Taliban Spokespersons Chat Up CBC, BBC Radio

[The Bread Guy]

Highlights from the CBC and BBC online postings - .pdfs attached if the links don't work.

From CBC:

.... Speaking on the telephone through an interpreter to host Carol Off from an undisclosed location in Afghanistan, Taliban spokesman Qari Yusuf Ahmadi said peace talks would mean "we are playing with the future of the nation and it will be not good for the nation. We will never talk to anyone. We are not ready for peace talks," ....

.... "Our target is not to kill the civilian people. We are fighting for the freedom of Afghanistan, and until we … get the freedom of Afghanistan, we will fight," Ahmadi said.  "Taliban are brave and we are just looking where to attack on NATO forces or American forces or Canadians or the Afghan people who are working for the internationals," he said ....

.... Ahmadi also condemned U.S. president-elect Barack Obama, saying his policies would represent a continuation of those favoured by the Bush administration.  "He is looking as cruel as Bush was. It is not a good news for Americans.… At least, it will not help for them, they are just crazy." ....

.... When asked if he had a message for Canadians, Ahmadi called on Canada not to "kill their sons" by sending troops to fight in Afghanistan.  "I tell them to let Afghans to make their future by themselves and decide by themselves," he said.  "Afghanistan does not belong to America or Canada." ....

From the BBC

The Taleban's senior spokesman has used a rare radio interview to call for all foreign forces to leave Afghanistan ....

.... Speaking on the BBC's World Have Your Say programme, Mr Mujahid answered listeners for almost an hour, and took follow-up questions from the BBC's security correspondent Frank Gardner.  He said the Taleban now controlled more than half of Afghanistan, and were running those areas in a more tolerant fashion than in previous years ....  Mr Mujahid told the BBC that the Taleban had now stopped beheadings and were educating girls in areas under their control. He denied they were behind this week's acid attack on schoolgirls in Kandahar.  The spokesman denied his movement financed itself from the drugs trade ....

.... He criticised the US for attacking Afghanistan in 2001, and said there was no proof that Osama bin Laden was behind the 9/11 attacks on New York and Washington.  Al-Qaeda, he said, had been brought to Afghanistan by the Americans, not by the Taleban ....

 

[vonGarvin]

So, we've talked to their Goebbels on our radio.  Wonderful.  Nothing like giving the enemy refuge and shelter.  How treasonous of the CBC.  How shocking, yet not surprising.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I take it it's of no comfort that they got the B-Team spokesperson, as opposed to the BBC getting the boss spokesperson, right?

Wonder how the CBC would have felt if a reporter, feeling it was the right thing to do to get the other side, decided to try to call those holding their reporter hostage?  But in THAT case, it would have been wrong, right?

 

[gun runner]

"Wonder how the CBC would have felt if a reporter, feeling it was the right thing to do to get the other side, decided to try to call those holding their reporter hostage?  But in THAT case, it would have been wrong, right?"



I feel that the reporter would be unfailingly risking the life of both the hostage and theirself. As for what the CBC would feel, they would probably say that "It makes for good headlines." Anything to sell, sell, sell. Ubique

 

[PuckChaser]

The TB is not ready for peace talks? Oh no, what will Taliban Jack Layton use as his party platform for the military now?

 

[gun runner]

Taliban Jack.... that man needs a better hobby. If it weren't for the war in Afghanistan,he and his party would be without a reason for being. I can't believe that this bubblehead actually thinks he had a chance to lead this country and direct its forces. Just my two cents. Ubique

 

[PAT-Platoon]

Taliban Jack.... that man needs a better hobby. If it weren't for the war in Afghanistan,he and his party would be without a reason for being. I can't believe that this bubblehead actually thinks he had a chance to lead this country and direct its forces. Just my two cents. Ubique

The New Democrats have a pretty extensive history in Canadian politics that seriously predates the war in Afghanistan...I don't think their "reason for being" is merely to instigate criticism regarding the current operations in Afghanistan. As for chances, well, the New Democrats did just win I believe 8 new seats, challenging their historical record set back in 1960s. They are quite influential in Canadian politics. Though, that being said, its up to you to decide if you agree with their foreign policy platform. As for my two cents, I don't agree with it. However if you are seriously wishing to counteract the movements set by the New Democrats its important not to discount them as a powerful figure in Canadian politics, i.e. don't underestimate your opponents strength.

