• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

UK PM Brown to push for talks with Taliban?!!!!!!!!!!

CougarKing

Army.ca Fixture
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
360
No offence to anyone, but I just lost respect for Brown whatsoever for even thinking about this. At this point, I doubt the Taliban can be reasoned or negotiated with!

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,158042,00.html

Report: Brown Pushing Talks With Taliban
Military.com  |  By Bryant Jordan  |  December 12, 2007

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown is set to drop a bombshell on the White House, announcing a policy shift on Afghanistan that includes negotiating with the Taliban, according to a report in the The Independent.

The newspaper is reporting Dec. 12 that Brown believes it is time to open a dialogue with Afghanistan's former rulers. Brown's belief is that talking with the Taliban could help end combat in Afghanistan by developing consensus-building among tribal leaders, according to the report.


The paper cited an unidentified senior Downing Street official in saying Brown's intention to talk to the Taliban is part of a three-pronged approach to resolve the situation in Afghanistan. The plan also includes continued security assistance for the Afghan army and economic and political assistance.

As for talking with the Taliban,the source told the paper: "We need to ask who are we fighting? Do we need to fight them? Can we be talking to them?"

British senior government officials told the paper it was an error to see the Taliban as a unified organisation rather than as a disparate group of Afghan tribesmen, often farmers recruited at the end of the gun, infiltrated by foreign fighters. The aim is to divide the Taliban's local support from al-Qa'ida and militants from Pakistan.

Any dialogue with the former Afghanistan rulers is bound to draw resistance and criticism from Afghan President Hamid Karzai and also the White House, the paper reports, but says the new strategy is another attempt by Brown to distance himself from President Bush, as well as the policy adopted by Brown's predecessor, Tony Blair.
 
See my report on the very recent Peacebuilding in Afghanistan conference in Ottawa.

The people whom I regard as well informed, thoughtful, etc pretty much all agreed that sometime, somehow we must negotiate with some of the Taliban and some other hangers on. I heard most of those people, and that includes MGen Tim Grant and BGen Peter Atkinson, suggest that we could never "win" in Afghanistan, not, at least, in the way we usually use the word "win." There was general agreement - not a real consensus, though, I think, that negotiations must take place, eventually. As I mentioned in the report several people suggested that the goal of the 3D strategy is to get Karzai into a good better negotiating position.


Edit: hyperlink to Peacebuilding in Afghanistan fixed
 
Edward dahlink,

Your link to Peacebuilding in Afghanistan ist kaput.

:-[
 
I am aware that the Taliban are not a monolithic entity and that some are supposedly more "moderate", but I just don't think now is the time with the Taliban obviously resurgent and thus able to have a better negotiating position. Still, Campbell is right, eventually we do have to negotiate with some of them.



 
Cougardaddy, are you confident in your assertion that the Taliban is resurgent?

Which is more important as an indicator?  Acts of violence and criminality?  Or defections from the cause?  IIRC by some estimates as few as 2-300 terrorists kept the Brits engaged in Northern Ireland for the best part of 30 years.  Meanwhile people went to work, school, the shops .... and discussions were held (Maggie notwithstanding).
 
Kirkhill said:
Cougardaddy, are you confident in your assertion that the Taliban is resurgent?

Which is more important as an indicator?  Acts of violence and criminality?  Or defections from the cause?  IIRC by some estimates as few as 2-300 terrorists kept the Brits engaged in Northern Ireland for the best part of 30 years.  Meanwhile people went to work, school, the shops .... and discussions were held (Maggie notwithstanding).

My perception of the Afghanistan situation is obviously influenced by the media perception of the situation there as getting "worse"; but I admit that I have paid less attention to that front in the Global War on Terror and have not read the aforementioned threads here on Afghanistan.
 
How odd...  The BBC is quoting something considerably different - directly from the source:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7139736.stm

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has told MPs that forces are "winning the battle against the insurgency" in Afghanistan.
He said Britain and its coalition partners were "isolating and eliminating the leadership of the Taleban, not negotiating with them".

But he backed Afghan leaders' moves towards "political reconciliation" with ex-insurgents who renounce violence.

The current level of 7,800 troops would be maintained, said Mr Brown, as part of the UK's "long term commitment".

He also announced £450m development funding and more equipment for troops.

More on link...

TR
 
Here's one of the sources I checked- apparently the situtation has changed since this was posted last September.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2007/09/01/world/middleeast/20070901_AFGHAN_GRAPHIC.html#
 
O, to be in England.....

"There is a consensus among the parties in here that we continue to support the Afghan assault," he said.

"But what are you going to do to persuade British public opinion that this activity is necessary and right?"
From Teddy's BBC report.
 
Ruxpin,

Apparently, Gates might disagree with the BBC, according to this article, though there have been gains made in preceding years.

