
Mullah Wakil Ahmad Mutawakil, left, who served as foreign minister during the Taliban regime, and Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, right, who was the Taliban’s ambassador to Pakistan. (Jean MacKenzie/GlobalPost)
Exclusive: Former Taliban see opening for talks
Two former high-ranking Taliban officials offer insight on how to progress.
KABUL — Talking to the Taliban is all the rage.
Whether for or against, upbeat or down, everyone seems to be weighing in on the wisdom or folly of negotiating with the black-turbaned crowd.
President Barack Obama has even suggested that his administration may reach out to moderate elements of the Taliban.
GlobalPost has gained unique access here in Kabul to two former high-ranking officials of the now-deposed Taliban government to hear their view of the possibility of an opening for dialogue.
Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef, who was the Taliban’s ambassador to Pakistan, and Mullah Wakil Ahmad Mutawakil, who served as foreign minister during the Taliban regime, confirmed in separate interviews that such talks were feasible, but that they would need to begin with a fundamental understanding that the view of this conflict looks very different from an Afghan-Taliban perspective.
Both emphasized they do not represent Mullah Omar and the Taliban’s active militant insurgency, but offered valuable insight into the likely debate within the Taliban’s inner circle about the various overtures from Washington to open talks.
Before any serious discussions can take place, they say, the warring parties at least have to agree on what they are fighting about. To date, that fairly obvious goal has been shrouded by rhetoric and misunderstanding.
“We are fighting two wars on one battlefield,” said Mullah Wakil Ahmad Mutawakil, who served as foreign minister during the Taliban regime. “The Taliban are fighting the ‘slaves of America’ while the United States is confronting ‘terrorists.’”
The United States is engaged in a Global War on Terror, battling the jihadists in Afghanistan so that they do not have to confront them on the streets of New York; at least that is how the Bush administration defined the engagement.
The Obama administration doesn't use the "GWOT" brand, and is expected any day to release its own policy strategy in Afghanistan. To date, it has contented itself with insisting there is no military solution to the conflict, while approving a 17,000-troop surge and appointing an active-duty general as ambassador. NATO defines its role in Afghanistan as nation-building.
The Taliban, for their part, are fighting a holy war of liberation against a foreign, infidel invader that has come to topple their government, impose an alien system on an unwilling people, and further its own interests.
Well written AND informative. Would that we can/will learn from it.
Did you forget that the same Taliban you are talking about refused any rights(even education) for women and many general freedoms the majority of us today have grow accustomed to for its citizens?
hello,im a researcher of world religions 29 years.exodus ch 19:9-11,GOD spoke from the sky,to 2-3 million eyewitnesses,believe in moses forever.God never spoke from the sky,believe in muhammed,buddha,hare krishna,wicca,tribal shamanism etc.exodus ch 20:19-22,,,,GOD told us what to believe from the sky,to eyewitnesses,,,mathew ch9:5,,,mark ch9,,,luke ch 9,,,2peter ch1:16-18,,,,i have defeated every other religion in debate,,,muslims should memorize those verses,,,everyone else also,,,,there are similarities among religions,,,,BUT the HOLY BIBLE,GOD spoke from the sky,acts ch 9,,,humans have no excuse
Why are you western journalists so absolutely gullible and naive to the words and promises of brutes, thugs and ideological fanatics? Also, who are these so called experts you source? The Taliban interested in diplomatic protocols, are you serious? That is the stupidest thing I've heard. As if Mullah Omar was not privy to a number of bin Laden's plans, especially 9/11! Why do you think they were harboring bin Laden and Zawahari to begin with?
Look, while there is certainly a distinction between al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and the Taliban as organizations with different cultures and capabilities, there is really hardly any distinction between the philosophies and ideologies they live by. Sure, the Taliban are the local, native born radicals and not the global, transnationally funded organization that al-Qaeda is, but do you really believe that if the Taliban didn't have the resources and logistics to manage and execute a wider, broader jihadist movement, that they wouldn't go ahead and do it? If the Western World is prepared to sit down and negotiate with the Taliban and let bygones be bygones, then let me just make a few points that we (the US and our "allies") should be willing to accept if we want to retreat and allow the Taliban to have their way in Afghanistan (and Pakistan): 1) Be tolerant of the Talibans desire and determination to kill all moderate Muslims, 2) Be willing to accept the Taliban's treatment of women, which includes beatings, attacks on schoolgirls, murder of school girls, murder of women who may or may not have committed adultery, torture of women, and of course just the overall denial of any type of human rights or education to WOMEN, 3) Be tolerant of a culture that openly declares Jews to be Pigs and Monkeys, 4) Be tolerant of the Taliban's refusal to allow any non-Muslims even close to their land, unless they are their to convert, be humiliated or killed, and 5) God forbid the Taliban discover and homosexuals amongst their ranks, because it will not turn out well for them I promise you that. So accept brutal treatment of gays too.
So, if the US and its "allies" are willing to simply step back let a cultural entity such as the Taliban have their way in Afghanistan, well, because it won't effect us, it will simply effect all those Afghanis (and of course, they want to live that way, right) then go ahead and lets have a peace settlement tomorrow. However, don't be angry if I (as a United States Soldier) call you a coward to your face if I ever happen to cross your sorry path. Finally, to say that the Taliban is simply not just another al-Qaeda in the waiting would be naive and short-sighted. Really, trying to separate the Taliban and al-Qaeda is like trying to separate Austrian Nazis from German Nazis in 1939. Do we really need to try and do that?