Sorry for the derail, I do wish to point out though that I doubt that this spokesperson has much control over the "Taliban", inasmuch that they are a well structured and organized group. There is so much in fighting, rivalries and splits within the movement known as the Taliban that I think that Afghanistan could very well benefit from exploiting these faults and "dividing and conquering" as it were. The Sunni Awakenings in Iraq are a good example that maybe could be followed. While "peace talks" maybe be a bit disingenous, however certainly the Karzai government and ISAF should be attempting some dialogue and rapproachement with some elements of the Taliban that are looking to split from their former leaders and to switch sides.

-C/D

 

[gun runner]

Thank-you for correcting my slack and idle body,SIR. The NEW DEMOCRATS have had it in for the forces since before the mission to Afghanistan. That is not a lie. As for the ND being a political powerhouse, I disagree. The only reason the ND won those seats, is plain and simple, the voters didn't like the Conservatives, and were not about to give the Greens their vote.( by greens, I meant both the Green party, and the Liberals) enough said.If they are so powerful( I believe you said INFLUENTIAL) a party, how come they consistantly finish third? As for the spokesperson...I was of the understanding that they would not converse their opinions( or anything else for that matter) with infidels. Ubique

 

[leroi]

they consistantly finish third

The NDP finished 4th in the Guelph riding ;D. A good thing too. I did a fair bit of research this time around and actually called all candidates with questions. When I called the NDP office and asked for their stance on the war in Afghanistan, I was told "the NDP don't believe in war." The person I spoke with had a mind like a steel trap; would absolutely not discuss anything beyond what I just quoted. I can't speak as a political expert but I think they played an important part in Canadian history and are now passe.  My 2 cents

Back on topic: There is no point in talking to a people who routinely play God by picking out the weak from their herd and sending them out as suicide bombers.

 

[PAT-Platoon]

Back on topic: There is no point in talking to a people who routinely play God by picking out the weak from their herd and sending them out as suicide bombers.

Certainly suicide bombing is a largely used tactic among some sects of the Taliban, however is there not a possibility of negotiation and dialogue with those more moderate Taliban who are more sympathetic to the cause of stability and peace in the area? I am sure there are those out there who may be swayed to join over to our side, and I certainly think keeping up dialogue and discourse among even our enemy is very very important. The Taliban isn't a monolithic organization that has control over its entire group, its a mish-mash of warlords and insurgency groups (supported by criminal elements such as those involved in the drug trade). Some of these members may be inclined to switch sides, and because of this possibility it's important we keep open that avenue of communication so we can jump on any opportunity to disrupt the Taliban as a viable political force in Afghanistan. Otherwise if we keep it black and white and paint a wide brush across the entire opposition to ISAF and the Karzai government, then we only further drive and antagonize moderates into the corner, whereby they will only fight fiercer and with more determination than ever. I am sure there are many misguided members in this movement that have simply painted the conflict over there as a simple black and white event of imperialistic aggression, and so to win over these members we need to show them that this is not another western (or foreign for that matter, i.e. USSR) intervention into the affairs of Afghanistan. To do this we need to establish the authority of the Karzai government, otherwise the Taliban (who are increasingly becoming stronger) can take hold of legitimacy in outlying regions. No doubt Kabul is a stronghold, but as soon as you leave that area it is widely contested. Thus, criminal activity too slips in through the cracks of authority.

