White House Orders Direct Taliban Talks to Jump-Start Afghan Negotiations

After 17 years US finally decided they can't do anymore

No American administration can extricate itself from a war without claiming not just military victory but more importantly political victory. If it does so the party in power will suffer lingering domestic political consequences Both Republicans and Democrats are invested in Afghanistan, and neither party can fully exit without admitting political defeat on their watch. The US has mostly withdrawn it's troops from Iraq without political victory, burdening both Republicans and Democrats with an imperial defeat. It will ultimately have to do the same thing in Afghanistan. These are facts, but they pose political problems for the American empire for which there are no solutions.

AFGHANISTAN HAS NEVER BEEN DEFEATED. So in seeking to extricate ourselves, the question is, How will we accomplish "peace with dignity" in dealing with a group of terrorist extremists like the Taliban? Forget about human rights altogether, leave alone equal rights for women and adequate nutrition, housing and learning for children.

Well! Finally, at least ten years after it was obvious we couldn't win this war with more bombs and guns, someone wants to try another way. The irony is that it's the Trump Administration, riddled with graft and incompetence, making the shift.

If you can't win it in 17 years, increase the military budget, then get out.

This chicken hawk war has devolved into the one thing we wouldn't do that precipitated this tragic loss of lives by the GOP barcalounger wanna be men sitting safely at home, talk with the Taliban. Yet all those chicken hawks still live on, one painting portraits of the soldiers he condemned.

It's about time that someone got some brains.. You cannot work anything out with a rival if you don't talk. So far it's been like 12 year-old kids, "I'm not talking to you!". Grow up!

One has to fear that Benedict Donald will betray us to anyone with Russian support.

Let's pretend Afghanistan is relevant and not Syria, let's pretend.

I commend the Trump administration's attempt to take this directly to the Taliban. At some point, you have to look at the enemy directly in the eye. However, we are fooling ourselves to think that this will achieve much. The gorilla in the room remains the Pakistani military establishment and the ISI. These are the institutions that gave birth to the Taliban and have been their backbone and support. Their relationship is so close that one can say that American deaths in Afghanistans are the work of the Pakistani military establishment. The Pakistanis will claim that they too have suffered, blah, blah. However, the entire survival of the Pakistani military establishment which has been the de facto rulers of Pakistan depends on their control of the Taliban. With that and the support of terrorism in Kashmir, they can keep their game going. The Trump administration has been upfront with the Pakistanis but much more needs to be done to straighten them out. They are the primary cause of Islamic terror in the region.

And so it goes with the Great American Raj...Invasion, Occupation, Destruction...and now, Negotiations

Lets forget about Afghanistan and lets hope Trump could bring our young men and young ladies home after 17 years of fighting for what? About 2,000 years ago the Chinese emperor sent a Chinese military delegation to Afghanistan and trying to find out more about that remote isolated region. General Zhang Qian, the head of the delegation reported to the emperor that China should stay out and don't get involved with that region because there were so many tribes and no one really played a leading role in that region. And China has been stayed out from Afghanistan until today. We should have learned from the China experience. Soviet wasted 10 years time to tame Afghanistan and failed and we jumped in the big hole for 17 years now. It is about time for us to wake up and get out from South/Central Asia and Middle East and let them fight among themselves. Do we know what is Taliban? Leave them alone.

There seems to be possible political change in Pakistan. Recent Pakistan leader charged with corruption and preventing from continuing in power. Perhaps Imran Khan will win the leadership backed by the Pakistan military. As he says it is Pakistan's military not a foreign one. The northwest tribal area has been legally integrated into Pakistan law instead of the previous British colonial law. This can change the power of the Afghan Taliban in the tribal area of Northwest Pakistan to hide out and affect insurgency in south Afghanistan. Yes Afghanistan is ethnically divided between North and South-Uzbeks and Tajiks in the North and Pastuns in the South. Taliban is more affiliated with the Pastuns.

After 17 years of war that has served no purpose except to enrich corrupt politicians and military contractors while killing far too many US and Afghan citizens, perhaps it would show more wisdom to simply declare victory and bring our troops home. Nothing will be served by continuing this fiasco.

Please send our great, "Deal Maker" King Trump to meet with the Taliban directly. He can take Air Force one there alone and meet privately with them. No need for the secret service or armed guards to accompany him. He alone will end all fighting and the Taliban will surrender.

