The US is to open direct peace talks with the Taliban, senior White House officials have announced.

The first meeting is due to take place in the next few days in the Qatari capital, Doha, where the Taliban is poised to open its long-awaited office.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai said his government is also sending a delegation to Qatar to talk to the Taliban.

The announcement came on the day Nato handed over security for the whole of Afghanistan to government forces.

US officials said prisoner exchanges would be one topic for discussion with the Taliban, but the first weeks will mainly be used to explore each other's agendas.

However, the talks are on condition that the Taliban renounce violence, break ties with al-Qaeda and respect the Afghan constitution - including the rights of women and minorities.

US officials said this was the first step on a very long road, adding that there was no guarantee of success.

Although senior US officials describe the latest move as a milestone on the road to peace, others will feel it is nearer to treason, says BBC North America Editor Mark Mardell.

On Tuesday, the Taliban issued a statement saying that one of the main aims of their Doha office was "to meet Afghans".

The statement said they would also make contact with UN, regional and international organisations as well as non-governmental institutions.

In the past, the Taliban have always refused to meet President Karzai or his government, dismissing them as puppets of the US.

 djones520 wrote:
I'm sorry... but we should never openly engage in diplomatic conversation with an organization that used soccer half time events to stone women to death.

 Easy E wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I'm sorry... but we should never openly engage in diplomatic conversation with an organization that used soccer half time events to stone women to death.

Great, then how do we ever stabilize Afghanistan so we can leave and not feel bad about it?

 Easy E wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I'm sorry... but we should never openly engage in diplomatic conversation with an organization that used soccer half time events to stone women to death.

Great, then how do we ever stabilize Afghanistan so we can leave and not feel bad about it?

 Frazzled wrote:
What if we passed out tweenkies at the start of the meeting?

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
Maybe it's an Operation Valkyrie-esque type thing? Y'know, get all the senior most leadership of one of the more revile organizations in our history into one locale, leave a brief case "accidentally" in the meeting room, and poof! there goes most of the Taliban

 Frazzled wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I'm sorry... but we should never openly engage in diplomatic conversation with an organization that used soccer half time events to stone women to death.

Great, then how do we ever stabilize Afghanistan so we can leave and not feel bad about it?

Just leave.

 sebster wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I'm sorry... but we should never openly engage in diplomatic conversation with an organization that used soccer half time events to stone women to death.

Great, then how do we ever stabilize Afghanistan so we can leave and not feel bad about it?

Just leave.

So, all at once you've taken the high moral ground of not negotiating with total Language Please!heads like the Taliban, but also figured you'll just walk away from the total clusterfeth you've made of Afghanistan. Bizarre.

 Jihadin wrote:
You do not even want to know how much equipment is going to get left behind either

 Wyrmalla wrote:
Or boom goes the US staff...

I'm not seeing any reason for the Taliban to agree to anything the US says. NATO forces are puling out, so it hardly means that the US will be backing up any threats they make in a big way. =/

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22957819

US officials said prisoner exchanges would be one topic for discussion with the Taliban, but the first weeks will mainly be used to explore each other's agendas.

However, the talks are on condition that the Taliban renounce violence, break ties with al-Qaeda and respect the Afghan constitution - including the rights of women and minorities.

 Jimsolo wrote:

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22957819

US officials said prisoner exchanges would be one topic for discussion with the Taliban, but the first weeks will mainly be used to explore each other's agendas.

However, the talks are on condition that the Taliban renounce violence, break ties with al-Qaeda and respect the Afghan constitution - including the rights of women and minorities.

This is the part that I found encouraging. There could be some real promise here if progress can be made on these points. Thanks for linking this, Dreadclaw!

