By Muhammad Hussain Saramad, Writer and Researcher

The officials of High Peace Council have directly and indirectly said that we should accept some of the options of the Taliban and have demanded for the release of Taliban leaders.

However, talks with the Taliban have popped up major concerns and questions: On what issues the government will show resilience in talks with the Taliban? Will human rights, women rights, democracy, constitution and civic values be sacrificed for the purpose of talks with the Taliban? If it is so then will Afghanistan be caught again in the paws of the Taliban?  If it is not so, then will Taliban accept these civic values? What are the preconditions of Taliban for peace talks as High Peace Council talks about? In all, where will Afghanistan head to after the reconciliation with the Taliban; violence and genocide of 90s or moving out of the current war?

The most critical part is that there are no obvious strategic plans proposed by the government about the reconciliation with the Taliban. On the other hand, the Taliban never showed any willingness towards peace talks and called the government of Afghanistan incompetent for peace process. The latest suicide attacks by the Taliban that targeted mostly business centers and common people are the answer by the Taliban that they don’t agree with the peace process. In the meantime the government is running fast towards Taliban.

It shows that the government of Afghanistan lacks concrete plans and the initiative is with the Taliban. The government only accepts the preconditions of the Taliban. In other words the government is dancing to the drum beat of the Taliban.

What can justify these political contradictions in the behavior of Afghanistan government? Unfortunately, there have been no comments by the High Peace Council members and the government authorities. The officials in the government have only relied on some moral and religious advices and have sought no plans for the controversial questions of the talks with the Taliban.

There is also a difference of age in proposing such questions from authorities; mostly the young people and the pro-civic rights are the people asking these questions. Mr. Rabbani, the head of High Peace Council in his latest demand from the Ulema and religious figures have asked, “Do not let the young internet and face-book users to take the leadership of the society.” It mainly points towards the Middle East uprising which was controlled mostly by the young generation. Is Mr. Rabbani afraid of the elders’ leadership positions in the society to be replaced by the new young people using face-book? The structure of the High Peace Council also reveals the fact that its members are the old leaders with fewer tendencies towards new values in the world. Maybe these old leaders see a common interest between themselves and the Taliban as they were also involved in the destructive fighting of the previous decades.

Justice and Human Rights

As proposed earlier, justice, human rights and civic values are the most important questions in reconciliation process with the Taliban which are, indeed, the achievements of past ten years. Taliban showed their sample of governance during five years of their “Imarat Islami”. Taliban were against the women’s rights, civic and modern values, even they prohibited modern education beside all other atrocities they committed inside Afghanistan that drove Afghanistan towards dangerous cultural and political isolation amongst the international community. These were the characteristics of their government and they have still preserved that by burning down the schools, terrorist activities and suicide bombings.

Thus, the absence of justice and modernity has turned the history of this country into tyranny, prejudice, destruction and deprivation. Therefore, justice, human rights and modern values are the biggest demand of the people of Afghanistan and a long time lost item of this society. Now the proposition of peace talks with the Taliban have endangered these values as Taliban have vividly expressed that they are against all such things. Now we must ask the government of Afghanistan as the symbol of national governance and responsible for managing this country, what guarantees they can give to the people of Afghanistan not to drown the country into the crises of recent history and the Imarat Islami of the Taliban? Does it not seem illogical and funny after nine years of efforts and hopes by the people of Afghanistan and the international community?

Reconciliation and justice and  the question of crimes against humanity

In many occasions during the “Islamic Imarat of Taliban” occurred crimes against humanity. Taliban forced many people to migrate to different parts of the country and used their tribal - ethnic nepotism and religious justification for this policy. Several cases of genocide happened in many regions by the Taliban. They committed many war crimes. All these took place as an organized strategy to control Afghanistan and suppress the opponents. The Taliban leaders publicly ordered for such activities. For example, Mollah Abdul Manan Niazi, Taliban spokesperson and governor of Mazar e Sharif in his official speech after capturing this province declared: “The Uzbeks should go to Uzbekistan, Tajiks go to Tajikistan and Hazaras should become either again Muslims, pay ransom or go to graveyard.”