How , in the name of god, are we still asking members of our armed forces to risk their lives in this travesty ?

You can make the friends if you are willing to listen to the other people. Josip Broz Tito, the leader of ex-Yugoslavia, singlehandedly modernized the Arab world from Egypt and Libya to Syria and Iraq without a war or any soldier present in Cairo, Tripoli, Damascus or Baghdad. He motivated the local leaders to voluntarily improve the Arab world, treat the women fairly, build the strong civil society, create modern educational system and marginalize the radical preachers. The Arab countries joined the non-aligned movement under Tito leadership. Not only that the Arabs followed Tito but even a North Korean leader. Just find the old videos of the welcome the Koreans organized to honore him during the official visit to Pyongyang. Do you know when the Iraq-Iran war broke out? Three months after Tito’s death… You don’t have to beat up anybody to follow you, but just to listen to them and understand their needs… We should teach our military leaders about Tito’s strategies, policies, maneuvering and achievements. If we had the same skill set, we wouldn’t have waged the longest war in our national history… Tito was equally attractive to the Yugoslav Christians, including both the Greek Orthodox and the Catholics, the Bosnian Muslims, the Arab Muslims, the India Hindus, the Korean Buddhists, or the Chinese communists, without any ability to bribe or threaten them… You can make a bunch friends by simply talking to the people and trusting them…

Those talks are 17 years late. The negotiations should have been conducted before the war ever started. Everybody knew that the Al Qaeda was the terrorist organization behind the 9/11/2001 attacks. Everybody knew that it was manned, led, organized and financed by the Arab Sunni Wahhabis, not by the Afghan people or their local militia. Osama bin Laden was a Saudi citizen and Al Zawahiri an Egyptian. Even the radical ideology was created in those two countries. The fatwa that authorized the terrorist attacks was issued by a Saudi cleric, not by the Afghan one. The longest war in the US history is the catastrophic failure of our intelligence services that failed to inform the American public about the aforementioned facts. Bush and Cheney were embarrassed to point out at the Saudi Arabia and Egypt because those were our alleged allies. They wanted to prevent disclosure of the facts that the radical Wahhabism was conceived and created by our intelligence agencies in the fifties in attempt to preempt the spread of socialist ideology across the Middle East and modernization of the Arab world. That’s why the war on terrorism swerved into the battle with socialist ideology. What do Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya have in common?All of them had the socialist regimes in power at one moment in history . The problem is that a socialist society was the best obstacle to spread of radical fundamentalism. The war on terrorism ended up as the war on socialism. What a tragedy!

And Its only a trillion dollars of our tax payers money later... Yet we kick old people to the street if they get sick. Close schools, complain about teachers salaries being too high, gripe about tax dollars for Psychiatric care for our citizen. I could go on and on. But this waste is acceptable. Its fine. Lets do a trillion more.. oh wait... theres how much unaccounted for????

About time!

Those talks are 17 years late. The negotiations should have been conducted before the war ever started. Everybody knew that the Al Qaeda was the terrorist organization behind the 9/11/2001 attacks. Everybody knew that it was manned, led, organized and financed by the Arab Sunni Wahhabis, not by the Afghan people or their local militia. Osama bin Laden was a Saudi citizen and Al Zawahiri an Egyptian. Even the radical ideology was created in those two countries. The fatwa that authorized the terrorist attacks was issued by a Saudi cleric, not by the Afghan one. The longest war in the US history is the catastrophic failure of our intelligence services that failed to inform the American public about the aforementioned facts. Bush and Cheney were embarrassed to point out at the Saudi Araba and Egypt because those were our alleged allies. They wanted to prevent disclosure of the facts that the radical Wahhabism was conceived and created by our intelligence agencies in attempt to preempt the spread of socialist ideology across the Middle East and modernization of the Arab world. That’s why the war on terrorism swerved into the battle with socialist ideology. What do Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya have in common? All of them had at one moment in history the socialist regimes in power. The problem is that a socialist society was the best obstacle to spread to radical fundamentalism. The war on terrorism ended up as the war on socialism.

