AFGHANS DEBATE RECONCILIATION

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KABUL 000753 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 07/07/2018 TAGS: PGOV AF PREL PHUM KDEM SUBJECT: AFGHANS DEBATE RECONCILIATION KABUL 00000753 001.2 OF 002 Classified By: Deputy Chief of Mission Christopher Dell for reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) SUMMARY. Recent media reports speculating on the pros and cons of the Afghan government negotiating with moderate Taliban have revived internal debate on this issue, with Afghan civil society, politicians, and religious leaders weighing in. Those leaning in favor of negotiations argue that engaging moderate or "reconcilable" Taliban could lead to improved security and promote a more unified Afghanistan. Those opposed to such negotiations argue there is no "moderate" Taliban, that the Taliban leadership is not genuinely interested in reconciliation, and that re-integration of Taliban into Afghanistan's political life could lead to a revival of repressive measures common under the Taliban, including those affecting women's rights. Although most Afghans appear open to negotiations with democracy-ready Taliban, they are pessimistic that such talks would result in any meaningful progress. They believe any Taliban willing to negotiate at this point are not members of the hard-line leadership and therefore would have no real influence in improving security or effecting true reconciliation. Media: Independent Media Oppose Reconciliation Efforts -------------- ¶2. (U) Most independent media outlets editorialized against talks with moderate Taliban. One of influential secular and anti-government newspaper Hasht-e-Sobh's anti-negotiation opeds argued Taliban leadership is in Pakistan, and the U.S. should direct its efforts there. The Daily Afghanistan also ran an anti-negotiation editorial stating that both moderate and extremist Taliban have killed innocent Afghans and should not be appeased. In one of the few pro-negotiations editorials, Erada Daily, a pro-government paper, asked if there were no military solution to Afghanistan's problems, "why shouldn't Afghanistan talk and resort to peaceful means to solve the problems..." Civil Society: Very Skeptical -------------- ¶3. (C) Afghan Women's Skills Development Center Director Mary Akrami said Afghans are tired of war; talking to the Taliban and encouraging them to accept democracy could only help bring peace to Afghanistan. It is important, however, that the government negotiate from a position of strength and not concede the democratic advances it has made in the past seven years, especially relating to human rights and women's rights. ¶4. (C) Afghan Civil Society Forum Director Aziz Rafiee said his views on reconciliation efforts depended on the definition used for Taliban. He described the Taliban as: five percent who are ideological extremists, 25 percent are avenging grievances, and 70 percent "know how to use a gun and need employment." In general, Rafiee supports combating the insurgency through development, providing more economic opportunities: "Any Afghan with a proper income would never even think of the joining the Taliban." Reconciliation efforts with the ideological extremists would never succeed, as these Taliban are clear enemies of democracy. ¶5. (C) "Women want peace, but not at the cost of their lives," said 2009 Department of State Woman of Courage award winner and Global Rights Country Director, Wazhma Frogh. Frogh raised several concerns regarding negotiations with Taliban in a recent conversation with First Lady Michelle Obama: First, the situation in Pakistan's Swat Valley is an ominous indicator of the consequences of government concessions to the Taliban. Second, most Afghans do not believe in the concept of "moderate Taliban," and are confused with what they perceive as a U.S. policy shift from labeling all Taliban as terrorists to identifying an unclear group as moderate Taliban. ¶6. (C) Open Society Institute's Nilofar Sakhi strongly opposes any reconciliation effort. The Taliban oppose democracy and would never accept the new Afghanistan. She added her view that most Taliban terrorists in Afghanistan are from Pakistan therefore reconciling them to the Afghan government makes no sense. Political Leaders: Spilt Along Ideological, Ethnic, Gender Lines -------------- ¶7. (C) Republican Party (multi-ethnic, secular) Leader and Karzai Policy Chief Sebghatullah Sanjar (Tajik) told approximately 500 party supporters on March 12 that he, speaking as Republican Party Leader, and not as a Karzai representative, strongly favors negotiation with moderate KABUL 00000753 002.2 OF 002 Taliban. In order to bring peace to the country, it is necessary to re-integrate Taliban who would accept democracy and the Afghan Constitution, Sanjar said. ¶8. (C) MP Khalid Farooqi (Pashtun, Kandahar) said all Taliban should be included in talks with the government. "If we invite everyone, then the ball will be in the opposition's court; if they do not come to the negotiating table, people will blame them." ¶9. (C) Female MPs oppose government negotiations with Taliban. "We have lived through the Taliban and know we do not want to re-walk that path," Helmand MP Naz Pawar Hadi (Pashtun) said. She added negotiations with the Taliban would not succeed because the Taliban always demand all foreign forces leave the country as a pre-condition to talks. Kunduz MP Shukria Paikan Ahmadi (Uzbek) also adamantly opposes any negotiation with the Taliban. No true Taliban would ever accept the Afghan Constitution, she claimed. Faryab MP Sultanat Kohi (Tajik) simply said, "Absolutely, I will never accept these talks." ¶10. (C) Faryab MP Rahman Oghli (Uzbek) maintains "there are no moderate Taliban; they are all extremists." Religious Hardliners: Yes, Let's Negotiate But With All Taliban -------------- ¶11. (C) Religious hardliners support talks between Taliban and the Afghan government. However, many surveyed denied the existence of a moderate Taliban wing and urged negotiations with all Taliban, including Mullah Omar and other high-ranking Taliban leaders. Abdul Fatah Jawad, editor of the fundamentalist Islamic news magazine, Islah-e-Mili, suggested President Obama's mention of developing an exit strategy for a military withdrawal from Afghanistan could encourage Taliban leadership to agree to government talks. The government should pursue this option in order to bring peace and stability to the country. Plurality View -------------- ¶12. (C) Despite their varying viewpoints, most Afghans participating in this discussion generally support reconciling those Taliban ready to accept the democratic and civil rights principles espoused in the Afghan Constitution. However, very few are optimistic that government-Taliban negotiations would lead to improved security or true reconciliation: the Taliban leadership would never accept the Afghan Constitution, and negotiations with lower ranking Taliban would achieve no tangible results. Primary dissenters from this plurality view include women leaders, ethnic minorities, and religious fundamentalists, with most women and minority leaders opposing any negotiations and most religious fundamentalists advocating negotiation with all Taliban. This range of views only underscores the point that reconciliation is a double-edged sword, welcomed by some but feared by many. WOOD