Coffee House

Could the Taliban become a useful ally against Islamic State?

22 July 2015

10:05 AM

22 July 2015

10:05 AM

For the better part of a decade, Nato forces fought a bitter war against the Taliban in Afghanistan, which claimed the lives of thousands of troops – including 453 members of Britain’s Armed Forces – and left thousands more seriously maimed by roadside bombs and other devilish devices.

So it is perfectly understandable that anyone who has had the least dealings with this ugly conflict, from politicians to the families and friends of those who participated, should recoil in horror at reports that senior members of the Taliban are now actively participating in negotiations that could ultimately see them become members of the Afghan government.

The Nato mission to Afghanistan, which at its height saw in excess of 10,000 British troops fighting in southern Afghanistan, may have faded from today’s headlines, but the conflict continues on its relentless course, with the Taliban already making its mark during this summer’s fighting season by conducting a series of high-profile attacks, including one against the Afghan parliament last month.

With the last remaining US troops – around 15,000 are still deployed to Afghanistan in support of the country’s security forces – due to withdraw by the end of 2016, it is vital that some form of political resolution is brought to the conflict soon. Otherwise all the sacrifices of the past decade, both in terms of blood and treasure, will prove to have been in vain, and Afghanistan could easily revert to its former state of Islamist-inspired lawlessness.

[Alt-Text]


Senior commanders who served in Afghanistan, from U.S. General David Petraeus to our own General Sir David Richards, frequently made the point to me that there was no military solution to the conflict per se: their view was that the Nato campaign, though bloody, was simply a means to an end, namely creating the space and stability for Afghanistan’s warring factions to settle their differences and reach a political accommodation.

It was for this reason the US arranged for the Taliban to open an office in the Gulf state of Qatar, and it is a consequence of this continuing diplomatic and political effort to reconcile the Taliban that its representatives earlier this month had their first official meeting with their Afghan counterparts in the former British colonial hill station of Murree, on the outskirts of the Pakistani capital Islamabad.

Starting with a sunset iftar breaking the day’s Ramadan fast and ending with a sehri meal before the next day’s sunrise, the two sides are said to have had a lengthy discussion on how to bring peace and reconciliation to Afghanistan. Furthermore, officials from China and America, which both have their own vested interests in making Afghanistan stable and secure, were in attendance, and there are now high expectations that further meetings will take place after Ramadan.

As with any initiative involving the Taliban there are the inevitable questions about whether those who attended the Murree gathering were bona fide representatives of the movement, or stooges of Pakistan’s al-powerful ISI intelligence agency, which is under pressure from both Washington and Kabul to end its practice of providing the Taliban with safe havens in the country’s lawless tribal areas.

But there are also many reasons to believe this initiative could provide dividends, not least the desire of the 20 million or so Pashtuns, who inhabit the mountainous border between Afghanistan and Pakistan and who have provided the backbone of the Taliban’s support, to enjoy peace after decades of civil war.

Taliban leaders, moreover, have a challenge of their own to confront, in the form of the growing appeal of Islamic State (IS) which, as has happened with al-Qaeda, now threatens to overshadow the more established Islamist movement. Taliban field commanders are said to be increasingly concerned by the defection of their young fighters to IS, and fear the rapid growth of their attention-grabbing rival could ultimately undermine their own cause.

Clearly, any peace talks between the Taliban and the Afghan government of President Ashraf Ghani have a long way to run. But nevertheless, if something tangible were to develop as a result of the Murree initiative, it could be that our one-time adversaries in Afghanistan emerge as useful allies in the global campaign to destroy Islamic State.

Con Coughlin is the Telegraph’s Defence Editor and author of ‘Churchill’s First War: Young Winston and the Taliban’ (Pan Macmillan)


New Spectator for less. Stay informed leading up to the EU referendum and in the aftermath. Subscribe and receive 15 issues delivered for just £15, with full web and app access. Join us.



Show comments
  • Smiffy51

    They are both reading from the same book – one that instructs them to behead or enslave non-believers.

  • iakovos
  • Ivan Ewan

    The answer is NO. You drop a few Arabic words in the article, thinking yourself terribly clever – but it was arguably the Western support of the Taliban as “useful allies” against the Soviets that made them so dangerous in the first place.

  • The Masked Marvel

    This is one of the stupidest things I’ve ever heard. ISIS are draining fighters and resources from the Taliban, and we want to help stop that? The possibility of the Taliban drying up and blowing away isn’t to your liking?

    Anyone who says the Taliban could be useful allies is a useful idiot.