We could label these face-saving talks the 2018 Paris Peace Accords, and have them take place at the Hotel Majestic in Paris. Seems appropriate for losing a war once won: Any guerrilla war that sustains itself has long been defined as one that is winning. This war was allowed to sustain itself by removing needed assets at the war's early culmination, allowing a defeated enemy to regroup, resupply, and re-infiltrate.

If we had any other administration in place, I might say this is an idea worth pursuing, albeit cautiously. However, with Mr. Trump blaming America, Britain and the EU when he should be chastising Russia, I am leery. We can't trust Mr. Trump and his administration to act in the best interests of America or Afghanistan.

Two thoughts on this article: One is that when one side in a war like this says that it wants to negotiate peace -- that is a confession to the world that that side is losing or at least has no hope of winning. The same thing happened in Vietnam. Of course, in this situation the message to our adversaries, Taliban or Viet Cong, is to hang on and keep fighting or drag out the peace process. We are on the way out so if they hang on long enough they will get a very favorable peace settlement or trump might give up and leave. The second thought is how the public and politicians will react to this news. If the Obama administration had proposed this there would have been howls of rage from the right; I expect to hear trump supporters talking about the wisdom of this new approach to peace. It is a strange situation. Trump cannot do anything dumb enough or malicious enough to cause his supporters to turn on him. Of course, our foreign policy is so muddled and confused I am not sure if it makes any difference what we do. I hope that everyone will work to minimize the lose of life by soldiers and civilians. I suppose that trump is in a hurry to get out of Afghanistan so that he can start a war with Iran.

If we are going to negotiate with the Taliban, we may as well just pull out. The reason we are there in the first place is that the Taliban were providing safe havens for terrorists. If we recognize them as the legitimate rulers of Afghanistan, why would they do anything different this time around?

It's about time. The military has been making a nonsense of Afghanistan for 16 years now and offering bad advice to a succession of US regimes. Talks leading to withdrawal are essential. The US strategy here has wrongly assessed the situation and has no clear idea of what to do. It can only lose in the longer term - no other result is even possible. What started off as regime change and counter-terrorism quickly morphed into counter-insurgency. Actually, it is none of these things now. It's a civil war with the Taliban against the Northern provinces. The Taliban are never going to go away - it's their country - and the US presence is helping to drive their agenda. Once again - as in Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya etc. - US foreign policy ignorance and the pathetic group-think of a feeble State Department have taken the US down the wrong road and led to untold human misery without end. Next time, just stay at home. Can't believe it's Trump who's leading this one. If it is, he's right.

The Taliban are winning. We... well, our Afhgan client government is losing It's generally not productive to negotiate if you're losing a war. If you're winning, why not? We asked the North Vietnamese to negotiate from the beginning. They agreed in 1968. They negotiated for six years and came out fine.

it's pretty clear after all these years that pakistan is a rat's nest of double-dealing . . . various hierarchies (tribal, linguistic, religious, political, economic) are engaged in a dynamic process without a comprehensive overview or goal-setting . . .lying, cheating, and double-crossing -- all in the name of loyalty to one's hierarchy -- are not only excused, but encouraged . . . there's no way we can deal with such a snake-infested swamp . . . if the u.s. and nato withdraw unilaterally from afghanistan, we'll likely see that country once again descend into territorial warlordism . . . we should be prepared to lend covert or overt support to whichever side seems to be the least threatening to us, in the hopes of returning to the situation that obtained when osama bin laden arrived, where factions essentially cancel each other out . . . and cut off all support for pakistan . . . our only friend in the region is india, with all of its faults still a legitimate democracy and one with a long-term economic interest in working with us . . . the muslim-dominated countries are well beyond our ability to influence and beyond their own ability to form rational coordinated action for their common benefit . . .

17 years?! Get out, exit, leave, close that door, now! We have no business there. Oh I almost forgot, we do. Natural resources for private industries.

If we have backed off from pressuring Pakistan as the article implies, then the peace talks will be definitely be UNSUCCESSFUL. DO NOT give any financial or military help to Pakistan. ZERO!! PERIOD!! They have been the bigggest reason why Taliban has NOT and can NOT be defeated. We must also make sure that during or because of any peace negotiations we do NOT make our most reliable allies in Afghanistan, the Northern Alliance of Ahmad Shah Masud, weak. They MUST be made strong to be the bulwork against the Taliban or else you would have the old situation of Taliban Government again.