More than a dozen killed in suicide bomber attack near US embassy in Afghanistan

Published June 11, 2013
Associated Press
KABUL, Afghanistan – A Taliban suicide bomber struck outside Afghanistan's Supreme Court on Tuesday, killing 17 people in the deadliest attack in Kabul in over a year and a half.
It was also the second consecutive day of attacks in the Afghan capital, undermining the ability of Afghan forces to keep security without help from NATO troops.
The attacker rammed his SUV into buses carrying court employees at the end of the day' work. All of the dead were civilians, including women and children, police said, and at least 39 people were wounded.
The Taliban said they delivered a blow to "cruel judges" who obey Western powers, and warned of more bombings to come.
President Hamid Karzai condemned the attack, saying it was another "terrorist act that once again shows the Taliban are serving the enemies of Islam."
Tuesday's attack was the deadliest in Kabul since Dec. 6, 2011, when a suicide bomber on foot hit worshippers at a Shiite shrine, killing at least 80 people.
It came just a day after heavily armed fighters launched a failed assault on NATO's operational headquarters at the military section of Kabul's international airport. All seven attackers were killed by Afghan forces and only two civilians were wounded in Monday's attack.
Hitting such high-profile targets as the Supreme Court or the international airport stirs up fear and threatens to shake confidence in Karzai's government. The courthouse is on a busy main road in central Kabul, near the U.S. Embassy. The NATO headquarters is also nearby.
Tuesday's blast went off as court employees were leaving the building from the back entrance, mostly in buses or private cars, said police officer Jahn Agha. Police spokesman Hashmat Stanikzai said the bomber specifically targeted the buses with court workers.
Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid claimed responsibility for the attack.
"The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan was obligated to act against this puppet regime because the people have suffered under the courts," said Mujahid, referring to the Taliban by the name they were known when they ruled Afghanistan. He warned of more such attacks if courts did not stop jailing insurgents.
As international forces started a withdrawal that will see most foreign troops gone by the end of 2014, the Taliban and other groups have unleashed a wave of bombings and assassinations around the country, testing the ability of Afghan security forces to respond with reduced help from NATO troops.
The Taliban have said they would go after government workers as part of their spring campaign targeting those serving in Karzai's administration.
Despite an enormous security cordon around the capital, Kabul remains a prime target for insurgents.
On May 16, a suicide car bomber killed six Americans in a U.S. military convoy. Earlier that same day, heavily armed fighters attacked the compound of an international aid group in an upscale neighborhood, kicking off an eight-hour battle that killed two civilians and a police officer before all the militants were killed.
Authorities have said that Afghan forces have been able to fend off major attacks and have foiled several other plots, but the insurgents' ability to strike Kabul has raised questions of whether violence will continue to soar.
Earlier Tuesday, the U.N. in Afghanistan expressed concern over what the mission said was a surge in civilian casualties in the first six months of the year.
Jan Kubis, the U.N. special representative to Afghanistan, said 3,092 civilians were killed or wounded from January to June -- a 24 percent increase, compared to the same period last year.
Though Kubis didn't provide a breakdown for the dead and wounded, he blamed the insurgency for the casualties, saying it was trying to take advantage of the drawdown of foreign troops.
"Because of their campaign, civilian casualties have increased and the situation has worsened," he said.
Kubis said insurgents were behind 74 percent of all civilians casualties in the first six months of 2013, and attributed the rise on the militants' "continuing disregard" for international laws on civilians in conflict. He said pro-government forces were to blame for 9 percent of the casualties, but did not say who was responsible for the rest.

Kubis also said that targeting government officials and civilians was a crime under international law. The Taliban have argued that government officials and workers are legitimate targets.

The U.N. in Afghanistan had publicly and privately sent a message to the Taliban that the mission was "willing to discuss civilian casualties and how to reduce them," he said.

The Taliban in return sent "signals of their willingness to discuss this," Kubis added, though a way to establish contact with the group has not yet been worked out.

Kubis also voiced concerns over the targeting of humanitarian groups, citing two attacks in May, one on the international Red Cross in eastern Afghanistan and the other on the offices of the U.N.-affiliated International Organization for Migration in Kabul.

Also Tuesday, two police officers and two truck drivers were killed when insurgents attacked a convoy carrying cargo through the eastern province of Ghazni. Deputy police chief Asadullah Insafi said three insurgents were also killed in the attack

 sebster wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 Easy E wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
I'm sorry... but we should never openly engage in diplomatic conversation with an organization that used soccer half time events to stone women to death.