Kirkhill and Campbell,

Perhaps one of the indicators of improvement to be used could be the performance of the new Afghan National Army's performance against Taliban troops, since the size of the growing ANA on paper would not be enough to gauge whether they can hold their own. Economic development that does rely on the illicit drug trade, according to the article, would be another indicator.

Would the frequency of Taliban attacks and size and mass of each enemy formation/change of tactics to attacks on supply lines/convoys be another indicator that they are resurgent?


http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,158280,00.html

Gates: Afghanistan Needs More NATO Help
Associated Press  |  December 14, 2007
EDINBURGH, Scotland - Defense Secretary Robert Gates is asking European allies for more troops to help stabilize Afghanistan, where the government is weak, the insurgency is relentless and casualties are mounting.
He got encouragement Dec. 13 from a reliable U.S. ally - Britain.

Success in Afghanistan will require a significant and concerted international effort, said British Defense Secretary Des Browne as NATO defense and foreign ministers from countries operating in the south of Afghanistan gathered in Edinburgh for a conference. In southern Afghanistan, Taliban insurgents have increased attacks in the 18 months since NATO took command of the war. "We must give the Afghan authorities the support they need to deliver the kind of success that we all recognize is vital, not just for security in Afghanistan, but for security in the wider world," Browne said in a statement.

Browne just returned from a visit to Afghanistan and praised the work of military forces there.

"But military power can only ever be part of the solution," he said. "We must build on our hard-won military gains and go further to help the people of Afghanistan to provide their own security, governance and economic development."

During talks with allied defense and diplomatic officials, Gates is seeking an overall strategy for Afghanistan that could be adopted by the leaders of NATO governments at a summit next April. But opinions differ within NATO about whether such a plan is needed. No final decisions on the way forward were expected in Edinburgh.

Gates has been trying to build a sense of urgency about the country's troubled south, push a strengthening of the central government in Kabul and foster economic development that does not revolve around the illicit drug trade.
Gates cautions that the gains achieved in Afghanistan over the past six years are at risk of being lost, unless the United States and its NATO allies carry out comprehensive military, economic and diplomatic solutions.

Along with other U.S. officials, he has expressed concern that much of Europe has lost sight of the purpose of fighting in Afghanistan, whose former Taliban rulers gave sanctuary to al-Qaida leaders, including Osama bin Laden, in the years before they carried out the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

Gates wants NATO to adopt and publish a short statement that would spell out briefly and plainly why the war is important, what U.S. and allied troops are doing there and how they can help the Afghan government.

The United States has about 26,000 troops in Afghanistan; together, NATO members other than the U.S. have a similar total. Britain is the largest non-U.S. contributor, with about 7,800 troops. Gates wants the Europeans to provide more troops - about 3,500 trainers for the Afghan police, plus additional mentors for the Afghan army, 16 helicopters and at least three battalions of ground forces.

There are signs of improvement in Afghanistan, NATO's leader said Friday.
"I assure you that reconstruction and development is going on," NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said during a visit to Tokyo to meet with Japanese officials. "Let's not see the picture totally blur by the Taliban making roadside bombs."

He added, however, that withdrawal from Afghanistan in the near future was out of the question.

"Afghanistan is not a commitment that you enter into for two or three years," he said. "Developing that nation will take a generation, or generations."
 
Perhaps one of the indicators of improvement to be used could be the performance of the new Afghan National Army's performance against Taliban troops, since the size of the growing ANA on paper would not be enough to gauge whether they can hold their own

Indeed

This from Prairie Pundit, relayed from Washington Post

50 Taliban killed fleeing Musa Qala for Sangin

AP/Washington Post:



Afghan soldiers backed by NATO air power killed more than 50 Taliban fighters during a two-day battle with militants who tried to attack a southern Afghan town near the one they were routed from this week, Afghanistan's Defense Ministry said Wednesday.
Afghan soldiers fought the insurgents in Sangin, a town in Helmand province that neighbors Musa Qala, which Taliban fighters had controlled since February before abandoning it this week in the face of an offensive by Afghan, British and U.S. forces.
"When the terrorists were defeated in Musa Qala, they escaped to Sangin and started firing in and around Sangin," the Defense Ministry said.

Among the 50 militants killed were three foreigners and three commanders, the ministry said. It said no civilians were hurt or killed in the operation.


...


This is an encouraging sign that not only was there good military planning to cut off the Taliban lines of retreat, but that the Afghan army backed by our aircraft were up to the task of defeating them. The Taliban continue to lose leadership and now they are losing the foreigners who were brought in to replace leaders lost in earlier battles. It will be hard for them to sustain these casualties without further deterioration in their fighting ability.

PS Prairie Pundit also has some interesting stuff on Brown talking to the Taliban, a link to an ABC News after action report on Musa Qala (a bit of a boisterous report) and a story about Swedish women emasculating lions.

 
Back
Top