A U.S.-Taliban Deal Hinges on Reducing Violence. It Might Work Like This.

As a start, all sides are supposed to halt attacks for one week — mostly. It’s not a full cease-fire, and even then it may be difficult to do.

Comments: 15

  1. I have a friend deploying to Afghanistan soon. We were only 7 and 5 when the U.S. invaded the country after 9/11. We're now 26 and 24. I imagine there's folks "on the other side" that were similar ages when the war started. Hopefully it ends soon.

  2. Deal? With whom? The problem with the Taliban is not in Afghanistan, it is in Pakistan. All of Taliban's arms, training, support - comes from the Pakistani military (whom we supply with cash and arms). Had we sent troops to Islamabad instead of Kabul, and demilitarized them, we would have had peace in Afghanistan by now. We would have also prevented another problem that we don't seem to think exists. Pakistan is now fully occupied by Chinese troops dressed as irregulars, pretending to work on road, rail, and port facilities. It is Chinese labor, answering to Chinese bosses, that are building the silk road, rail, ports in Pakistan. If they pick up their gun tomorrow, Pakistan becomes a Chinese province by tea time. Every major Pakistani asset (such as its airline, its rail stock, its ports) is now owned by China. We didn't intend this, but we have produced a far bigger problem in the region by our failure to recognize the real problem. The best thing we can do is to stop talking, pack what we can, and get the heck out.

  3. I don't doubt something will be signed soon. Trump wants something to brag about and the Taliban wants any opposition to leave so they can take total control. Both Trump and the Taliban have zero credibility, so the only thing left to negotiate is the terms on paper so Trump can blame the Taliban when the wheels fall off the day after the US leaves.

  4. It appears we are negotiating from a weak position when we cannot even get a complete cease-fire for a week. This does not help Afghans and NATO troops who will be in areas not covered by the somewhat-cease-fire. It probably does not matter in the end -- the Taliban will probably renew an offensive to topple the government as soon as NATO troops are withdrawn.

  5. Good luck with that. How many times will these "attempts" at "peace" talks actually be vetted?

  6. There is nothing productive for us left to do in Afghanistan or Iraq for that matter, bring the troops home. These folks have to figure things out for themselves. I'm fed up with criticism of "unrealistic Medicare for all" while trillions are poured into useless wars without a peep from either party. Enough!

  7. @CacaMera I would politely counter: Ending the war in Afghanistan right now is intended to boost Trump's reelection chances. The President has absolutely no intention of expanding Medicare, ever. To the contrary, his most recent budget request once again expands the military dramatically. We need to stop fighting endless wars. However, I encourage you to consider the political elements in these decisions. Human well-being is not a consideration in Trump's decision making. The Afghan government is withholding prisoners in order to prevent retaliatory rape from Taliban soldiers against Afghan women. An assurance the Taliban refuses to provide. Would you rather have our troops home? Or would you rather have a new variation of ISIS child brides? I know which service is voluntary.

  8. We created the mess and the lunacy that made some filthy richer

  9. Afghanistan has not seen peace without marauding and looting others for centuries. How can we expect suddenly the most warlike and medieval tribes like Taliban to sit down and negotiate and then keep their word? At best keep your airbases and a small protection force and let the local wolves play. Yes, it would be a big help if we can keep Pakistanis out of it.

  10. So the Taliban just have to play nice for a week or so and after the US troops leave, the bloodbath begins. MAGA indeed!

  11. Afghans should be extremely concerned about surrendering leverage. Trump is hanging them out to dry. He wants a deal signed now. He needs the talking point as campaign leverage. Trump is absolutely throwing the Afghan government under the bus for his own political gain. Nixon at least pretended he wasn't so shameless. If I were the Afghan leadership, I would participate politely in the minimum amount of formalities to maintain standing with the US. I would then throw the problem right back in Trump's face. Preferably at a key moment in the election season. Oh? So you thought the war was over when you sold us out? Wrong answer Trump.

  12. Enough. Declare " Peace With Honor " and leave. It sufficed in Vietnam.

  13. Here's a good review of our Afghanistan war during Obama administration. Trump's foreign policy is not all that different than Obama's with the exception of his idiotic moves against Iran. Obama withstood all sorts of pressure and prevailed. Trump is bought with campaign contributions, and he lacks the historical and regional knowledge his predecessor had. But deep down, they both believed (and so do I) that these wars are not winnable and we are just spitting in the wind. https://millercenter.org/president/obama/foreign-affairs The military industrial complex by way of Congress will continue to whine, voters need to make their opinions clear to their representatives.

  14. It seems a cut and run. A repeat of Vietnam after what was an orgy of incompetence

  15. Just pull the band-aid off the scab and leave. I'm tired of the spilling of American blood in conflicts that do not threaten our national security interests. We have been fighting this conflict for 19 years now. Let the Afghans defend themselves from the Taliban, ISIS, the Haqqani network and all others that want to exist in this war torn nation. Enough!