    • Coyote

      Exactly what suggestions do you have? I’m listening.

      • The Masked Marvel

        I thought it was obvious. If ISIS is draining away Taliban fighters, the Taliban will shrivel up and fade away. That’s a good thing. The only real way to stop a large army conquering the land is to fight them with a larger, stronger army. Boots on the ground or it’s all a waste of time. If you don’t like that, then you don’t get to complain about what ISIS get up to.

  • Bonkim

    Britain’s experience in Afghanistan over two centuries had shown that there is no military solution against the Afghan tribes. Forget democracy and female education – that is for the next Millennia.

    Provided US/Britain find some ways to encourage the opium trade – and Britain was quite successful of that in the past and/or prepared to reward the Mujahadin, ways could be found to make use of the enemy for benefit. The Afghans are good at negotiation and we just have to get smarter, resurrect experience from the 19th century and establish a win-win arrangement.

    Unlike the black-caped evil in the Caliphate of Syria and Iraq, the Taliban should be amenable to commercial incentives and prove worthy allies in the crusade against ISIS. Get the Iranians to give you a hand – they know the ropes.

  • Margaretbchagnon

    Get It Now. p-e-t-a-t-o

  • jim

    Oh God!!..so now the Taliban(!?!) are the lesser of two evils?.Islamic factions seems to be competing with each other to see who can be more depraved. and still they’re trying to vacuum pack these horrific creatures into our cities…. still they want Turkey in the EU….still they they believe WE’RE the problem.

    • Coyote

      “Oh God!!..so now the Taliban(!?!) are the lesser of two evils?”

      Yep.

      • jim

        The lesser evils were the despotic strongmen swept away in Gulf War 2 and the Arab Spring. Forcing me to choose between Taliban and ISIS is like asking an animal if it would rather be devoured by a crocodile or an alligator. The least objectionable option is to back Assad, arm the Kurds and give Iraq to the Sunnis.

  • David B

    The enemy of my enemy is my friend. Whether we like it or not Taliban came from the Mujahideen, and we know how they came about.

    • Bonkim

      They were friends in the campaign against the Reds remember. They were also friends of the British (when suitably rewarded) and kept the Russians at bay from invading the Indian Empire.

      • Damaris Tighe

        Financed & supplied with arms by the US.

    • The Masked Marvel

      So what? Let them wither away as their people join ISIS instead. The Taliban will fade away and we won’t have to upset you or Rod Liddle by getting involved at all.

  • fundamentallyflawed

    Couldn’t. Make. It. Up.

  • Infidelissima

    The shocking degeneration and spinelessness, not to mention passive appeasement of the dregs of humanity, by the West, has never been so obvious.
    When the West asks itself whether it should cooperate with those who disfigure little girls with acid, and shoot polio vaccinators and burn Christians, there really is no hope left for our survival.

    • Bonkim

      No Hope – so why bother?

  • JSC

    “Could the Taliban become a useful ally against Islamic State?”
    The Taliban will be useful to use against the Islamic State, of that I have no doubt, but I wouldn’t suggest inviting them around for cocktails and chit-chat any time soon.

    • Bonkim

      Do the Taliban drink cocktails?

      • JSC

        They probably should, it might make them lighten up a bit. Less suicide bombings and more slippery nipples could be just what they need.

        • Bonkim

          Or help more join in the fun of blowing up and slitting throats.

          • Infidelissima

            cause they’re such a ‘tiny minority’ …

            • Bonkim

              It only takes a few bacteria to infect the whole body.

              • Infidelissima

                and the weaker the body, the faster it’ll capitulate

                • Bonkim

                  The weak are eliminated.

  • Strativarius

    Ever heard of the Ummah, Con?

    Thought not.

    • Bonkim

      Kiss of death!

  • zanzamander

    So what was the point of going to war with them? We scarified our soldiers’ lives, spend a treasure and licked Pakistani backsides, all for what?

    Maybe we should never have fought Nazis, given time, we too would have come around their way of thinking.

    Btw, I’ve always maintained that we should have nothing to do with the matters involving the Islamic world. We always get it wrong, get our behinds kicked and eventually, having spend a fortune and sacrificed many lives, we run with our tails between our legs.

    If it the nature of things for truth to always prevail, then we have to admit, that Taliban, al-Quaida, Isis and the whole bunch of them must be the righteous ones and we’re the bad guys – because they always win and we always lose.

    • Bonkim

      Due to misguided strategy – but now that Bin Laden is enjoying himself in Paradise starting with a clean slate is a possibility. Taliban and the US know each other and British Foreign Service can cram up from the despatches from the 1800s to learn how to reset the relationship.