Moreover, they can also be regarded as the violators of women rights. They prevented women from their due right to get education or work and deemed necessary every kind of violence against them.

According to the international criminal law these crimes should be trialed and the criminals should be punished. One of the programs of new Afghan government with respect to the international criminal law and its commitment to international obligations was the implementation of transitional justice. This program was supposed to be implemented until 2008 and based on it, the criminal activities happened during past years should have been prosecuted. The program is not only forgotten now, but also the High Peace Council and the Afghan government has demanded for the release and impunity of many Taliban leaders who were involved in several crimes against humanity. Will the government of Afghanistan sacrifice the just demand of victims of Taliban’s crimes for the sake of reconciliation?

Running away from transparency; political and ethnic deals with the policy of reconciliation with Taliban

The questions raised so far are commonly asked amongst the ordinary people, civil society activists and women rights defenders. Why the government and the High Peace Council pay no serious attention to them? The government avoids any clear instance about these issues. This lack of transparency has led to despair and uncertainty for the Afghan people about the government's intention to seek justice.

What acts as the dynamics of this despair and doubt in the minds of the Afghan people are the existence of ethnic, tribal, religious, linguistic and gender prejudice. This discrimination existed in the Afghan history as many Afghan kings also were involved in tribal and ethnical biases in particular the civil war was the acute point of all these. These prejudices can be vanished when a new political system based on rule of law, transparency and public interest. The current Afghan government has not only failed in shaping and promoting an atmosphere of integration and harmony but in most cases it has made this trend more precarious.

One of the main reasons behind claiming ethnic right in the political atmosphere of Afghanistan is the same thing; while in the civil society the citizens’ right must be spoken of than ethnic rights. The citizen’s right is the right of every individual without any affiliation to tribe, religion, position, language, gender and others. When these affiliations are the bases of claiming the right or giving the right then it is evident that ethnicity is proffered than individual or citizen.

If the government could break the threads of tribal and ethnic prejudices in Afghan society and dominate them then naturally and gradually the ethnical politics of Afghanistan would vanish and fewer would be the claim for ethnic rights. Meanwhile, the only thing that can remove this mentality and make the public opinion supportive of the reconciliation plan by the government with the Taliban is the transparency and truthfulness of the government in removing the concerns of the people and answer their questions.

Lack of transparency in government and High Peace Council can also add to the concerns of the civil society organizations and the civil rights and women’s rights defenders which can also trigger to the non-civic prejudices in different layers of Afghan society that can finally deprive the government from the national support of Afghan people. This issue can make the security situation of Afghanistan more fragile and can drive the country towards more severe and dangerous crises.

The last word: The mirage of peace and reconciliation

As noted the meaning of peace in terms of civil society owes to justice. Security does not only mean physical but it means psychological security and safety of every Afghan individual’s conscience. It is evident that the psychological security and particularly the safety of conscience is particularly influenced by the citizenship status. Which means that when in the definition the status, dignity and citizens’ rights discrimination is legitimized then the safety and security of conscience will be lost.

Can reconciliation with the Taliban bring real security?

The justice and human rights and other civic values as defined earlier are threatened in the talks with the Taliban. Can reconciliation with the Taliban bring an end to the ongoing war in Afghanistan and establish security in the country, considering the issues raised and assuming that the government of Afghanistan is a democratic civil government and is committed to its international obligations? Are talks with the Taliban possible? Considering this fact the issue of talks with the Taliban remains as a mirage and impossible because Talibanism is a phenomenon of tribal beliefs against civil rights, human rights, justice and mixed with violence. Now that the government of Afghanistan has entered the Taliban’s ground with the initiative in its hand and the High Peace Council in its side, another question can be posed, will the government of Afghanistan remain committed to human rights, democratic values, civic law or it will drive the country back towards isolation, barbarism and the Talibanism?