy – in ef­fect eras­ing whatever se­cur­ity gains the Pentagon could claim from wa­ging the dec­ade-long Afgh­anistan war. 

Peace talks, wheth­er they hap­pen or not, play on every Afghan’s grow­ing con­cern about the fu­ture, said Majidy­ar, though the hys­teria around them is most ad­vant­age­ous to party least de­sir­able to the West. 

“The only ones that be­ne­fit from peace talks is the Taliban,” he said.

Re­prin­ted with per­mis­sion from De­fense One. The ori­gin­al story can be found here.

What We're Following See More »
BIPARTISAN SUPPORT YIELDS 87 VOTES IN FAVOR
Senate OKs Perdue as Agriculture Secretary
32 minutes ago
WHY WE CARE

It took long enough, but the Trump administration finally includes an Agriculture secretary. "The Senate easily approved Sonny Perdue on Monday" by a count of 87-11. Perdue enjoyed the support of Democrats like Delaware's Chris Coons and Wisconsin's Tammy Baldwin, both of whom spoke in his favor.

Source:
ANOTHER ETHICAL THICKET
State Department Highlights Mar-a-Lago in Advertisement
32 minutes ago
THE DETAILS

"A media arm of the State Department is using federal resources to promote President Donald Trump’s private Florida golf club, fueling scrutiny of the nexus between the president’s official duties and his personal financial interests." On April 4, "Share America, the State Department’s social media-friendly news website, paid homage to Trump’s Mar-a-Lago club ... hailing the president’s use of 'the winter White House, as Share America dubbed it, to host world leaders."

Source:
NOT WORRIED ABOUT BUDGET NEUTRALITY
Trump Wants to Slash Corporate Rate to 15%
17 hours ago
THE LATEST
PROMISES “MASSIVE” CUTS
Trump Tax Reform Package Coming Next Week
17 hours ago
THE LATEST

President Trump today said he'll be releasing his tax reformpacakge next week around the 100-day mark of his presidency. He promised that "businesses and individuals will receive a 'massive tax cut ... bigger I believe than any tax cut ever."

Source:
ONLY BROAD PRINCIPLES
Mulvaney: Tax Reform Details Won’t Be Released This Week
17 hours ago
THE LATEST

Despite President Trump's announcement that his tax reform proposal would be released this week, Office of Management and Budget Director Mick Mulvaney now says it will be ready in June. This week's announcement will be limited to "specific governing principles."

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login