Negotiating with the Taliban and Democracy Challenges in Afghanistan

Commenting on the question of engaging the Taliban in negotiations, Network Member Dr. Daoud Sultanzoy MP, Afghanistan, stated that negotiation is the best solution to end conflicts, but any negotiation has to be based on frameworks that are realistic and with a very specific goal in mind. Mr. Sultanzoy emphasized that maintaining certain values and principles was critical to any negotiations and that talks should be undertaken within the framework of the state institutions.

On the issue of President Karzai’s proposed Loya Jirga, Mr. Sultanzoy stated that while the Jirga can come up with good recommendations, it has no legal authority and only the Parliament can formalize its recommendations.

He called for unity and a single voice within the government and stated that the next parliamentary election will be a pivotal juncture in the political future of Afghanistan, as it will endorse ‘the rule of law, people’s will and the confidence that people can have in their systems from expressing their will through ballots.’

P.N. Recently the EastWest Institute had a few debates about the future of Afghanistan, and the possibility of dialogue or negotiations with the Taliban. What is your opinion regarding this issue?

DS. First of all, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to the Parliamentarians’ Network Newsletter. As regards your question, I think negotiations to bring peace in a military conflict – in any conflict – are the ultimate goal of every involved group – even military functions cannot come to fruition without negotiation in the end. So negotiation is the only final solution to end conflicts but also negotiations have to be based on frameworks that are realistic, that have a very specific goal in mind. In the Afghanistan situation, we are struggling against a very specific threat, where the threat is not just a national or local but regional and international, and it has an ideological and socio-economic dimension. So all those things have to be considered and we have to have a framework in which we cannot forgo certain basic humanistic values. When we talk about Taliban or about peace with the Taliban, we know who they are and what their values are, and we know that war is not the answer, but also, that going back to the ways of Taliban is not the answer either for Afghanistan. Here it has to be a very clear cut understanding that the Afghan society, even the most backward people in this country, cannot live under the regime that the Taliban had ten-fifteen years ago. But if the Taliban are brought to the negotiating table then we, as the Afghan state and our international partners, have to have a meeting of minds, to have a very united front and certain parameters, values and principles that cannot be negotiated. Everything else will be based on mutual reciprocity and respect. But the Afghan government so far, and the President and his colleagues and family are the only people who have been involved in the back door channels, and that is not the solution in my opinion. The solution is that if we want to be different from the Taliban we have to show our uniqueness in negotiating with them also. We have to negotiate with certain principles and values.

We also have to use the instruments of the state when we negotiate with them. We cannot negotiate with them based on eighteenth and nineteenth century ‘back door and dark curtains’. If we are going to show them that we are different than ten years ago, we have to use the state apparatus. Afghanistan has institutions, and although there are some problems, we still have many achievements. These achievements should be employed to show the Taliban and those who sponsor them that we are serious about state-building and institutions and therefore we are using these state institutions and deploying them in the negotiations. Specifically, we are talking about women’s issues, the role of the institutions, the role of the media and civil society, and the value and importance of elections in a democratic system. These are the things we can convey to them in our attempt to start a negotiation that is of value.

P.N. President Karzai declared that he is ready to implement a peace ‘Loya Jirga’ at the end of April.  Will the Afghan Parliament be involved in preparing the Peace Jirga?

D.S. Well, Mr Karzai has named this Jirga several times differently. Initially he named it a ‘Loya Jirga’, then a ‘Peace Jirga’, now he’s calling it a ‘Consultative Jirga’ that will recommend what should be talked about with the Taliban. So he has reverted to different names at different times, but I hope he sticks with one name and one goal in mind. The Consultative Jirgas are good as long as they come up with good recommendations. The recommendations of a Jirga that has no legal authority can only be recommendations and nothing more and it is the Parliament that can play the role of legislator in voting a framework that can be taken to the table of discussions and say: This is our state, these are our institutions, this is the Parliament’s decision and this is the voice of the people.

We cannot have duplicate mechanisms, displaying duplicity of efforts when we are trying to convey this message to the Taliban. We have to speak with one voice, not just as people, but our institutions also have to display that unity of voice.

P.N. Usually the majority of the members of the Jirga are Pashtuns. Do you think that it is possible for the upcoming Jirga to have an ethnic balance that will make the outcomes of the discussion accepted by everyone in Afghanistan?

D.S. I think that a Consultative Jirga can be composed of an array of people. We also have to remember that if the majority of the people are Pashtuns, that the majority of the wars are in the Pashtun areas, so naturally the grievances are more in these areas, and we have to listen more to the voices of the Pashtuns. If others do not accept it, then we have to convince them – that’s why if it is done in the Parliament, then the Parliament’s voice will be accepted by all Afghans.

P.N. How do you see the Parliamentarians’ Network supporting the peace process in Afghanistan, maybe for example, by bringing together Parliamentarians from Kabul and possibly from Pakistan or Iran? Do you think there is any specific way in which the network could support you in the Parliament?

D.S. I think that if we do everything right and we inform everybody that this would be a very useful forum; the Parliamentarians’ Network could deploy its efforts in bringing not only Afghan parliamentarians but also Pakistani and Iranian parliamentarians, even Indian parliamentarians if need be. Naturally this is a very useful tool and if we can use it that would be good.

P.N. The Network just implemented working groups and one of them will focus on the special question of women in conflict areas, which includes also the issues of female MPs in Afghanistan. Do you think it’s possible to support the Afghan Women MPs in their work by inviting them to join our Parliamentarians’ Network?

D.S. Yes of course, but there are some female MPs, well known to the international community, but they do not represent the real women in this country. They are from Kabul and the NGO world and the international community is exposed to those women MPs. My suggestion would be to deploy and take advantage of those MPs that come from rural Afghanistan and that are probably more representative but they are not well known to the international community.

P.N. The EastWest Institute might be invited to hold a conference in Afghanistan on the water issue. Would you think that such a debate would be of help in dealing with such a conflict prevention focus area?

B.S. In a country like Afghanistan the society has usually solved its conflicts with wars, and such an event is a unique opportunity to take advantage of these forums and institutions that the world has created based on their own turbulence and turmoil.

P.N. To conclude is there anything you would like to add?

D.S. I think you touched upon very important issues like security, conflict resolution and all the negotiations and talks that are going on. One of the most important things to add in my opinion, in a country where we want to bring stability and the rule of law, are elections - a very important issue in a democracy. The rule of law, people’s will and the confidence that people can have in their systems from expressing their will through ballots. And the next parliamentary election will be a pivotal juncture in our political life and I think that forums like the Parliamentarians’ Network can play a very important role in raising people’s awareness of the political life of our new democracy.

PN: Thank you very much. We wish you all the best!