    • Mark

      They don’t always win.

      They were turned back at Tours and Vienna.

      They were evicted from Spain.

      The Ottoman Caliphate was smashed at the end of World War 1.

      What is required is a West with a coherent strategy and set of ideas it is prepared to fight for, well we did have that but it has currently been replaced by a strange mixture of the cult of celebrity and consumerism, gay rights and appeasement of Islam, a line that clearly cannot hold with this almost comedic contradiction at its heart.

  • Martin Adamson

    The difference between “moderate” Islam and “extreme” Islam is merely the difference between lottery winners who don’t need to play anymore, and those who have yet to win so still need to play. The senior, elder Taliban leadership reckon that they have now got enough property, slaves, wives and prestige* to be set up both for this life and the next. They have even enough have prestige to compromise with the infidel – given that “compromise” means the infidels give them lots of money and arms, and are even prepared to risk worthless infidel lives to protect them. The younger generation of Muslims will still join the IS, of course, because that is the only way they can ever get the property, slaves and prestige that their elders have already secured.

    *The only prestige which counts in the Islamic world derives from killing infidels, naturally.

  • zanzamander

    Once we thought Taliban were bad, now they’re good, then it was replaced by al-Qu’ida who were bad then but are now good, and many have come and gone in between but now Isisl is bad.

    So as “terrorism” (no names, don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings) mutates into an increasingly deranged and violent strain, who knows there will soon come a time when we may even need the help of Isis to defeat its replacement.

    • Coyote

      No–the Taliban are obviously still very bad; however, if we could make a lot of ex-Nazis play by our own rules after the end of World War II, then maybe, just maybe, we can make some (ex-?)Taliban members play by our own rules as well.

  • Damaris Tighe

    Very sad for the women of Afghanistan. There are photos from the 1970s showing Afghan women in jeans & teeshirts. Now, even after ‘liberation’ from the Taliban, they’re still confined to burkhas. For the US to encourage the Taliban’s rehabilitation is to consign fifty percent of the Afghan population to slavery.

    Afghan women were far better off under the Soviet-aligned regime. With friends like Obama, who needs enemies?

    • JSC

      Well, that’s what the norm is in “Muslim lands” and if you try and change it you’re a western imperialist.

      • Bonkim

        Afghanistan is not quite the Muslim Land you are imagining – the Afghans are a different lot and Islam is negotiable there.

        • Kennybhoy

          Sound.

      • The Masked Marvel

        Unless it’s a UN agency promoted by Gordon Brown trying to push education for girls, of course. Then it’s perfectly fine and not imperialism or the white man trying to push his social norms on them at all.

      • Kennybhoy

        Did you read what Damaris wrote about the Afghanistan of the 1970s? I travelled extensively in the region in the years immediately prior to the Soviet intervention and the Iranian Revolution. Better days than these…

        • Damaris Tighe

          Yes, difficult to conceive that Kabul was once on the hippy trail!

          • Kennybhoy

            Who you calling a hippy? LOL :-)

            • Damaris Tighe

              Did I put two & two together & make five?!

          • Bonkim

            Overlanders went through Turkey, Iran and Afghanistan to Pakistan and India and the passage although arduous was relatively safe. i went through Iran in 1986 (Ayatollah’s Regime) and although there were formalities O.K. But Afghanistan route was closed because of the Russian/Afghan conflict.

            Generally the Afghans were a free people – not too much state intervention, the drug trade, etc, the Afghans are an untamed people and still very much so. Even the Taliban had difficulty keeping the different tribes in line as the British a century before. Was the wild West any different? No – tall men settled their differences with the gun.

      • lira.cady

        FGDGB

        Exposed ,,2,, One TriMaxMethod ;:; @2mu1

        >cg,,

        http://www.LatestTypeGoalCreateTap...

        < ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ✓█ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ✓█ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ✓█ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ✓█ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ✓█ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ✓█ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ✓█

    • Bonkim

      1970s – that was the Soviet influence. Afghan tribes have simply returned to their centuries old traditions – this is not a place for liberal democracy or women’s-lib to take root. The British Foreign Service should know most of all how to deal with Afghanistan.

      • Damaris Tighe

        ‘that was Soviet influence’: precisely my point. At the time I thought to myself that if I were an Afghan woman I’d much rather live under the Soviet aligned regime than under the mujaheddin. When you’re a slave liberation from any source is preferable to slavery.

