AFGHANS NERVOUSLY EYE RECONCILIATION TALKS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 KABUL 002963 SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR SCA/FO, SCA/A, S/CRS NSC FOR JWOOD OSD FOR MCGRAW CG CJTF-82, POLAD, JICCENT E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: PTER PREL PGOV AF SA SUBJECT: AFGHANS NERVOUSLY EYE RECONCILIATION TALKS REF: A. KABUL 2782 ¶B. KABUL 2746 ¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY. Afghan political leaders and ordinary citizens are following reports of reconciliation talks with Taliban representatives with great interest and, in many cases, significant trepidation. A number of individuals who assume USG involvement, have approached us at many levels to express their concern over what Taliban involvement in the government would mean for human rights, women's rights, and Afghan society at large. Independent media coverage of the reconciliation talks has been skeptical, with many commentators doubting the Taliban would ever support the Constitution and renounce violence, although pro-government papers have been more optimistic. We have told our contacts the US is not involved in any talks with the Taliban and would only support reconciliation that is Afghan-led, respects the Afghan Constitution, promotes peace, does not involve ceding territory to the Taliban or other insurgent forces, and does not include persons linked to al Qaeda. Still, the perception remains among many Afghans that the US is a lead player in a process that may result in the return of at least some extremist leaders (and their policies) to Afghan society. Growing Concerns Over a Taliban Return -------------- ¶2. (SBU) Following reports of talks between GIRoA and Taliban representatives in Saudi Arabia in early October, Afghan politicians, students, and journalists approached us to express their nervousness at what reconciliation would mean for Afghan society. Most Afghans assume USG involvement in the talks and shared their concerns with us in hopes of ensuring more extreme aspects of Taliban governance would not be welcomed into a future Afghan government. ¶3. (SBU) Politicians commenting on the talks included non-Pashtuns threatened by a Karzai-Taliban alliance, Pashtuns who felt they could serve as better emissaries than Karzai's chosen representatives, and moderates worried about consequences for human rights under a government that could include Taliban members. With rumors circulating that a second round of talks in Saudi Arabia is likely and other low-level efforts materializing elsewhere (reftels),those outside the Karzai administration have increased the number 
of comments to us in an effort to shape any negotiations. ¶4. (SBU) Upper House MP Rida Azimi (Kabul, Tajik),a former journalist and the first female anchor to appear on Afghan television following the fall of the Taliban, emotionally described her prior experience as a woman living under Taliban rule, worrying that reconciliation would pave the way for a return of the Taliban's anti-women policies. If the Taliban joined the government, Azimi said she and other female politicians would be forced out of public life, while those with the resources would leave Afghanistan at the first sign of Taliban inclusion in the government. "I survived them once, but I just can't do it again," she told us, with tears brimming in her eyes. "I am tired and cannot fight them any longer. They are not people who share power, they will take and take from us until they have their way with everything." ¶5. (SBU) Other women MPs have expressed similar trepidation at GIRoA contact with Taliban representatives. Fatima Aziz (Kunduz, Tajik) said the lack of women involved in the reconciliation process showed the government was overlooking women's concerns about the Taliban's policies. Aziz, a medical doctor, told us a Taliban official had once barged into an operating room demanding to know why she was not wearing a burqa. With her hands occupied with the surgery she was leading, she yelled at him to leave the room, telling him she had better things to be doing, such as saving a man's life, than to listen to him. She said she has no desire to return to those times. ¶6. (SBU) Lower House Deputy Speaker Amanullah Payman (Badakhshan, Tajik) appealed for a better explanation from Karzai and the international community on what the process and goals were for the reconciliation talks. Payman said many non-Pashtun leaders already suspicious of Karzai's motives in placing more Pashtuns in high-ranking government positions feared they were being sold out by the international community for the sake of ending the conflict with Taliban insurgents. Payman said reconciliation with the Taliban or Gulbuddin Hekmatyar risked driving away groups now KABUL 00002963 002 OF 003 part of the government and would not solve the overall security challenges facing the country. Moreover, he added the Taliban would never respect the Constitution nor cut ties with al Qaeda, and wondered why