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