Great, then how do we ever stabilize Afghanistan so we can leave and not feel bad about it?

Just leave.

So, all at once you've taken the high moral ground of not negotiating with total fuckheads like the Taliban, but also figured you'll just walk away from the total clusterfeth you've made of Afghanistan. Bizarre.

The Afghan government will not take part in peace talks with the Taliban unless the process is "Afghan-led", President Hamid Karzai has said.

The statement came a day after the US said it would talk to the Taliban, who opened a political office in Qatar.

Mr Karzai earlier suspended talks with the US on its military presence in Afghanistan after Nato leaves in 2014.

Correspondents say Mr Karzai is angry the insurgents did not commit to talk directly to the Afghan government.

A statement from his office said Afghan negotiators would stay away from the Qatar talks, which were due to start within days, until "foreign powers" allowed the process to be run by Afghans.

"Unless the peace process is 'Afghanised', the High Peace Council is not attending the Taliban Qatar talks," the statement said.

Earlier, four US soldiers died in a Taliban attack at an Afghan air base, heaping further pressure on the proposed talks.

A spokesman for the Taliban said the militants had launched two rockets at Bagram airbase, the largest military base for US troops in Afghanistan.

The attack came just hours after the US announced it would open direct talks with the insurgents at their office in the Qatari capital, Doha.

A condition for the talks was for the Taliban to renounce violence. However, US President Barack Obama did not make a ceasefire part of the preliminary negotiations.


The BBC's Jonathan Beale says the Afghan government clearly thinks that US preconditions should have included a commitment to talk to the Afghan government, to acknowledge the constitution of Afghanistan and to renounce violence.

Meanwhile, President Obama said he always expected "friction" at Afghan peace talks.

"My hope is that despite those challenges the process will proceed," he said during an official visit to Berlin on Wednesday.

"Ultimately we're going to need to see Afghans talking to Afghans about how they can move forward and end the cycle of violence so they can start actually building their country".

'Name and flag'
Afghanistan's National Security Council confirmed President Karzai had suspended the fourth round of the bilateral security agreement talks.

"There is a contradiction between what the US government says and what it does regarding Afghanistan peace talks," the president's spokesman Aimal Faizi said.

He added that the president disagreed with the name given to the new Taliban office opened on Tuesday in the Qatari capital, Doha.

"We oppose the title the 'Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan' because such a thing doesn't exist," Mr Faizi said.

"The US was aware of the president's stance."

Afghan officials said Mr Karzai also objected to the Taliban flag flying over the new premises.

The announcement comes a day after Nato handed over the security for the whole of the country to the Afghan government for the first time since the Taliban were ousted in 2001.

The BBC's Bilal Sarwary says President Karzai has been reluctant to sign a long-term agreement with the US amid fears it would undermine Afghan sovereignty - and how it might reflect on him during his remaining time in office.

'Puppets of Washington'
US officials told reporters on Tuesday that the first formal meeting between US and Taliban representatives was expected to take place in Doha on Thursday.

On the same day, President Karzai said he also intended to send delegates of Afghanistan's High Peace Council (HPC) to Doha to engage in talks with the Taliban in the coming days.

In the past, the Taliban have always refused to meet President Karzai or his government, dismissing them as puppets of Washington. But on Tuesday the insurgents said they would meet Afghans, suggesting they might meet HPC negotiators.

Mr Karzai has expressed anger at previous US and Qatari efforts to kick-start the peace process without properly consulting his government, correspondents say.

There is also concern within the presidential palace that the Taliban will use the office in Qatar to raise funds.

The US met the Taliban secretly in 2011 in Qatar, but these would be the first open talks.

In March 2012 the Taliban said it had suspended preliminary negotiations with Washington, citing US efforts to involve the Afghan government as a key stumbling block.

The Taliban set up a diplomatic presence in Qatar in January 2012 and US officials held preliminary discussions there.

 djones520 wrote:


They didn't bother talking to the Afghan government about this first!?!?