July 7, 2012

Peace Talks Spawn Violent Taliban Splinter Groups

Given the probability of this reaction, the odds that the Obama administration is intentionally fragmenting the Taliban could exceed 50%. Dividing an enemy or group of enemies is a basic strategy of war and, if executed correctly, can have devastating results on him. Problematically, the reverse is also true (especially in pure netwar). Negotiating with “the Taliban” was never going to be quick and easy - impossibility is a possibility - but Washington has never pursued a genuine political resolution with the insurgency. Instead, the Taliban’s leadership has been offered an ultimatum while political favoritism is directed towards outlying factions. Refusing to militarily exit Afghanistan after 2014 is also aggravating the Taliban’s most extreme personalities, and ex-Taliban aren't running for NATO's meager reconciliation program either. 

The end result will be a continuation of Afghanistan’s war past President Barack Obama’s declared “end.” Call it the Iraq strategy:
As the United States and its allies try to negotiate a peace settlement with the Taliban before all combat troops leave Afghanistan in 2014, a new obstacle has arisen: Insurgent splinter groups opposed to the deal are emerging, complicating U.S. hopes of leaving behind a stable country.
These splinter groups have demonstrated their strength recently, with two brazen killings -- one of a high-ranking Taliban leader and the other of a senior member of the Afghan government's High Peace Council.

That new violence has added to the difficulty of striking a deal with the Taliban as the clock continues to wind down with only 2 1/2 years to go before the planned withdrawal. Failure to figure out all these new players in Afghanistan's varied ethnic and political groups threatens to plunge the country into more civil strife.

"I am very pessimistic," said Moeed Yusuf of the U.S. Institute of Peace in Washington.
He warns that Afghanistan seems poised to repeat the devastation of the early 1990s after the Soviet withdrawal. At that time, rival rebel factions previously united against the Soviets turned their guns on each other, killing tens of thousands of civilians and paving the way for the Taliban takeover.
As more decision-makers emerge on the scene, it is becoming more difficult it is to secure a peace deal that can withstand the test of time, Yusuf said.

"Whatever peace you come up with, I believe it is not sustainable, and I believe we are probably going to see a repeat of the 1990s, where you go for a few years and then it all starts to fall apart," he said.

The U.S. began the clandestine talks with the Taliban last year, aided by Germany and secretly held in Qatar. A senior U.S. diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue, said the goal for Marc Grossman, Washington's special representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan, was straightforward: Get an Afghan peace deal.

That goal has run into a series of problems.

The Taliban broke off talks earlier this year, saying the U.S. reneged on a promise to release Afghan prisoners from Guantanamo Bay. To get the Taliban back to the table, the U.S. last weekend said it was mulling a proposal to transfer some Guantanamo Bay inmates to a prison in Afghanistan. But Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahed told The Associated Press that the group wants the prisoners freed unconditionally before resuming talks.

In the last six months, the Taliban has had increasingly violent clashes with a militant Islamist group called Hezb-e-Islami, led by warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar. That fighting escalated to all-out war in some parts of Afghanistan.

Hekmatyar is a former American ally who is now on Washington's wanted list. The Taliban worry that Hekmatyar's group, which is close to the government of President Hamid Karzai and has held parallel talks with the Americans, will make its own peace deal.

The fissures in the Taliban movement have been further widened by the emergence of the splinter groups opposed to the peace talks.

Here is a look at some of those groups:
Continue Reading

The AP report mentions that fighters from the Taliban and Hezb-e-Islami, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's faction, have escalated their battles over the past six months. Whether they are to be believed or not, representatives of Mullah Omar and Hekmatyar held a recent show of unity in Kyoto, Japan to undercut U.S. subversion. 

Siddiq Mansour Ansari, a peace activist who attended the meeting at Doshisha University, would tell the AP, "The Taliban insisted on complete withdrawal of foreign troops from the country after 2014 and called the Karzai government a puppet saying they would not negotiate with Karzai or his government."


  1. More control through chaos.
    It will go beyond divide and conquer.
    Think of the American - Indian wars.
    They used Indians for scouts and translators.
    Once the Indians were brought to the reservations [gulags] the scouts were betrayed. And put along side their former brothers in the reservations.
    There will be a 'good' Taliban, and a 'bad Taliban.
    The history of an occupier Empire never ends well.

  2. We can try and may partially succeed in D/C, but the Taliban cannot be eradicated from Afghanistan's social fabric as long as U.S. troops occupy the country in any form. Or they could be permanent now. Despite their strict laws and terrorist tactics, the group retains a form similar to Hezbollah, Hamas, Sadr's militia (which fractured from US/Iranian influence) and other "liberation" groups. "Negotiations" between the U.S. and Taliban will probably continue long past 2014, through a combination of political and military maneuvering.