Regards,
SPC Anthony Costello
Hi Anthony,
I am not here to support the western press, but a western ideal is to give the oppossition the benefit of the doubt. Now, in dealing with Nazis and other anti-semitic terrorists' the question is how to deal with them. Can a U.N. police force protect us? Can a united Islamic community protect us? Who you gonna call? Ghost Busters'!!!!!!!!!!!
If you hop over to the Christian Science Monitor you will find an article about International Muslim's that want peace in Afghanistan. Granted, it must be very humiliating for Afghanistans' to be constantly invaded by foreigners' over the centuries (religious and, or political). So, why can't the Muslim Community settle disputes in any Muslim Country? Surely the Muslim Community has religious leaders that could handle any dispute.
I am in two minds about this. On the one hand open dialiogue seems absolutely essential if we are ever to move forward.
But then I wonder what these men did to get into high positions in such an organization, would it be ethical to sit down at a table with them...
Recent on Afghanistan:
Adventure travel: The Great Himalaya Trail?
Jason Overdorf - India - February 4, 2010 07:11 ET
Why walk Everest, K2, and other mountain giants? Because they are there.
Opinion: Fatal flaw to peace package in Afghanistan
Nushin Arbabzadah - Worldview - January 31, 2010 14:32 ET
The peace package that emerged from London Conference is doomed to fail, unless Kabul can get a monopoly on violence.
2 Afghanistan conferences: No solutions
Jean MacKenzie - Afghanistan - January 29, 2010 11:15 ET
Opinion: London and Prague meetings on Afghanistan do not produce new answers.
US, NATO want Dutch to stay in Afghanistan
Paul Ames - BeNeLux - January 28, 2010 07:17 ET
After deriding the Dutch mission to Afghanistan, the US now holds it up as an example.
Are Afghans really happy?
Jean MacKenzie - Afghanistan - January 24, 2010 11:34 ET
Western media talk of soaring optimism in Afghanistan. Afghans, when pressed, beg to differ.
Obama "magic" just another illusion
Jean MacKenzie - Worldview - January 20, 2010 07:26 ET
Analysis: To Afghans, the Obama administration has seemed uncertain, with promises sounding hollow.
How the US is attacking Taliban funding
Douglas Wissing - Afghanistan - January 20, 2010 07:14 ET
Official: Cracking down on Taliban funding is "like punching jello."
"It's a perfect war. Everybody makes money."
Douglas A. Wissing - Afghanistan - January 19, 2010 09:00 ET
How US military funds are ending up in the hands of the Taliban.
Taliban strike in central Kabul
Jean MacKenzie - Afghanistan - January 18, 2010 11:21 ET
Taliban gunmen and suicide bombers launched a brazen assault on the center of Kabul on Monday.
Opinion: Messages from Afghanistan
Marisa L. Porges - Worldview - January 18, 2010 07:07 ET
Without trust and understanding, counterinsurgency efforts are bound to fail — 30,000 more troops or not.
Good money after bad in Afghanistan?
Jean MacKenzie - Afghanistan - January 18, 2010 06:49 ET
Poppy planting is down, but graft is up. So why is the U.S. mimicking a British agriculture program in Helmand?
On patrol in enemy territory
Ben Gilbert - Afghanistan - December 27, 2009 12:33 ET
Afghanistan's wild wild west
Ben Gilbert - Afghanistan - December 27, 2009 11:18 ET
Welcome to the “Heart of Darkness,” where the militants rule and most Afghans are stuck between the Taliban and U.S. troops.
Analysis: Is Germany fighting a "war" in Afghanistan?
Cameron Abadi - Germany - December 21, 2009 08:49 ET
German Defense Minister zu Guttenberg may have gotten more than he bargained for by opening debate on Afghanistan.
On the road with "Dog Company"
Ben Gilbert - Afghanistan - December 17, 2009 06:34 ET
The Taliban may be increasingly elusive but cilantro is surprisingly easy to find, says one band of patrolling US troops.
Opinion: The Taliban is keeping time
Sam Kiley - Worldview - December 15, 2009 11:43 ET
With a thriving opium industry in Afghanistan, Obama's troop surge has no hope of success.
USAID: Understaffed and overwhelmed in Afghanistan
C.M. Sennott - Afghanistan - December 11, 2009 12:12 ET
Obama's troop surge fails to address how to improve delivery of aid.
Opinion: Obama defines the use of war in an age of terror
C.M. Sennott - Worldview - December 10, 2009 11:43 ET
Obama's Nobel acceptance speech was a self-effacing and deeply personal exploration of "just war."
Opinion: Where in the world is Osama bin Laden?
Michael Goldfarb - Worldview - December 9, 2009 06:48 ET
Do we even want to know? Is it possible that limbo is the easiest place for him to be?
Watch GlobalPost videos:
Reporter's Notebook
There is a brave new Afghanistan out there, where people love their government, are hopeful about the future, and are enthusiastic about the presence...Read more >
KABUL — You can take the girl out of Afghanistan, but Afghanistan will never release its grip on the girl. I realized this as I sat in those...Read more >
The news that an otherwise normal-seeming Afghan policeman killed five British soldiers and wounded six more in Helmand this past week was shocking....Read more >
Featured: Special Projects
Oceans:
Assessing their health
After the Fall:
20 years since the Berlin Wall came down
Life, Death and the Taliban:
Videos and stories
Study Abroad:
Students report from the road
Living in the Shadows:
An intimate look at China's migrant workers
A World of Trouble:
The global economy in 20 hotspots









Comments:
9 Comments.
Login or Register to post comments