Taliban leaders to be offered Exile?

An area for free-thinkers to discuss and exchange ideas.

Taliban leaders to be offered Exile?

Unread postby willow » Thu May 06, 2010 8:14 pm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/ma ... peace-plan

It seems that the Afghanis have come up with a peace proposal for the Taliban, in theory anyway.

• Taliban foot soldiers will be encouraged by provincial and district governors to reintegrate into society. An initial 90-day cooling-off period will decide how they can be helped.

• They will vow not to fight against the government, and disavow al-Qaida. The authorities will hold their biometric profile, including fingerprints and iris scans.

• To help former fighters support themselves, the government will offer vocational training in trades such as tailoring and electrical repairs.

• Thousands of manual jobs in construction and agriculture will be created for reintegrated rebels. Others may join their local police force or the army.

• The programme will be initially rolled out in the provinces of Kandahar, Helmand, Herat, Baghdis, Nangarhar, Kunduz, and Baghlan. It will affect 220 districts and around 4,000 villages.

• Insurgent leaders who reconcile themselves with the government may be removed from the UN's terrorist blacklist and possibly be offered "exile in a third country".

Top Taliban leaders could be offered exile outside Afghanistan if they agree to stop fighting the government of Hamid Karzai, a long-expected peace plan by the Afghan government will propose later this month.

The far-reaching proposals, seen by the Guardian, also call for "deradicalisation" classes for insurgents and thousands of new manual jobs created for foot soldiers who renounce violence.

It seems if it goes forward it would open with a pool of around 160M to try and lure insurgents away from warfare towards civil labour etc through job creation and intigration programs for former insurgents.

The idea would be I assume to provide reintigration and gainful employment (like theres any shortfall in rebuilding work) while sending major leaders into exile thus removing them from the sphere of combat and effective command.

Saudi Arabia has been used in the past for such purposes, and there has been widespread speculation that exile could be offered to Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, the leader of the Hizb-e-Islami armed group, which in March sent a peace delegation to Kabul for talks with Karzai.

So it seems there may be atleast some interest amoung the other side in the idea.

reintigration of former insurgents and factions would follow something like:
They will initially be put in "demobilisation centres" for a "cooling off" period of 90 days where their needs can be assessed and their personal security assured.

If they agree to lay down their arms and cut ties with al-Qaida they will be entitled to an amnesty against prosecution for any crimes they may have committed. They will also be issued with a biometric "reintegration card". They will then be offered a "menu" of options designed to keep them peacefully occupied, including vocational training in such trades as carpet-weaving and tailoring.

The whole plan given that the Government of Afghanistan is currently unable to carry it out at a wide scale would also it seems require the creation of various government ogranizations and extensions of government beaurocracy.

This however isnt really a bad thing if you think about the complete lack of current government structure in Afghanistan. The formation of these institutions mayhaps will serve to take much of the administrative duties for various massive construction and infrastructure programs off the hands of the international community.

I really liked this one :P
Last week Ahmed Wali Karzai, the Afghan president's hugely influential half-brother, told the Guardian that while fighters could surrender and return in peace, the Afghan government would never share power with the Taliban or give in to demands for the country's constitution to be changed in return for peace. Speaking at his home in Kandahar, he said: "Give them Uruzgan, Kandahar and Helmand? Change the constitution? No way, they are a defeated force, they are running, they are hiding, they are defeated."

It seems there a hitch in the timing for the talks however
both US and Afghan officials say there is only disagreement on the timing of the talks and, to the frustration of the UK, which wants to see a high-level political accommodation with the Taliban, both sides are determined that there should be no significant compromise.

This makes me think the US wants to hold off any talks with the Taliban until after its major offensive into the Khandahar and Helmand regions.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=125991484 wrote: In Afghanistan, U.S. and NATO troops are laying the groundwork for a major offensive in the southern province of Kandahar — the birthplace and spiritual heartland of the Taliban.

But the operation needs the backing of Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai, and the mercurial leader has made it clear he is less than enthusiastic about the offensive.

The Kandahar operation is expected to be the biggest military offensive in the nearly nine-year war in Afghanistan. More than 20,000 U.S., NATO and Afghan troops will take part. The goal is to wrest control of the city and its surrounding districts from Taliban militants and local warlords, and to install a credible government.

Perhaps Karzai fears that the massive offensive may affect the good will of the peace deal. He is also hard pressed by the Afghani people to bring the number of Afghani civilian casualties down, and in a major US offensive you know theres going to be quite a few.

The article closes out with this peice.
It is thought that the offer to return home to Afghanistan from their sanctuaries in Pakistan and live without the fear of being killed by Nato forces would be enough to encourage people to give up. However, Harvard analyst Matt Waldman said the Taliban would only be happy with significant change to the current political set-up in Afghanistan.

"From my discussions with Taliban commanders it is clear they are driven to fight by predatory politics, the abuse of power and perception of military aggression. Until these causes are addressed the fighting will go on."

I think it is just this that may make the idea of exile functional, being that your not really appealing to the commander with the agreement rather with the individual soldiers and smaller factions supporting the Taliban and major insurgency. It allows the Afghani government and NATO to pick off small parts of Taliban support and take away large numbers of fighters.

What do you guys think? would it be a good idea for a peace agreement? I cant see what would induce the leaders to accept exile, perhaps NATO promises not to kill there asses while in exile if they behave. I wonder if many would have accidents? I think rather they will be declaired exiled by the govt and then arrested if in the country type deal. pain of death perhaps? this is Afghanistan. Would letting the fighters come home work? I think they will be screened rather well, atleast if it goes as described. But it does provide widespread amnesty to people who have possibly killed one to several dozen innocent people or soldiers.

The idea of exile also focuses on the idea of punishing the leaders not the soldiers, which almost supports the notion that a soldier is just following orders. While practical and pragmatic, I'm not sure that its really the moral choice. Especially given that it would allow many leaders to walk provided they give up, this isnt exactly justice.

Can Afghanistan count on any kind of stability with the "leaders" deposited outside the nation, or would those leaders still be able to command?
dirty work... the right google key words...
-willow 07/22/09
User avatar
Chat Moderator
Chat Moderator
Posts: 516
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 10:59 am
Location: Vancouver Canada
Reputation point: 932

Return to Free-Thinkers Only

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

[Valid Atom 1.0]