US, Afghan leaders agree on peace push, Taliban don’t

Taliban fighters react to a speech by their senior leader in the Shindand district of Herat province, Afghanistan. (File Photo: AP)
Updated 05 March 2018
Follow

US, Afghan leaders agree on peace push, Taliban don’t

WASHINGTON: Despite US support, the Afghan government’s surprising new peace offer to the Taliban is immediately running into a wall. The insurgents show no sign of shifting from their demand that talks for a conflict-ending compromise take place with Washington, not Kabul.
The impasse is blocking a diplomatic path out of America’s longest-running war and could prove as fateful as fortunes on the battlefield.
The Trump administration says it’s escalating pressure on the Taliban to advance a negotiated solution to the fighting. But diplomacy is a distant second to military efforts right now, and the US isn’t offering carrots of its own to persuade the insurgents to lay down their arms.
Laurel Miller, who until last June was a senior American diplomat for Afghanistan and Pakistan, said the US should be clearer about what it’s willing to negotiate on, including when it might start pulling forces from Afghanistan. “That could set the stage for talks,” she said.
Such a timetable seems a remote prospect, and President Donald Trump has consistently railed against the idea of telling the enemy when the US might leave. The US involvement in the Afghan conflict is now in its 17th year, and 10,000 Afghan civilians were killed or wounded in 2017 alone. All sides are hung up on even the format for potential negotiations. The Obama administration’s peace push, which relied heavily on Afghanistan’s neighbor Pakistan, floundered in 2015.
Afghan President Ashraf Ghani’s new effort, announced at an international conference in Kabul this past week, includes incentives for insurgents that join negotiations and enter the political mainstream. The government would provide passports and visas to Taliban members and their families, and work to remove sanctions against Taliban leaders, he said. The group could set up an office.
Alice Wells, America’s top diplomat for South Asia, endorsed the overture and said the “onus” was on the Taliban to demonstrate they’re ready to talk, “not to me or the United States, but to the sovereign and legitimate government and people of Afghanistan.”
With wounds and emotions still raw in Kabul after a wave of brutal Taliban attacks in Kabul in late January, Ghani’s offer was a significant olive branch. Still, it’s one unlikely to change the calculus of hard-line insurgents, said Michael Kugelman, senior associate for South Asia at the Wilson Center think tank.
And Barnett Rubin, a New York University expert on Afghanistan who advised the Obama administration, said: “The trouble is that the major issue the Taliban is interested in talking about is the one he has no control over — the presence of American troops in Afghanistan.”
Top Afghan security officials maintain back-channel discussions with Taliban, The Associated Press has learned, but the officials’ efforts are not coordinated and more formal talks are impeded by the Taliban’s insistence that its “Islamic Emirate,” ousted in a US-led invasion in 2001 for hosting Al-Qaeda, remains Afghanistan’s legitimate government.
“America must end her occupation and must accept all our legitimate rights including the right to form a government consistent with the beliefs of our people,” the militant group said in a rambling Feb. 14 letter addressed to the American people and “peace-loving congressmen.” It sought “peaceful dialogue” with Washington.
Events on the ground are moving in the opposite direction.
Since August, when Trump recommitted America to an indefinite military presence in the country, the US has sent in thousands of additional forces to train Afghans, bringing the total US troop figure to more than 14,000. The US has intensified airstrikes, though there has been no significant dent on the Taliban, which control or contest nearly half the country.
Shortly after a Taliban suicide bomb using an ambulance that killed more than 100 people in Kabul, Trump declared on Jan. 29: “We don’t want to talk with the Taliban. There may be a time, but it’s going to be a long time.”
US officials have conveyed messages to Taliban political representatives in Qatar, urging the group to join talks with the Afghan government. Neighboring countries are doubtful about America’s commitment to a political resolution. Pakistan, Iran and Russia are thought to maintain ties to militant proxies inside Afghanistan in case the war-ravaged country collapses.
Miller, now a senior foreign policy expert at Rand Corp., said peace would require heavy lifting by the Trump administration, which has yet to appoint a top diplomat for the region. The war might need international mediation.
“It’s not enough to say the door is open, let’s have a peace process,” she said. “You have to make it happen.”


US ambassador accuses Poland parliament speaker of insulting Trump

Updated 05 February 2026
Follow

US ambassador accuses Poland parliament speaker of insulting Trump

  • Tom Rose said the decision was made because of speaker Wlodzimierz Czarzasty’s “outrageous and unprovoked insults” against the US leader
  • “We will not permit anyone to harm US-Polish relations, nor disrespect (Trump),” Rose wrote on X

WARSAW: The United States embassy will have “no further dealings” with the speaker of the Polish parliament after claims he insulted President Donald Trump, its ambassador said on Thursday.
Tom Rose said the decision was made because of speaker Wlodzimierz Czarzasty’s “outrageous and unprovoked insults” against the US leader.
“We will not permit anyone to harm US-Polish relations, nor disrespect (Trump), who has done so much for Poland and the Polish people,” Rose wrote on X.
Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk responded the same day, writing on X: “Ambassador Rose, allies should respect, not lecture each other.”
“At least this is how we, here in Poland, understand partnership.”


On Monday, Czarzasty criticized a joint US-Israeli proposal to support Donald Trump’s candidacy for the Nobel Peace Prize.
“I will not support the motion for a Nobel Peace Prize for President Trump, because he doesn’t deserve it,” he told journalists.
Czarzasty said that rather than allying itself more closely with Trump’s White House, Poland should “strengthen existing alliances” such as NATO, the United Nations and the World Health Organization.
He criticized Trump’s leadership, including the imposition of tariffs on European countries, threats to annex Greenland, and, most recently, his claims that NATO allies had stayed “a little off the front lines” during the war in Afghanistan.
He accused Trump of “a breach of the politics of principles and values, often a breach of international law.”
After Rose’s reaction, Czarzasty told local news site Onet: “I maintain my position” on the issue of the peace prize.
“I consistently respect the USA as Poland’s key partner,” he added later on X.
“That is why I regretfully accept the statement by Ambassador Tom Rose, but I will not change my position on these fundamental issues for Polish women and men.”
The speaker heads Poland’s New Left party, which is part of Tusk’s pro-European governing coalition, with which the US ambassador said he has “excellent relations.”
It is currently governing under conservative-nationalist President Karol Nawrocki, a vocal Trump supporter.
In late January, Czarzasty, along with several other high-ranking Polish politicians, denounced Trump’s claim that the United States “never needed” NATO allies.
The parliamentary leader called the claims “scandalous” and said they should be “absolutely condemned.”
Forty-three Polish soldiers and one civil servant died as part of the US-led NATO coalition in Afghanistan.