        • Bonkim

          Don’t be too sure – it is the evil grannies that push their granddaughters to the den of the cutters in Somalia – and the Soviet system of individual responsibility and rights does not suit all cultures. In some societies without a man to protect you you degenerate into begging and prostitution – no benefits to allow you to have a free life outside the prison of social and cultural conformity.

          Not many decades back the Lord of the Manor pushed out unmarried mothers in this green and pleasant land and the child had to be given away and the mother sent to the Poor-house. Look up how the US working classes were exploited and had a wretched life in the Land of the free – and freedom meant starvation and prostitution too.

          • Ivan Ewan

            “Soviet system of individual responsibility and rights”

            Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Oh wait, it’s Bonkim so you’re serious. Let me laugh even harder.

            • Bonkim

              You will be surprised how liberal and egalitarian the people were in the Eastern Block – you need to consider that there was a tassle between the USSR (Russian Empire) that always wanted to extend their Central Asian territories but held back by the British in Afghanistan and the USA that saw Afghanistan in the same way as a check to the USSR and expansion of the Soviet ideal.

              There was competition between East and west to build roads and infrastructure and also other aid projects and the king of Afghanistan was taking it from both sides until the Soviets moved in physically. Little wonder the people particularly the better off adopted western lifestyles and indulged in its corrupt manners. And yes the Taliban stepped in after the USSR was defeated and the only ideology that could unite Afghanistan was bigoted Islam and Taliban rule was something like Cambodia’s start from year Zero.

              Having travelled in the Eastern Block most people there were free to do what they wanted within the system, there was meritocracy of sorts with the talented going to Universities and rising high up in the state and Party hierarchies, discrimination by ethnicity, religion, etc, practically non-existent and wage levels levelized with the basics such as housing, subsidised food, etc, provided by the state. Most people had second homes in the country, were able to travel to other Eastern Block countries. Believe it or not the average East German had higher standard of living in real terms (allowing for wage and exchange/price differentials) and a healthier lifestyle than their counterparts in the West.

              Post collapse of the Soviet Empire most olk folk were ruined and the deep-seated differences remain say between East and west Germany even today. The Russian/Ukrainian situation also a pathetic result of the break up. Ask most Ukrainians or polish or Rumanians – they all think their prospects are better in Germany or Britain where they are now free to emigrate – but not in their own home lands.

              • Ivan Ewan

                “Believe it or not the average East German had higher standard of living in real terms (allowing for wage and exchange/price differentials) and a healthier lifestyle than their counterparts in the West.”

                Would these be the same East Germans who had to be convinced that West Berlin’s thriving commercial success was all an illusion, while they sat in slums, spying on each other for the state?

                You are so full of it.

                • Bonkim

                  Ignore US propaganda. Commercial success is not everything – and East Germany had a slower pace and higher quality of life. You should have visited both sides in the 1960s to appreciate that. You can be happy driving a Trabant for a camping holiday to the Black sea.

                • Ivan Ewan

                  Or a Lada, perhaps, but thanks for wasting more time with your lalaland claptrap. It’s a well-established fact that the Stasi had used around a tenth of all East Germans as domestic spies, and the architecture speaks for itself. If this were the 1960s, ignorance would be your excuse. You’ve nothing to excuse you but stupidity at this point, but I suspect something about absolute state power just turns you on. It’s just a shame you were, and are, with the losing side.

                  PS: Vote for Jeremy Corbyn!

                • Bonkim

                  Pretty unintellectual reasoning on your part – no point discussing the real world with idiots.

                • Ivan Ewan

                  There’s no point discussing the real world with someone who doesn’t live in it.

    • Coyote

      Interestingly enough, though, I have heard that the Taliban were impressed that some female Afghan lawyers were defending Taliban members who were in Afghan prisons.

      Anyway, I could see the Taliban making compromises in regards to women’s rights if the Taliban faces enough pressure. Of course, the Taliban could try reneging on its promises in regards to this later on, but please keep in mind that the Taliban draw their main support from Pashtuns, which make up less than half of Afghanistan’s population. Plus, pissing off half of the Afghan electorate (women) isn’t exactly a good idea.

      • Damaris Tighe

        But ‘compromise’ on the part of a group with views like the Taliban isn’t going to amount to very much, is it?

        • Coyote

          Honestly, it might depend on just how strong the Taliban perceives its position on the battlefield to be; if it thinks that it will win within the next several years, then it wouldn’t be inclined to make many concessions. However, otherwise, the Taliban might be (much) more conciliatory and thus willing to make (large) concessions (even if they will try breaking/violating some or all of their promises later on).

Close
Can't find your Web ID? Click here