Why in God's name did this take so long to figure out? Such a policy was stock in trade when the Brits and Russia played The Great Game.

After the immense of sacrifice in money and US Soldiers' lives, it is disgusting to see almost a half-million Afghan men--all draft dodgers or deserters mosts probably--living off taxpayer money in Europe, working a pathetic "asylum" claim, and crying that if they return the Taliban will get them. The Taliban number less than 30000. Utterly disgusting, but these "men" have no qualms about working this scam. Cut this country loose. The women might be worth the sacrifice made so far, but the men know only corruption, misogyny, and lies--and the longer the US stays around to allow them to work their swindle, the better. How much of the billions dumped into this country are now sitting in Banks in Qatar, stolen by Karzai and his extended clan/mafia. Trusting any Afghan government (or Pakistani) is stupid. Negotiate, but make sure all the criminals Pakistan is hiding get taken out.

This guy has sided with Russia, North Korea, Nazis, and now the Taliban... And still his base calls him a patriot? Blue State secession may be our only way out of this deplorable mess...

Apparently we do negotiate with terrorists. Strange that old ladies and children immigrating from south of our border are dangerous vermin that must be eradicated, but "radical Islamic terrorists" (is it just me, or has Trump retired that favorite phrase of late?) are not. What exactly is the goal here? What was Bush's goal when we stationed troops in Afghanistan 15 years ago? Does anybody know what the hell is going on?

Direct talks with North Korea worked out great; the North Korea nuclear threat is over ....(only in Donald's empty head) Direct talks with Russia worked out great; Putin gave Donald his annual performance evaluation and Vlad taught Donald how to have more fake elections. Direct talks with Canada and European allies worked out great; Donald told them to all get lost. The Art of Disaster....by Donald Trump.

Excellent direction in seeking out a diplomatic resolution. I am pleased at this approach.

After NATO, NAFTA, the Pac Trade Agreement, the Paris Accord, North Korea, and every 10 minutes on Mr. Trump's Twitter account, I now cringe whenever I read that the Trump Administration was to initiate "talks."

Only political solution in Afghanistan. There is no military remedy in that part of the world. Look at the history of this rugged land starting from Alexander the Great in 327 BC.

The population of Afghanistan might feel quite differently about giving concessions to the Taliban, that has murdered so many of them.

So many "what ifs" in Afghanistan. At first, all our enemies in the region and around the world were quite impressed and fearful that with such a light footprint and in such short order we could go across the globe and dispose of the Taliban, send them into Pakistan and surround bin Laden, et al in Tora Bora. What if Bush had let our forces have free reign on capturing bin Laden at Tora Bora rather than insist on Afghan participation and input? What if we pulled out after accomplishing that kill/capture mission? What if no Iraq campaign? Well, if we're destine to "lose" or backfill or whatever its called in Afghanistan, we might as well get it over with and get out, let Trump claim its a "beautiful thing and we'll see what happens" and save lives, limbs, misery and lots of money.

So, unlike Obama who tried to force Afghans to take over, Trump is making one last effort before declaring "no threat from Afghanistan" and simply pulling out and cutting funding, rerunning circa 1990 after Russia pulled out. When the Taliban takes over, Trump will blame Obama. Only Trump can fix things.

Appalling!!. These people are the ones who condone stoning, cutting off hands for stealing, honor killings, beheadings, etc. They want to go back to the good old middle ages days. I don't agree with staying in Afghanistan but can't imagine participating in negotiations with the Taliban because they insist we be at the table? Is that really our best and only option? The Soviet Union was in Afghanistan for many years and, in the end, just packed up and left. Why aren't we doing the same thing?

Sounds like the timing is right for a negotiation process to begin ... let's pray that there is light at the end of this long, dark tunnel ...

Declare Victory and buy the annual opium crops.

This will surely cause an immediate eruption from the political right. Just is it did when President Obama said he would be willing to talk with the Taliban. Right wing media excoriated Obama for his comments. They said that Obama's position that the US should be out of Afdghanistan rendered talks useless. Charles Krauthammer on FoxNews said, "The Taliban understand exactly what's going to happen. If the allies, the West is going to leave, the war will resume, and they assume they will ultimately defeat the government already in Kabul. So they have no incentive to concede anything." The Right considered then-President Obama weak and naive to suggest action. They surely will erupt with similar criticism of now-President Trump with the same charges. Right?

