The Afghan public, along with the international community, appears increasingly supportive of opening negotiations with the Taliban to end the war. This Peace Brief assesses the possiblities and challenges the Afghan government and the international community must consider to forge a lasting settlement with the Taliban. The author, Patricia Gossman, is a human rights expert who has investigated and reported on human rights violations in Afghanistan and elsewhere in South Asia for the past twenty-five years.

pb 74

Summary

  • The Afghan public, along with the international community, appears increasingly supportive of opening negotiations with the Taliban to end the war. The Karzai administration also supports this, as reflected by the June 2010 Peace Jirga held in Kabul and the 70-member High Peace Council that was formed thereafter.
  • In spite of the talks, no one in Washington or Kabul has clarified what reconciliation means in practice, particularly with respect to accountability for abuses that occurred during the rule of the Taliban as well as those that occurred when rival factions fought with each other before the Taliban came to power.
  • On November 10, 2010 representatives from Afghan and international NGOs, as well as the U.N., gathered for a one-day Conference on Peace, Reconciliation, and Justice in Kabul to revitalize public discussion on peace and reconciliation among the government of Afghanistan, the international community, and Afghan civil society.
  • The discussions revealed a troubling disconnect between the High Peace Council and Afghan civil society representatives who strongly criticized the Council’s inclusion of former militia leaders among its members, the lack of transparency in its activities, and the lack of clarity in its objectives.
  • These criticisms indicate that for a peace process to have broad, popular support, the Afghan government and the international community must make greater efforts to engage local leaders in a dialogue and account for the interests of communities and interest groups that are not represented in the High Peace Council.

About this Brief

Patricia Gossman is a human rights expert who has investigated and reported on human rights violations in Afghanistan and elsewhere in South Asia for the past twenty-five years. She is the founder of the Afghanistan Justice Project and has worked on human rights issues for USIP, the International Center for Transitional Justice (ICTJ), and Human Rights Watch. Gossman participated in the one-day Conference on Peace, Reconciliation, and Justice in Kabul on behalf of ICTJ.


Related Publications

How to Support Female Entrepreneurs in Afghanistan

How to Support Female Entrepreneurs in Afghanistan

Tuesday, June 25, 2024

Potential areas of cooperation between the Taliban and the international community, such as private sector development and alternative livelihoods to now-banned opium poppy cultivation, will be on the agenda at a meeting of international envoys for Afghanistan hosted by the United Nations in Doha from June 30 to July 1. Discussions on women’s rights are not included, as the Taliban consider it an internal matter. This is ironic, given that the private sector is one area where the Taliban allow limited women’s participation.

Type: Analysis

EconomicsGender

As Taliban Poppy Ban Continues, Afghan Poverty Deepens

As Taliban Poppy Ban Continues, Afghan Poverty Deepens

Thursday, June 20, 2024

Afghanistan, historically the leading source of the world’s illegal opium, is on-track for an unprecedented second year of dramatically reduced poppy cultivation, reflecting the Taliban regime’s continuing prohibition against growing the raw material for opiates. The crackdown has won plaudits in international circles, but its full implications call for clear-eyed analysis and well considered responses by the U.S. and others. The ban has deepened the poverty of millions of rural Afghans who depended on the crop for their livelihoods, yet done nothing to diminish opiate exports, as wealthier landowners sell off inventories. The unfortunate reality is that any aid mobilized to offset harm from the ban will be grossly insufficient and ultimately wasted unless it fosters broad-based rural and agricultural development that benefits the most affected poorer households. 

Type: Analysis

Economics

View All Publications