Now that Canada is leaving a major combat role in Afghanistan I believe its important we take that money that was spent on the military operation and put it to aid to the government, as well as much much more Law enforcement training and support for Afghanistan. The Afghan National Police is going to be needed to take a much more important role in the future, as a military is not suited for LEO work whatsoever.

-C/D

 

[TCBF]

... Now that Canada is leaving a major combat role in Afghanistan I believe its important we take that money that was spent on the military operation and put it to aid to the government, as well as much much more Law enforcement training and support for Afghanistan. The Afghan National Police is going to be needed to take a much more important role in the future, as a military is not suited for LEO work whatsoever.
-C/D

- When you look at what the balance of our forces are doing there now, those engaged in 'the combat role' do so largely to improve the security environment so that the governance issues of Afghanistan can be improved.  Do people know this? Doubtful. 

 

[Shamrock]

I am sure there are those out there who may be swayed to join over to our side, and I certainly think keeping up dialogue and discourse among even our enemy is very very important.

I doubt that we have at any point closed communications with the Taleban, they have instead routinely refused to enter into any form of parlance with us;  this is not accidental and it is not for fear of reprisal.  The organisation and tactics employed by the Taleban are very clear indicators to why this is and why they would rather allow their misinformation campaign and psychological weaponry allow non-Taleban converts and collaborators do their talking for them.  Not only does this self-directed narrative affirm the Taleban's legitimacy in a collaborator's mind, it offers social proof that maybe, just maybe, the Taleban is right (or failing that, NATO is wrong). 

 

[PAT-Platoon]

I doubt that we have at any point closed communications with the Taleban, they have instead routinely refused to enter into any form of parlance with us;  this is not accidental and it is not for fear of reprisal.  The organisation and tactics employed by the Taleban are very clear indicators to why this is and why they would rather allow their misinformation campaign and psychological weaponry allow non-Taleban converts and collaborators do their talking for them.  Not only does this self-directed narrative affirm the Taleban's legitimacy in a collaborator's mind, it offers social proof that maybe, just maybe, the Taleban is right (or failing that, NATO is wrong). 

Understandably so I cannot comment on whether or not we do keep open communication/dialogue with the Taleban as, I would not be in the know. However it is my general understanding from the attitude portrayed both by our Foreign affairs, as well as our own Canadian Forces (for example, comments by our former CDS regarding the Taleban) that we have entered into a "no negotiation" style affair in Afghanistan. I hope I am wrong in my assessment, however and that we routinely keep up diplomatic attempts at solving conflict in Afghanistan, and not just military force.

-C/D

 

[Flip]

I hope I am wrong in my assessment, however and that we routinely keep up diplomatic attempts at solving conflict in Afghanistan, and not just military force.

You are wrong! I can assure you.
"Just military force" has never been what Canada has been doing and more important to point out, when one seeks to negotiate with the other side, in this case the Taliban.
We would be offering legitimacy to their movement. That is, we would be in effect be saying "law and order are negotiable". We would in effect concede that their depravity
is somehow acceptable.  We would also allow that jihadis from all over the globe can participate and have some effect on the outcome by allowing that we were in error.

If individuals want to negotiate with their government they are free to do so.

CD - your argument depends on the fact that you misunderstand what is going on.

 

[GGboy]

The Afghan government has been "negotiating" with the Taliban for some time, at least with some of the elements and individuals associated with the Taliban (which others here have quite rightly pointed out is far from a homogenous organization). They've had some success in splitting off the less hard-core elements from the insurgency, although I couldn't say how much success. Point is, that there is no point whatsoever in negotiating with the hard core Taliban like supreme leader Mullah Omar and his immediate circle, or the foreign jihadists who support them: you might as well negotiate with Hell's Angels. They're not interested in compromise and can't be trusted to keep any commitments they may make.
There are "allies of convenience" which fall under the broad Taliban label and can and should be enticed away from the insurgency. This is just good counter-insurgency sense.
As I said, it is being done already and I'd be very interested in any int about how much success these efforts have met with.