The White House belongs to the American people. It does not belong to the corrupt crony capitalist corporate plutocrat oligarch welfare House of Trump organized crime family that is profiting from temporary occupation of our White House. Mar-a-Lago or Bedminster, Trump Tower New York City and Trump International Hotel D.C would be more accurate and apt about who is ordering what and upon whose behalf they are acting here. While not all Pashtun are Taliban, the Taliban are all Pashtun. And while the Pashtun are a plurality of Afghans most Pashtun live in Pakistan where they are mere 15% minority. Afghans have been burying empires from the days of Alexander the Great through the British and Soviet empires to America awaiting it's turn. The Taliban did not attack America on 9/11/01. Nor has it done so nor threatened to do so since.

Anyone who has taken the effort to read Steve Coll's magnificent history of this debacle in "Directorate S" will know that this has been tried before and failed. Its failure is a by-product of the conflicting objectives and power relationships between the Taliban, Pakistan, the puppet government and the Americans. I have no doubt that the onetime congressman from Kansas can do that which his more able predecessors could not achieve. I say that because the onetime reality TV star president and the Kansas congressman would go to Kissinger's playbook for Vietnam. The playbook is a classic and it fits Trump's approach to everything: have a meeting, lie about the outcome, declare victory but always making sure that the real plan is to cut and run. A very important part of the cut and run plan is to abandon locally engaged staff and allies. I predict this will work because: it has in the past in similar circumstances, and it is well within the scope of this administration's competence. So yeah, declare victory, bury the defeat and go home. You guys never finish anything serious that you start.

Does any thinking person believe that the Taliban would abide by any agreement they made? They are a bunch of psychopathic killers eager to return to the dark ages. They and their ilk need to be exterminated. No one has ever succeeded in Afghanistan and the U.S, never will. Sooner or later, no matter what they agree to, the Taliban will conquer all.

As with any idea (word used loosely) coming from this administration, there are two components to weigh. 1. Is the idea solid in general? 2. Is the idea solid given who will be implementing it? I hate to be this way, but thanks to the last 18 months, my reflexive response to anything is that if Team Trump is in charge, something undesirable or unintended will probably result. Everything the man touches turns to... let's just say it goes south.

The Russians failed to subdue the Taliban, thanks in no small part to Charlie Wilson and friends (sorry Dems but I get that it was "anticommunist move", like Vietnam). So the US inherited the hot seat, and it goes on and on. Negotiating is usually a great move for graduate-level politicians on both sides who have some motivation to be involved in civilized international affairs, but in this case, with Trump's White House being fundamentally bad at negotiating anything, anywhere, with anyone, and an immovable object in the Taliban, this effort is not likely to go anywhere. Maybe that's what Trump is doing right now with his friend and fellow autocrat, Mr. Putin; deciding on joint operations to tame the Wild East.

Direct talks certainly couldn't hurt so long as Trump doesn't do the negotiating. If he were to try making a "deal" with the Taliban he'd end up calling them "great people," dismissing their misogyny ("I've seen your women; they BELONG in burkas") and handing them Afghanistan on a silver platter. "So they've killed some people. Are we so perfect?"

Well, I guess we lost another mis-guided war. Thank you GOP.

Trump sees no out. Taliban will talk but not capitulate. The U.S. stays forever. Case closed.

It's about time Washington stopped incinerating taxpayer dollars in this fundamentalist Sunni Muslim hellhole. More than enough has already been spent. Too many American service men have already died. Could the bipartisan empire-builders in the Capital actually be so clueless as to believe they can bring "peace and democracy" (their usual cynical excuse for military intervention) to a Bronze Age society that is, remarkably, even more socially regressive and backward than Saudi Arabia?

Our military involvement in Afghanistan since 2001 seems to have accomplished nothing of consequence, so what is the point in not negotiating with the Taliban and withdrawing? What US interests are at stake? We supposedly went there to find and do in Osama bin Laden -- who finally got snuffed in Pakistan. The real reason, so I have read elsewhere, was to create conditions favorable to building an oil and/or gas pipeline from the Caspian area fields, across Afghanistan to the port of Karachi, for export to refineries elsewhere. That idea, one would assume, has been abandoned.