international allies were "wasting their time" with such efforts. ¶7. (U) At a recent visit to Kabul University, political science and law students peppered POLOFF with questions related to what they assumed was USG involvement in reconciliation talks. Students said they felt the talks were a sign of abandonment by the US and other ISAF countries. One student said the international community had driven the Taliban from power, but now was seeking to bring them back in -- a sign the US must be reconsidering its support for democracy and human rights in Afghanistan. Another student said US support for Taliban reconciliation would send the message that the international community was more focused on ending its "failed" mission in Afghanistan quickly than on protecting Afghans from terrorism and repressive governments. ¶8. (SBU) At a meeting of the National Coalition for Dialogue with Tribes of Afghanistan, a variety of tribal elders expressed their concerns that negotiating with the Taliban would only give them legitimacy. They argued Saudi reconciliation talks could not work because talks would be sponsored by one of only three countries to have recognized the Taliban and included the participation of Pakistan's Nawaz Sharif (viewed unfavorably by many Afghans) and many non-Afghan Taliban. Other tribal elders expressed similar pessimism on reconciliation, saying the fighting would not end until Pakistan stopped fueling the conflict. Other elders have said they would support reconciliation as long as anti-Afghan forces agree to accept the Constitution and respect human rights at a minimum. Most do not think Taliban leaders will agree to these conditions. A More Positive, But Cautious, View -------------- ¶9. (U) Commentators in the independent press have viewed the reconciliation talks skeptically, saying the Taliban would be a dishonest negotiating partner. In the anti-government Arman-e-Meli daily paper, a writer said the Taliban cannot be negotiated with because they are not a coherent political-military group, but a loose confederation of entities. The paper criticized Karzai for using the issue for political leverage in an election season. Cheragh, another independent paper, also raised doubt about the seriousness of the talks, pointing out Foreign Minister Spanta was disengaged from the process and that the recent up-tick in Taliban attacks shows the insurgents have no interest in peace and reconciliation. Pro-government media has had a more optimistic outlook, with both Weesa Daily and Erada Daily noting the positive role of Saudi Arabia in the talks. Erada also highlighted local efforts to invite Taliban representatives to jirgas in Farah and Nangarhar provinces. Another pro-government paper, Islah Daily, said the best way to restore security is by talking with the Taliban. ¶10. (SBU) Upper House Deputy Speaker Hamed Gailani (Paktia, Pashtun) said he was supportive of reconciliation efforts, but doubted the meetings in Saudi Arabia would lead to much progress, especially since Karzai had not invited him or his father, Pir Sayed Ahmad Gailani, to participate. The Gailani family, leaders in the Qadiriyya Sufi religious order and close to the former king, maintains significant influence in some areas of Afghan society, particularly in the eastern border provinces. Hamed Gailani said the current talks, while not serious, opened the door for future efforts. He added that in future talks, the Gailani family could use its influence to bring senior Taliban and HIG leaders to the table. ¶11. (SBU) One Afghan political party loyal to Karzai has taken steps to address some concerns about the reconciliation process. The Republican Party, headed by Karzai's chief of policy Sebghatullah Sanjar, held its party conference Nov. 1, where nearly every speaker touched on the reconciliation issue from a cautious, but supportive, perspective. Sanjar and other speakers said reconciliation with the Taliban and other insurgent groups was an acceptable path to peace, but such talks should only be held with groups or individuals who respect the Constitution. With the party's chairman employed in the Palace, it is reasonable to assume such language was vetted by Karzai himself before being presented for public consumption. KABUL 00002963 003 OF 003 Perception Does Not Match Reality -------------- ¶12. (SBU) In this case, perception does not match reality -- we have repeatedly told our contacts we are not involved in the Saudi Arabia process, adding that any reconciliation process must be Afghan-led, respect the Constitution, disarm insurgents, and adhere to the authority of the central government (i.e., no territory set aside for insurgent groups to administer). The specter of a return of the Taliban has stoked fears among many Afghans and is a useful reminder that not everyone shares international partners' near boundless enthusiasm for reconciliation, nor do all Afghans necessarily share the conviction that a "political solution" is the best way to end the conflict here. WOOD